[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:0.037 / U:14.068 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site