 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] TIME_SLOP vs. timer_slop
| To: | "Keir Fraser" <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [Xen-devel] TIME_SLOP vs. timer_slop |
| From: | "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:41:16 +0000 |
| Cc: | xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivery-date: | Wed, 10 Feb 2010 03:41:36 -0800 |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| List-help: | <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
| List-id: | Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
| List-post: | <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
| List-subscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
| List-unsubscribe: | <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
| Sender: | xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
Keir, is there a reason why schedule.c and timer.c don't both use the latter, command line controllable value? Also, aren't the comment and code in vcpu_periodic_timer_work() out of sync with the actual implementation in timer.c in that a timer will never expire early (with timer_slop only being used to set an upper bound on the expiry range)? Thanks, Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Xen-devel] Re: libxc: fix bug of xc_tbuf_get_size(), Yu Zhiguo |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [Xen-devel] xen.git pvops kernel bug: i915 bug after memory upgrade, Yasir Assam |
| Previous by Thread: | [Xen-devel] [RFC]output log messages to the user console and logfile by creating a fifo file at XendBootloader.py, sun.shuchun |
| Next by Thread: | [Xen-devel] Re: TIME_SLOP vs. timer_slop, Keir Fraser |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
