Patrick Mochel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > IMHO the pm interface should be split up as following:
> >
> > Nobody has disagreed: therefore this separation must be perfect ;-)
>
> I once heard that patience is a virtue. :)
>
> > > (1) Battery status, power status, UPS status polling. It
> > > should be possible for lots of processes to do this
> > > simultaneously. [That does not prohibit a single process
> > > querying the kernel and all the others querying it.]
> >
> > Solution. Have a bunch of procfs or dev nodes each giving info on a
> > particular power source, like now, but vaguely standardise the output.
[...]
> I can see at least two types of events - (forgive the lack of colorful
> terminology) passive and active. Passive events are simply providing
> status updates, much like the events described above. These are simply so
> some UI can notify the user of things like a low battery or detection of
> an AC adapter. These can be handled in much the same way as described
> above.
No they can't. They only happen once. Battery status exists all the
time.
[...]
--
http://www.penguinpowered.com/~vii
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
