[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1243539663.28705.99.camel@desktop>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 12:41:03 -0700
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>
To: Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Walleij <linus.ml.walleij@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Victor <linux@...im.org.za>,
Haavard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...el.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
John Stultz <johnstul@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Support current clocksource handling in
fallback sched_clock().
On Fri, 2009-05-29 at 04:34 +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > I'm still a little confused how kernel modules fit in here.. Are you
> > saying a user would unload some certain driver which has a pin locked
> > down and prevents the clocksource from working. Then the user would load
> > the clocksource module which would now function, and that all would have
> > to happen in order to enter a certain power state?
> >
> Yes.
I'm assuming this isn't a low power state, this would be something more
like suspend or hibernate right?
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists