Re: [PATCH] core: fix unbound watchdog-notify for timeouts <2s

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 9:11 PM, David Herrmann <dh.herrmann@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I get the feeling that if > 2s, then we should use g_timeout_add_seconds to get the advantage of being woken up with all other timeouts in our daemon. And when it is <= 2s, then we better use a high precision g_timeout_add.
>
> This sounds actually good. I will do that in v2.

Ok, glib only supports millisecond precision, so whatever we do, there
will be a WATCHDOG_USEC range that we cannot react to properly. Ok, to
be honest, if WATCHDOG_USEC is below 1ms, we're screwed anyway, so
maybe we should just keep our current behavior.. I mean there is
nothing sane to do for use if users specify such low watchdog ranges.
At some point, we have to resort to either run watchdogs without a
timeout or bail out and tells users to stop using such low values.
Whether this is at 1s or at 1ms doesn't matter much, does it?

So I think we can just keep the current behavior.

Thanks
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Bluez Devel]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Linux Wireless Personal Area Networking]     [Linux ATH6KL]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media Drivers]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Big List of Linux Books]

  Powered by Linux