Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>
> some can be used for both (PIT), but on a concept level the uses are
> independent. The advantage of local apic over PIT is that local apic is
> cheap to do "one shot" future events with, while the PIT will tick
> periodic at a fixed frequency. With tickless idle.. that's not what you
> want.
>
So with a local apic, and acpi_pm as clocksource, I shouldn't be getting timer
interrupts? Yet I do. Which I assume means that the kernel will still get woken
up very often.
Rgds
--
-- Pierre Ossman
Linux kernel, MMC maintainer http://www.kernel.org
PulseAudio, core developer http://pulseaudio.org
rdesktop, core developer http://www.rdesktop.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
