"Grover, Andrew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [do we want to move this to linux-power?]
I'm happy to as long as I'm cc'd.
[...]
IMHO the pm interface should be split up as following:
(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.]
(2) Funky events happening to the physical machine, like a
button being pressed, the case being closed, etc. [Should this
include battery low warnings, power status changes? I don't
know.]
(3) Sending the machine to sleep, turning it off. It should be
possible to do this from userspace ;-)
Am I missing anything? Of course (1) and (2) could be combined into a
single daemon.
ATM the area is fraught with incompatibility. There are a ridiculous
number of power management systems - one per architecture almost. Each
has a different kernel-userspace interface. Every UPS has its own
interface too (?) ;-)
> There should be only one PM policy agent on the system.
Why?
As far as I see it, only some people need polling capabilities -
i.e. those on battery or UPS. Why should they be subjected to the
bloat etc. And those on battery might want multiple policies as Alan
pointed out.
[...]
--
http://www.penguinpowered.com/~vii
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
