From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] PM / Sleep: Timer quiesce in freeze state Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 09:25:03 +0100 Message-ID: <20141028082503.GN3337@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <5446787E.60202@linux.intel.com> <20141024153656.GM12706@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <544DE5CF.9040501@linux.intel.com> <20141027074419.GE10501@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <544F4B31.7050308@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <544F4B31.7050308@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Li, Aubrey" Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , "Brown, Len" , "alan@linux.intel.com" , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org >> Linux PM list" List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 03:52:17PM +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote: > Both clocksource and clockevents are not per-cpu device, why do we need > to run their suspend callback on *each* cpu? Uhm, you mean to say we don't use per-cpu timer lists and per-cpu timer hardware for clockevents then?