From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Aug 22 19:21:06 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE318106568B for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2009 19:21:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aurelien.mere@amc-os.com) Received: from smtpfb1-g21.free.fr (smtpfb1-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.9]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 241998FC1A for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2009 19:21:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp4-g21.free.fr (smtp4-g21.free.fr [212.27.42.4]) by smtpfb1-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id C988F2DFE5 for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2009 21:02:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp4-g21.free.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58A344C80DC; Sat, 22 Aug 2009 21:02:43 +0200 (CEST) Received: from kmlaptop (blackforest.amc-os.net [88.174.102.207]) by smtp4-g21.free.fr (Postfix) with SMTP id 5B51A4C810D; Sat, 22 Aug 2009 21:02:41 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: From: "Aurélien Méré" To: "Alexander Leidinger" , "Marc Balmer" References: <6101e8c40908211917k69c82491w3cff00a527d14873@mail.gmail.com><19e9a5dc0908212303j28a6913er604bfd06e7df81ec@mail.gmail.com><2DC22872-96F5-4C0A-82E4-F9755A10E245@msys.ch> <20090822182923.000064e0@unknown> Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 21:02:32 +0200 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18005 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18005 X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 20:44:20 +0000 Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, Gonzalo Nemmi , Oliver Pinter Subject: Re: Common interface for sensors/health monitoring X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 19:21:06 -0000 >> The OpenBSD sensors framework lacks some desireable features, e.g. >> event capabilities like getting an event if a certain threshold is >> exceeded. And it propbably was used for things that it better had > > This assumes the kernel is monitoring the device periodically (in the > general case, as there are a lot of dump sensors which do not send > events on their own). The framework as in the SoC did not provide this > feature to keep the kernel part simple. You want to see a value, you > poll the kernel for it, and the userland would have been responsible to > fire up an event. In my pratical case, this is perfectly satisfying. Probably most of the controllers I work with don't even support event triggering, and we already have the scripts to trigger events depending on the polled values. I'm worried that today drivers don't exist or don't seem to be maintained to provide these values. So, I would be satisfied just by getting the values. I would be very satisfied if it was in a common interface. Heaven with triggers... I'm just afraid by reading your email that the situation doesn't seem to have evolved since the discussion regarding the SoC, maybe even more taboo, and that I'll have to keep writing my own software and drivers to get the data I want in the future if I want to get this data under FreeBSD.. Is it the case ? Thx Aurélien