* Henrik Austad <henrik@austad.us> 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