On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 15:10 +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote: > 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?
timer interrupts as in "irq0"? you shouldn't if you use the hrtimers/tickless stuff... can you get us a dmesg somewhere? maybe the kernel mentions why ;) > Yet I do. Which I assume means that the kernel will still get woken > up very often. if irq0 keeps increasing at 100Hz or 1000Hz or so.. then yes -- if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com Test the interaction between Linux and your BIOS via http://www.linuxfirmwarekit.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/
