From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Oct 19 12:34:52 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 7291416A417;
	Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:34:52 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C40513C45A;
	Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:34:52 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (unknown [192.168.61.3])
	by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8651817104;
	Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:34:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id l9JCYnFh082534;
	Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:34:49 GMT (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk)
To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 19 Oct 2007 13:48:42 +0200."
	<20071019134842.rhlnbcqrbc4sc4o4@webmail.leidinger.net> 
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:34:49 +0000
Message-ID: <82533.1192797289@critter.freebsd.dk>
Sender: phk@critter.freebsd.dk
Cc: arch@freebsd.org, "Constantine A. Murenin" <cnst@freebsd.org>
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 <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:34:52 -0000

In message <20071019134842.rhlnbcqrbc4sc4o4@webmail.leidinger.net>, 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?

Than the OpenBSD sensors concept

>What to do with sensors which aren't event based or don't have a  
>predefined polling interval (e.g., temperature and humidity)? What do  
>you think will the ratio be between the amount of sensors with and  
>without something like this?

They poll at whatever rate the application ask them to, (using an
ioctl ?)

>How is the kernel supposed to know what polling policy the user is  
>interested in (every 5sec/every minute/every 5 minutes/whatever)? Why  
>should this policy/procedure life in the kernel?

Nobody said the policy should live in the kernel.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.