From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com>
Subject: TIME_SLOP vs. timer_slop
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:41:16 +0000
Message-ID: <4B72A96C020000780002EB6B@vpn.id2.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
Content-Disposition: inline
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

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