From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22853 invoked by alias); 27 Feb 2008 15:43:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 22842 invoked by uid 22791); 27 Feb 2008 15:43:32 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from NaN.false.org (HELO nan.false.org) (208.75.86.248) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:43:05 +0000 Received: from nan.false.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA52E98140 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:43:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from caradoc.them.org (22.svnf5.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.183.55]) by nan.false.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBB0F9811F for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:43:03 +0000 (GMT) Received: from drow by caradoc.them.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1JUOQx-000850-2u for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 10:43:03 -0500 Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:45:00 -0000 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: testsuite: Of all the timeouts provided always select the largest Message-ID: <20080227154303.GA31042@caradoc.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <8f2776cb0802260755q7c48c3d9me8d35807c3d35ae7@mail.gmail.com> <8f2776cb0802260824y2c87f942sa925149de3c38cef@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-12-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-02/txt/msg00435.txt.bz2 On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 03:38:54PM +0000, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > Hmm, I have given it a little bit more thought and I believe it may be > reasonable for boards to provide their own factors for classes of > operations, let's say two for a start, corresponding to tranfer and > execution latencies as noted above. Then each of calling sites might use > one of them according to operation performed, together, possibly, with a > factor specific to the requested operation which the class factor would be > multiplied by. I am not sure if that is not too complicated, but it would > better match the reality. All the factors might default to 1 for > simplicity as could call sites with no class annotation (your flag might > become '-timeout-class'). > > Any thoughts? Yes - do you think this extra complexity is really useful? I'm dubious. -- Daniel Jacobowitz CodeSourcery