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-acpi" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
