[Click] When Timers fall behind

[Eddie Kohler]

Hi,

Bart Braem wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 March 2008 02:44:37 Eddie Kohler wrote:
>> * Timers cannot be scheduled too far in the past.  If a timer is
>>    scheduled more than 1 second in the past, it may be silently updated to
>>    the current system time.  If it's scheduled more than 2 seconds in the
>>    past, it will definitely be silently updated to the current system time.
>>    Thus, repeated application of reschedule_after() will never get more
>> than 2 seconds behind; after that the timer will jump ahead to the current
>> system time.  This will make timers more robust to system time changes and
>> such.
>>
> This seems like interesting behaviour but I find it dangerous. 
> You might want to know that timers have been scheduled in the past and are 
> corrected, certainly if you need higher precision. It might be a good idea to 
> give a notification, similar to what happens with packets with too few 
> headroom.

Good idea, implemented!

Thanks!
Eddie


> 
>> * Timer fairness: no single rescheduled timer can starve other expired
>>    timers.
>>
> 
> Of course this is a good idea!
> 
> Regards,
> Bart
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> click mailing list
> click at amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
> https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click