Re: Attempted summary of "RT patch acceptance" thread

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 03:38:04AM +0200, Eric Piel wrote:
> 11.06.2005 02:59, Paul E. McKenney wrote/a écrit:
> >On Sat, Jun 11, 2005 at 01:23:34AM +0200, Eric Piel wrote:
> >>What about using the way you wrote it at the beginning of the section:
> >>"Probability of missing a deadline only because of a hardware failure"
> >
> >
> >Good point, I may just need to invert the whole thing, so that it
> >becomes something like:
> >
> >	i.	Probability of missing a deadline due to software,
> >		ranging from 0 to 1, with the value of 0 corresponding
> >		to the hardest possible hard realtime.
> >
> >But then the "p^n" becomes "1-(1-p)^n".  Bleah.
> Yes, it seems language doesn't fit well with mathematics ;-)

Hey, it could be worse.  I am just glad that it is not normally necessary
to do integration by parts, trig substitutions, or Laplace transforms
on English sentences!!!  ;-)

> >OK, how about the following?
> >
> >	i.	Probability of meeting a deadline in absence of hardware
> >		failure, ranging from 0 to 1, with the value of 1
> >		corresponding to the hardest possible hard realtime.
> >
> Sounds good!

OK, I made the change!  Thank you for catching this one, good eyes!

						Thanx, Paul
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/