On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 13:48:10 GMT, Albert Mingkun Yang <ay...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> It is a way to give a "4x" lowest value, while not multiplying a 10x factor >> with four resulting in a 40x factor. I think (but I am not sure) that it >> would sometime time out if I only used the given timeout factor and not >> "guarding" with the max(x, 4). > >> while not multiplying a 10x factor with four resulting in a 40x factor. > > Why is that undesirable? The base is `(HOLD_TARGET_TIME + 30000) * 4` and > the timeout-factor changes that linearly. Using `max(..., 4)` here may come > as a surprise to end users, IMO. Because 40x is a very large timeout factor. I think I might misunderstand you in some way. My change is conservative, and will give a timeout that is not smaller than before (but can be larger if an explicit (non-default) timeout factor less than 4 was used before). Does that make sense, or do I answer something different from what you are asking? ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26749#discussion_r2314295263
