>>> On 05.09.17 at 19:13, <dario.faggi...@citrix.com> wrote: > On Wed, 2017-08-30 at 01:18 -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> > > > On 29.08.17 at 18:06, <george.dun...@citrix.com> wrote: >> > Dario is on holiday, and I think it would be good to get this >> > functionality in sooner rather than later to shake out as many bugs >> > as >> > possible. Would you be willing to let the idle timer period be set >> > with >> > a follow-up patch? >> > So, I'm back, and can do such a patch. > > Do we want to enforce a maximum value, to try to at least avoid severe > injuries, even for users that shot themselves in the foot? Or we just > accept anything which is below STIME_MAX? > > I personally would only accept values smaller than 100ms (In fact, I > was keeping it below that level in patch 6, where the heuristics was > implemnted) or, if we really want, 1s. > > Going above these values is basically equivalent to saying that the bug > this series has fixed was not really a bug! :-/
I think an upper limit would be good to have. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
