Re: [RFC/RFT] calloutng

On Wed, Jan 02, 2013 at 09:52:37PM -0800, Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 2:06 PM, Alexander Motin <mav_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On 02.01.2013 18:08, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> >>
> >> .. I'm pretty damned sure we're going to need to enforce a "never
> >> earlier than X" latency.
> >
> >
> > Do you mean here that we should never wake up before specified time (just as
> > specified by the most of existing APIs), or that we should not allow sleep
> > shorter then some value to avoid DoS? At least on x86 nanosleep(0) doesn't
> > allow to block the system. Also there is already present mechanism for
> > specifying minimum timer programming interval in eventtimers(9) KPI.
> 
> I can see serious performance issues with some hardware (wireless
> comes to mind) if things happen too quickly. Intuition is that it
> could also play hob with VMs.
> 
> I believe that the proper way is to wake between  T_X and T_X + D.
> This assumes that D is max_wake_delay, not deviation, which leaves us
> at the original of (T_X) =< event_time =< (T_X + D).

i think "max delay" was the intended meaning of the D parameter.
We picked bad names (tolerance, deviation,...) for it.

cheers
luigi