On ?t 10-03-05 09:43:41, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > Hi. > > On Thu, 2005-03-10 at 09:26, Pavel Machek wrote: > > On ?t 10-03-05 08:49:54, Nigel Cunningham wrote: > > > On Wed, 2005-03-09 at 20:36, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > > Uh, that would really suck. This would entail a string parser in every > > > > > > > driver, which is what we wanted to get away from with sysfs. A better way > > > > > > > would be to have a driver export a file with the specific features that it > > > > > > > supports encoded in a meaningful and efficient way (i.e. a fixed-length > > > > > > > string, character, or constant). > > > > > > > > > > > > Agreed. > > > > > > > > > > <heresy> I wonder if using sysfs is even the best method for doing > > > > > run-time PM. It will force your imaginary nice userspace interface to > > > > > include code to scan the whole directory tree looking for files of each > > > > > kind, perhaps sorting and collating and so on. Maybe a DBus interface > > > > > would be better? </heresy> > > > > > > > > DBus is too hard to use from shell, and I do not think whole directory > > > > scan is so hard to do. > > > > > > Perhaps provide both? Of course I don't know what the implications > > > > No... > > > > I do not believe sysfs is ever going to be efficiency problem. If your > > machine is so big that your /sys is big, then your machine is fast > > enough to handle it. > > It is possible, I agree. But how slow would it be? > > I guess the real show stopper would be the fact that you'd need to have > your userspace daemon constantly scanning these sysfs files for events. inotify? By the time we are done with this, inotify is very likely to be in kernel. Pavel -- People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers... ...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
