linux-kernel - Re: Generic battery interface

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:17:30 +0200
From:	Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@...e.cz>
To:	Shem Multinymous <multinymous@...il.com>
Cc:	"Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu" <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-thinkpad@...ux-thinkpad.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Generic battery interface

On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 12:48:51PM +0300, Shem Multinymous wrote:

> I don't think "update frequency" is a good abstraction. The hardware's
> update may not be variable and irrregular (e.g., event-based), and
> there's there's an issue of phase sync to avoid unnecessary latency.
> 
> The lazy polling approach I described in my last post to Vojtech
> ("block until there's  a new readout or N milliseconds have passed,
> whichever is later") looks like a more general, accurate and efficient
> interface.
 
If "N" is given by the kernel, then it's identical to an event-based
approach. ;) Just described in different words.

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
Director SuSE Labs
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/