From owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org  Thu Nov 16 21:26:29 2000
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) id VAA22524;
	Thu, 16 Nov 2000 21:26:29 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from tasogare.imasy.or.jp (daemon@tasogare.imasy.or.jp [202.227.24.5])
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) with ESMTP id VAA22519
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 21:26:28 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost (iwasaki.imasy.or.jp [202.227.24.92])
	by tasogare.imasy.or.jp (8.10.2+3.3W/3.7W-tasogare/smtpfeed 1.07) with ESMTP id eAGCQQq06002
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Thu, 16 Nov 2000 21:26:26 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org)
To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <200011140700.eAE70sF00934@mass.osd.bsdi.com>
References: <20001111040340X.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org>
	<200011140700.eAE70sF00934@mass.osd.bsdi.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.1 on Emacs 19.34 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20001116212622Y.iwasaki@jp.FreeBSD.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 21:26:22 +0900
From: Mitsuru IWASAKI <iwasaki@jp.freebsd.org>
X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140)
Lines: 36
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Precedence: list
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+000315
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 904
Subject: [acpi-jp 904] Re: Some power device driver. 
Errors-To: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
X-Originator: iwasaki@jp.freebsd.org

Hi,

> > Cool!  BTW, how can we get info. (e.g. battery, temperature) from userland?
> > Any ideas?
> > 
> > 1. ioctl interface
> > 2. sysctl interface
> > 3. ACPI Filesystem
> > 4. others
> > 
> > I vote ioctl allocating different minor number for the ACPI devices.
> > It's easier to implement and port them to other *BSD (yes, including BSD/OS).
> 
> I still prefer sysctl, because it's very easy to distribute the 

I think it's not so serious matter for me, which interface to be used.
I can agree with using sysctl when I convince to it.

BTW, I'm wondering on using sysctl interface.
 - How can we inform the device events to userland program thru sysctl
   like select(2) ?

 - Is it possible to create MIB per unit dynamically for the variable number
   of devices (e.g. for the batteries or processors) ?

 - Is sysctl for interface to kernel state, not for the devices originally,
   correct?

> namespace.  Using control devices, we are going to end up with dozens of 
> little device nodes in /dev (/dev/acpi, /dev/acpi_batt0, /dev/acpi_batt1, 
> /dev/acpi_message_led, /dev/acpi_processor, etc. etc.) which is just Bad.

I think designing device nodes and MIB are not so different in terms of 
design cost of namespace :-)

Thanks
