[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Let init know user wants to shutdown
"Grover, Andrew" <> writes:

> [do we want to move this to linux-power?]

I'm happy to as long as I'm cc'd.


IMHO the pm interface should be split up as following:

(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.]

(2) Funky events happening to the physical machine, like a
button being pressed, the case being closed, etc. [Should this
include battery low warnings, power status changes? I don't

(3) Sending the machine to sleep, turning it off. It should be
possible to do this from userspace ;-)

Am I missing anything? Of course (1) and (2) could be combined into a
single daemon.

ATM the area is fraught with incompatibility. There are a ridiculous
number of power management systems - one per architecture almost. Each
has a different kernel-userspace interface. Every UPS has its own
interface too (?) ;-)

> There should be only one PM policy agent on the system.


As far as I see it, only some people need polling capabilities -
i.e. those on battery or UPS. Why should they be subjected to the
bloat etc. And those on battery might want multiple policies as Alan
pointed out.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:26    [W:0.154 / U:1.464 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site