(2010/07/31 4:06), Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The length of the BLOCK_IPOLL string is making it's value be printed too
> far to the right. This patch fixes this and makes the output a bit
> neater.
>
> Currently:
> CPU0
> HI: 0
> TIMER: 599792
> NET_TX: 2
> NET_RX: 6
> BLOCK: 80807
> BLOCK_IOPOLL: 0
> TASKLET: 20012
> SCHED: 0
> HRTIMER: 63
> RCU: 619279
>
> With patch:
> CPU0
> HI: 0
> TIMER: 585582
> NET_TX: 2
> NET_RX: 6
> BLOCK: 80320
> BLOCK_IOPOLL: 0
> TASKLET: 19287
> SCHED: 0
> HRTIMER: 62
> RCU: 604441
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Davidlohr
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/proc/softirqs.c | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/proc/softirqs.c b/fs/proc/softirqs.c
> index 1807c24..3799473 100644
> --- a/fs/proc/softirqs.c
> +++ b/fs/proc/softirqs.c
> @@ -10,13 +10,13 @@ static int show_softirqs(struct seq_file *p, void *v)
> {
> int i, j;
>
> - seq_printf(p, " ");
> + seq_printf(p, " ");
> for_each_possible_cpu(i)
> seq_printf(p, "CPU%-8d", i);
> seq_printf(p, "\n");
>
> for (i = 0; i < NR_SOFTIRQS; i++) {
> - seq_printf(p, "%8s:", softirq_to_name[i]);
> + seq_printf(p, "%12s:", softirq_to_name[i]);
> for_each_possible_cpu(j)
> seq_printf(p, " %10u", kstat_softirqs_cpu(i, j));
> seq_printf(p, "\n");
Sorry for late response.
It looks good to me.
// Keika Kobayashi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
