"Grover, Andrew" <andrew.grover@intel.com> writes:
> Hi Pavel,
>
> I think init is doing a perfect job WRT UPSs because this is a
> trivial application of power management. init wasn't really meant
> for this. According to its man page:
>
> "init...it's primary role is to create processes from a script in
> the file /etc/inittab...It also controls autonomous processes
> required by any particular system"
>
> We are going to need some software that handles button events, as
> well as thermal events, battery events, polling the battery, AC
> adapter status changes, sleeping the system, and more.
Dealing with events should be disjoint from polling the battery or
powerstatus. Many processes might reasonably simultaneously want to
provide a display to the user of the current power status.
However, button presses and so on should be handled by a single
process. Otherwise the kernel is unreasonably complicated by having to
deal with multiple processes' veto power, which could just as well and
more flexibly be handled in userspace.
I don't why there needs to be an additional daemon constantly running
to deal with button presses and power status changes. Apparently init
is already handling similar things: why should it not be extended to
include button presses?
Alternatively, why not forgo a daemon altogether? (This scheme is
already implemented in the pmpolicy patch, i.e. it is already
working.)
> We need WAY more flexibility than init provides.
Examples please.
[...]
--http://www.penguinpowered.com/~vii - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 23 2001 - 21:00:24 EST