Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:45:10 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, "Constantine A. Murenin" <cnst@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: sensors fun.. Message-ID: <20071019154510.qo8obs838co0csgw@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <82692.1192800033@critter.freebsd.dk> References: <82692.1192800033@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> (from Fri, 19 Oct 2007 =20 13:20:33 +0000): > In message <20071019151426.ttkynf788c0g8s4k@webmail.leidinger.net>, =20 > Alexander L > eidinger writes: > > Alexander, > > I'm getting pretty tired of this game of yours. I'm asking questions to understand what is going on. > Either you're not paying attention to what I write, or you are so > totally blinded by rage that you don't try to understand it. I'm not in rage and I was not in rage. > This is my last email to you on this subject. That's sad. > As far as I can tell, you have nothing to do with the actual code, We're talking about architecture here in this thread on arch, not =20 about any specific commits to the CVS. > apart from committing it without proper review and discussion, so I was willing to discuss this with you and others long ago, but you =20 stopped talking without any notification why. Then you stomped in =20 saying that you don't like the _idea_ of the framework without =20 pointing to technical flaws (you mentioned you didn't even looked at =20 the architecture). Now you tell me that you don't want to discuss =20 architectural things with me. Could you please tell me what I did to =20 you that you don't want to talk with me? > why don't you step out of the loop, and leave Constantine, who, > quite frankly, seems to have a better grasp of the subject than > you, participate instead ? You don't care to explain where my point of view of monitoring is wrong? >>>> 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 ?) >> >> So you want to put the polling interval (=3D3D the polling policy) into = =3D20 >> the kernel (with e.g, an ioctl)? > > No, the "polling policy" does not end up in the kernel if the > application calls an ioctl that says "poll every 5 seconds". > > Look up the meaning of the word policy if you don't belive me. According to dict.leo.org: english german policy especially [comp.] die Richtlinie If you say "poll every 5 seconds" you give the kernel "die Richtlinie" =20 to look every 5 seconds for the sensor data and to provide it to the =20 application. Looks good to me in my language. As you don't like it: =20 feel free to replace every ocurence of "polling policy" with "polling =20 interval" in my questions. If you think those questions are not worth =20 being answered, I would like to know why. Bye, Alexander. --=20 I've got a COUSIN who works in the GARMENT DISTRICT ... http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071019154510.qo8obs838co0csgw>