Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:17:30 +0200 | From | Vojtech Pavlik <> | Subject | Re: Generic battery interface |
| |
On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 12:48:51PM +0300, Shem Multinymous wrote:
> I don't think "update frequency" is a good abstraction. The hardware's > update may not be variable and irrregular (e.g., event-based), and > there's there's an issue of phase sync to avoid unnecessary latency. > > The lazy polling approach I described in my last post to Vojtech > ("block until there's a new readout or N milliseconds have passed, > whichever is later") looks like a more general, accurate and efficient > interface.
If "N" is given by the kernel, then it's identical to an event-based approach. ;) Just described in different words.
-- Vojtech Pavlik Director SuSE Labs - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |