From owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org  Tue Aug  7 02:55:45 2001
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) id CAA19856;
	Tue, 7 Aug 2001 02:55:45 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from owner-acpi-jp@jp.FreeBSD.org)
Received: from mail.wrs.com (unknown-1-11.windriver.com [147.11.1.11])
	by castle.jp.freebsd.org (8.9.3+3.2W/8.7.3) with ESMTP id CAA19851
	for <acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org>; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 02:55:44 +0900 (JST)
	(envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (john@[147.11.46.201])
	by mail.wrs.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAA01063;
	Mon, 6 Aug 2001 10:55:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <XFMail.010806105512.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <200108061751.f76Hp7i01472@mass.dis.org>
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 10:55:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To: Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Reply-To: acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Precedence: list
X-Distribute: distribute version 2.1 (Alpha) patchlevel 24e+010328
X-Sequence: acpi-jp 1216
Subject: [acpi-jp 1216] Re: kqueue stuff(revised)
Errors-To: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
Sender: owner-acpi-jp@jp.freebsd.org
X-Originator: jhb@FreeBSD.org


On 06-Aug-01 Mike Smith wrote:
>> We use minor numbers for labels and slices, not different units, and slices
>> a
>> nd
>> labels are related items, whereas batteries have nothing to do with lid
>> switches. :(  I guess I'd rather us have a real /dev/batt0 with a generic
>> battery API which can be backed by ACPI, but also can be backed by something
>> else other than ACPI, so that we don't tie ourselves too tightly to just
>> ACPI
>> .
> 
> I want to do this as well, FWIW.  I'm prettymuch settled on the battery 
> abstraction, just need to cut battery_if.m and try implementing it.
> 
> And yes, I take your point.  One reason I don't want a proliferation of 
> acpi_foo devices with their own kqueues is that I don't want to tie our 
> PM too tightly to ACPI.  Hence wanting a single ACPI event queue; 
> the "generic" devices should have "generic" events, not ACPI events.

Right.  My original e-mail made that point as well.  /dev/batt0 instead of
/dev/acpi_cmbat0, etc.  I suppose that is more of a long-term goal at the
moment, however.

-- 

John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve!"  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/
