Re: sensors fun..
- From: Warner Losh <imp@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:05:16 -0600 (MDT)
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: sensors fun..
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:41:04 +0000
In message <20071019113444.xinyc37x9cg0ckk0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexander L
eidinger writes:
I was thinking you talk about the interface between the kernel and the
userland. Now I think that you talk more or less about something which
could be implemented e.g., as an userland library which not only polls
the kernel sensors framework, but provides the single-system sensor
data (and could be a base of a singe-system sensor daemon which feeds
its data to a group-level sensors framework). Does this sound like
what you have in mind?
It certainly sounds more sensible.
The kernel-userland interface should happen over a filedescriptor
(either device or unix-domain socket) so that whatever daemon we
park on the fd can just use select/poll/kqueue to wait for events.
If we're going to have a stream of data from the kernel, is there any
reason to invent another daemon for that? We already have devd that
deals with a number of disparate events from the kernel in a fairly
generic way.
Warner
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch@xxxxxxxxxxx mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxx"
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: sensors fun..
- From: Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: sensors fun..
- References:
- Re: sensors fun..
- From: Alexander Leidinger
- Re: sensors fun..
- From: Poul-Henning Kamp
- Re: sensors fun..
- Prev by Date: Re: sensors fun..
- Next by Date: Re: sensors fun..
- Previous by thread: Re: sensors fun..
- Next by thread: Re: sensors fun..
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|