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;
Date:   Thu, 23 Jan 2020 22:40:09 +0100
From:   Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     "liuchao (CR)" <liuchao173@huawei.com>,
        linfeilong <linfeilong@huawei.com>,
        Hushiyuan <hushiyuan@huawei.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: =?utf-8?B?562U5aSNOiBbUkZDXSBpcnE6IFNr?= =?utf-8?Q?ip_printin?=
 =?utf-8?Q?g?= irq when desc->action is null even if any_count is not zero
Message-ID: <20200123214009.GA17257@localhost.localdomain>
References: <20200121130959.22589-1-liuchao173@huawei.com>
 <87k15jek6v.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <20200122192856.GA2852@localhost.localdomain>
 <7966953BB2EC794AA37DF0A21FAD8A34021318DA@DGGEMA503-MBX.china.huawei.com>
 <87pnfatkpy.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87pnfatkpy.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 01:34:33PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 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.
> 
I think it probably makes sense to just keep it then.  I'm not sure I
see it as hurting anything to keep it around.

Neil

> Thanks,
> 
>         tglx
>