From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 19 11:49:54 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B90CC16A41A; Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:49:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from redbull.bpaserver.net (redbullneu.bpaserver.net [213.198.78.217]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EF0E13C45D; Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:49:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from alexander@leidinger.net) Received: from outgoing.leidinger.net (p54A564CA.dip.t-dialin.net [84.165.100.202]) by redbull.bpaserver.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 551BC2E2F1; Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:49:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from webmail.leidinger.net (webmail.Leidinger.net [192.168.1.102]) by outgoing.leidinger.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 607C55B480D; Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:48:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from www@localhost) by webmail.leidinger.net (8.14.1/8.13.8/Submit) id l9JBmgDv061028; Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:48:42 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from pslux.cec.eu.int (pslux.cec.eu.int [158.169.9.14]) by webmail.leidinger.net (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:48:42 +0200 Message-ID: <20071019134842.rhlnbcqrbc4sc4o4@webmail.leidinger.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:48:42 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Poul-Henning Kamp References: <81952.1192786864@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: <81952.1192786864@critter.freebsd.dk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.4) / FreeBSD-7.0 X-BPAnet-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-BPAnet-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-BPAnet-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-13.4, required 8, BAYES_00 -15.00, IMPRONONCABLE_2 1.50, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.10) X-BPAnet-MailScanner-From: alexander@leidinger.net X-Spam-Status: No Cc: arch@freebsd.org, "Constantine A. Murenin" Subject: Re: sensors fun.. X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:49:54 -0000 Quoting Poul-Henning Kamp (from Fri, 19 Oct 2007 =20 09:41:04 +0000): > In message <20071019113444.xinyc37x9cg0ckk0@webmail.leidinger.net>, =20 > 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. More sensible than what? > 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. Please explain a little bit more of this architecture regarding the =20 following questions: What to do with sensors which aren't event based or don't have a =20 predefined polling interval (e.g., temperature and humidity)? What do =20 you think will the ratio be between the amount of sensors with and =20 without something like this? How is the kernel supposed to know what polling policy the user is =20 interested in (every 5sec/every minute/every 5 minutes/whatever)? Why =20 should this policy/procedure life in the kernel? Bye, Alexander. --=20 Two heads are better than one. =09=09-- John Heywood http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137