On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Zhao Yakui wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-06-20 at 16:22 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > Various bits of hardware (some Thinkpads, for example) will execute ACPI > > > methods in response to events but won't generate any notifications. It > > > would be nice to be able to receive notifications on those updates in > > > order to avoid polling. How about something like the following? > > Very good idea. From the description the notification can be received > > when some ACPI methods are executed. > > But it touches the ACPICA source code. Maybe it is uneasy to accept. > > And I have a question about this. > > Asynchronous or synchronous notification event? It seems that > > I'd do fine with an asynchronous blocking or SCRU (blocking) notify > chain for thinkpad-acpi. No need for synchronous operation, I'd not be > using this API to hotpatch the AML or anything of the sort. But I *really* do think you don't want a table-wide notify chain, something more fine-grained is better, or it will be a performance hog if too many drivers use it. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- 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
