Subject: Re: i386 interrupt counters
To: Michael Graff <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris G Demetriou <Chris_G_Demetriou@ux2.sp.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 08/11/1996 15:02:10
> I added in i386 interrupt counters for both the slow and fast interrupt
> hooks in the kernel. Right now I have the "slow" ones called "intr*"
> and the fast ones called "fast*" but I am open to suggestions on other
My general rule when naming interrupts is to have the names be similar
to what is printed out in the startup messages.
In other words, i think you'd probably want them to be called
something like "irq*" and "f(ast)irq*". Unless i'm mistaken, there's
no difference in the way the fast and non-fast IRQ's would be printed,
so the latter is just a suggestion. (However, i do think that 'irq'
is appropriate, somewhere in there.)
> It is SO nice to see things like this again:
Yes. And, the sort of sad thing is that it's not even very hard to
implement, for somebody with a reasonable knowledge of i386 assembly.
(I.e. enough to write the few lines of code in assembly to increment
I found it sort of amusing that in the time that that bug came into
existence before the Alpha port was even _started_, and the Alpha port
has had functional interrupt counters for a while now...