From: Michael R. <mc...@sa...> - 2002-07-08 03:21:13
|
>>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Dike <jd...@ka...> writes: Jeff> mc...@sa... said: >> I would propose that this needs to be coordinated by a small process >> that simply accepts time-to-next-event inputs from each UML, takes the >> minima and advanced each machine by that amount. Jeff> What's the matter with the outside process telling each UML how much to Jeff> advance the time and let each one figure out how to skip that far? Sure, it can do that, that's what I'm talking about. But, since we can't predict how stuff is going happen, we need feedback from each UML about how "bored" it is. ] ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine. | firewalls [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works, Ottawa, ON |net architect[ ] mc...@sa... http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/ |device driver[ ] panic("Just another NetBSD/notebook using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [ |