Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     "liuchao \(CR\)" <liuchao173@huawei.com>,
        Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc:     linfeilong <linfeilong@huawei.com>,
        Hushiyuan <hushiyuan@huawei.com>,
        "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: =?utf-8?B?562U5aSNOg==?= [RFC] irq: Skip printing irq when
 desc->action is null even if any_count is not zero
In-Reply-To: <7966953BB2EC794AA37DF0A21FAD8A34021318DA@DGGEMA503-MBX.china.huawei.com>
References: <20200121130959.22589-1-liuchao173@huawei.com> <87k15jek6v.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20200122192856.GA2852@localhost.localdomain> <7966953BB2EC794AA37DF0A21FAD8A34021318DA@DGGEMA503-MBX.china.huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Jan 2020 13:34:33 +0100
Message-ID: <87pnfatkpy.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Chao,

"liuchao (CR)" <liuchao173@huawei.com> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 03:29AM +0800, Neil Horman wrote:
>> > I'm not opposed to suppress the output, but I really want the opinion
>> > of the irqbalance maintainers on that.
>
> Irqbalance is an example. I mean, when this happens, users who cat /proc/interrupts 
> may be confused about where the interrupt came from and what it was used for. 
> People who use Linux may not understand the principle of this. They are not sure 
> whether this is a problem of the system or not.

Well, this has been that way for 20+ years and so far nobody got
confused. If it's not documented then we should do so.

>> Actually, irqbalance ignores the trailing irq name (or it should at least), so you
>> should be able to drop that portion of /proc/irqbalance, though I cant speak for
>> any other users of it.
>
> If irq isn't removed from /proc/interrups, it will still be parsed in
> collect_full_irq_list and parse_proc_interrupts.

Sure, and why is that a problem? Again, this is really historic behaviour.

> irq_name is used in guess_arm_irq_hints.

That's a problem of guess_arm_irq_hints() then.

Again, I'm not against supressing such lines in general, but I want to
make sure that no tool depends on that information.

Thanks,

        tglx