From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264213AbTDJWh5 (for ); Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:37:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264215AbTDJWhz (for ); Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:37:55 -0400 Received: from air-2.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:24498 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264213AbTDJWhy (for ); Thu, 10 Apr 2003 18:37:54 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 15:49:02 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: Alan Cox Cc: davidm@hpl.hp.com, akpm@zip.com.au, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: proc_misc.c bug Message-Id: <20030410154902.32f48f9c.rddunlap@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <1050011057.12930.134.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> References: <200304102202.h3AM2YH3021747@napali.hpl.hp.com> <1050011057.12930.134.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Organization: OSDL X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.11 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10 Apr 2003 22:44:17 +0100 Alan Cox wrote: | On Thu, 2003-04-10 at 23:02, David Mosberger wrote: | > The workaround below is to allocate 4KB per 8 CPUs. Not really a | > solution, but the fundamental problem is that /proc/interrupts | > shouldn't use a fixed buffer size in the first place. I suppose | > another solution would be to use vmalloc() instead. It all feels like | > bandaids though. | | How about switching to Al's seqfile interface ? It's already using it, but it uses the simple/single version of it, which doesn't automagically extend the output buffer area when it's full, so a max size buffer has to be allocated for it up front. I'll look at changing it unless somebody beats me (to it :). -- ~Randy ['tangent' is not a verb...unless you believe that "in English any noun can be verbed."]