Subject: Re: i386 interrupt counters
To: Noriyuki Soda <>
From: Michael Graff <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 08/11/1996 19:49:33
Noriyuki Soda <> writes:

> I agree. It is better to have stray interrupt counter.
> But explorer's implementation doesn't have it. :-)

s/doesn't/didn't/  :)

I think I have that part working, but I need to beat on the code a little
more first.  I am checking the return value of the interrupt function
to determine if the interrupt was serviced or not, and if it was never
serviced I call it a stray.

Actually, there was code to do something like this in the interrupt
routine, but it seems to be #ifdef'd out.  To count interrupts correctly
I think I might need to re-enable this bit of code.