Re: [patch] high-res timers: UP resume fix

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Sat, 2007-04-07 at 11:47 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > We do in on_each_cpu() unconditionally. I missed that.
> > 
> > BTW, the on_each_cpu() in clock_was_set() is unnecessary, because 
> > timekeeping_resume() is always run on one CPU.
> 
> yes - but that's not the only place where we do clock_was_set(), and the 
> on_each_cpu() is necessary in every other case. So i think the right 
> solution was the patch i did: to split the resume functionality from the 
> clock_was_set() functionality.

Right, I reused it and just did not notice, that interrupts are enabled
unconditionally in on_each_cpu().

	tglx


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/