From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] libxl: add rtds scheduler
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 17:54:42 +0100
Message-ID: <1410886482.23505.19.camel@citrix.com>
References: <1410730649-2417-1-git-send-email-mengxu@cis.upenn.edu>
	<1410730649-2417-4-git-send-email-mengxu@cis.upenn.edu>
	<1410818821.6908.4.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk>
	<CAENZ-+=hwxpPPUQLONe+uz_ysZpEAg_K0aizAequYH6ueyvWvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1410832163.6908.36.camel@hastur.hellion.org.uk>
	<CAENZ-+=VRPn-jiOzf9QT4omHRua26eGaReRTdz3ok9zUE=ixUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1410852450.20720.10.camel@Abyss>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1410852450.20720.10.camel@Abyss>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Cc: Sisu Xi <xisisu@gmail.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Chenyang Lu <lu@cse.wustl.edu>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Linh Thi Xuan Phan <ptxlinh@gmail.com>, Meng Xu <xumengpanda@gmail.com>, Meng Xu <mengxu@cis.upenn.edu>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Chao Wang <chaowang@wustl.edu>, Chong Li <lichong659@gmail.com>, Dagaen Golomb <dgolomb@seas.upenn.edu>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 09:27 +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-09-15 at 23:32 -0400, Meng Xu wrote:
> 
> > 2014-09-15 21:49 GMT-04:00 Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>:
> 
> >         Is a 0.5hr maximum period considered to be larger than any
> >         practically
> >         useful value?
> > 
> > 
> > I think so. 
> >
> Yes, it is. Most of the people using this scheduler will be interested
> in "a few [decades, hundreds] millisecond" period and budget. Someone
> might want to try microsecs, someone may be fine with seconds.

OK, so no need for me to ask if it should be a 64bit value then.

Ian.