From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755574AbbDILzV (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2015 07:55:21 -0400 Received: from mail-wg0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:35325 "EHLO mail-wg0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755099AbbDILzS (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Apr 2015 07:55:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 9 Apr 2015 13:55:13 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Henrik Austad Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Luca Abeni , Luca Abeni , juri.lelli@gmail.com, raistlin@linux.it, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 4/4] Documentation/scheduler/sched-deadline.txt: add some references Message-ID: <20150409115513.GB12448@gmail.com> References: <1428494380-1917-1-git-send-email-luca.abeni@unitn.it> <1428494380-1917-5-git-send-email-luca.abeni@unitn.it> <20150409093908.GB10954@sisyphus.home.austad.us> <20150409094427.GR5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <55264FA4.5090805@unitn.it> <20150409101125.GS5029@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20150409101349.GD10954@sisyphus.home.austad.us> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150409101349.GD10954@sisyphus.home.austad.us> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Henrik Austad wrote: > On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 12:11:25PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 12:08:36PM +0200, Luca Abeni wrote: > > > On 04/09/2015 11:44 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > >On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 11:39:08AM +0200, Henrik Austad wrote: > > > >>>+ CPUs, with the first M - 1 tasks having a small worst case execution time > > > >>>+ WCET_i=e and period equal to relative deadline P_i=D_i=P-1. The last task > > > >> > > > >>Normally, 'e' is used to denote an _arbitrarily_ small value, and I suspect > > > >>that this is indeed the case here as well (you're going to describe > > > >>Dhall's effect, right?). Perhaps make that point explicit? > > > >> > > > >> T_i = {P_i, e, P_i} > > > > > > > >We're talking about \epsilon here, right? > > > Right. I used "e" to make the thing more readable in a simple text document. > > > > > > >Is it customary to use a regular 'e' in CS literature for that? > > > I do not know... I just wanted to use one single character, and to avoid the "\" > > > (which only makes sense to people using latex :) > > > > > > But if you want I can use "epsilon" or "\epsilon"... Let me know > > > > I'm fine either way, its just my math/physics brain piping up. > > I'd vote for 'e' then (just to mess with peterz' brain and avoid some > confusing \'s). Just make sure you explain the nomenclature in the document! Thanks, Ingo