[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Next gen PM interface
 Patrick Mochel <> 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


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:0.060 / U:10.668 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site