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-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html