> 29 нояб. 2016 г., в 17:51, Marc Zyngier <[email protected]> написал(а): > > That'd be my preferred course of action. I've located some documentation > over there [1], and page 1126 seems to indicate a profusion of > additional timers, some of which are in an always-on domain. Seems like > a much better use of someone's time...
Thank you very much :) And thank you for great explanation of core problem. In general, I no longer insist on the inclusion the patch in the kernel. Thank you guys for the help. Alexander.
