Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote:
I propose to have user-land screen savers instead of KLD
screen savers.
[ ... performance degradation ... ]
[ ... file access ... ]
I don't see either of these as being compelling arguments
in favor of a user space implementation; I guess this means
you want
Actually, running in user space adds two problems:
1) Performance degradation as a result of protection
domain crossing which does not exist in the current
implementation
So, you seems to be effectively saying that any program running in the
lower priority in the user-land is
I propose to have user-land screen savers instead of KLD
screen savers.
[ ... performance degradation ... ]
[ ... file access ... ]
I don't see either of these as being compelling arguments
in favor of a user space implementation; I guess this means
you want to do file access in your screen
You can stick the screen saver in a low priority kthread and achieve the same
effect.
As the screen saver accesses and uses syscons' internal structures and
facilities, its operation must be carefully coordinated with syscons.
Thus, putting the screen saver in a kthread will require major
It is much easier, at least to me, to just remove much of the KLD
screen saver support from syscons to the user-land, than to utilize
the kthread :-)
Just FWIW, I think that moving the screen saver to userspace is an
excellent thing to do.
--
... every activity meets with opposition,
Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote:
This is to propose to abolish KLD screen saver modules.
KLD screen savers have the following problems/deficiencies.
[ ... ]
I propose to have user-land screen savers instead of KLD
screen savers.
[ ... performance degradation ... ]
[ ... file access ... ]
I
On 24-Jul-01 Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote:
This is to propose to abolish KLD screen saver modules.
KLD screen savers have the following problems/deficiencies.
- It is too easy to abuse the power of being run in the kernel
mode. The screen saver is invoked periodically once the console
Hi, a friend of mine just forwarded this to me. I've just been looking
at writing graphical stuff, firstly screen savers for the console
using vgl. In fact we were talking about this exact idea just last
week. (As my code doesn't like being run in the kernel - because while
it's in devel it still
In standard FreeBSD the moving of screen savers to userland may
not be a big deal. In Embedded applications it is nice to be able
to create very lightweight (read size) screen savers. Hopefully
this new mechanism will still allow this. (-;
Larry
--
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 21:07:40 +0900, Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote:
I propose to have user-land screen savers instead of KLD
screen savers.
Good idea.
We shall provide the screen saver daemon and a set of screen saver
programs. The screen saver daemon will run in the background and
We shall provide the screen saver daemon and a set of screen saver
programs. The screen saver daemon will run in the background and
periodically checks if the console is idle. When it finds no
activity in the console, it will launch a specified screen saver
program.
No periodical checks
On Tue, Jul 24, 2001 at 21:34:40 +0900, Kazutaka YOKOTA wrote:
We shall provide the screen saver daemon and a set of screen saver
programs. The screen saver daemon will run in the background and
periodically checks if the console is idle. When it finds no
activity in the console, it
12 matches
Mail list logo