Subject: Re: events (was Re: New IDE control program & changed to apmd )
To: None <perry@piermont.com>
From: John Kohl <jtk@kolvir.arlington.ma.us>
List: tech-kern
Date: 11/20/1998 18:39:54
Thanks for jogging my memory, I knew someone had already started
discussing the event notification issue.

One requirement I think we need for APM events is that the notified
parties must have the chance to finish their work before APM goes to
sleep.  I don't particularly care if that's by calling synchronously, or
waiting for a thread delivering the notification to exit, or something
else.  [Waiting sounds reasonable, since you probably want to keep
periodically telling the APM bios "hold on, I'm working on cleaning up
for this transition" rather than rejecting its request and then later
initiating our own transition.]

Of course, for user-level applications there should be some timeout
beyond which the APM code says "screw you" and transitions to the next
power state anyway.

-- 
==John Kohl <jtk@kolvir.arlington.ma.us>, <john_kohl@alum.mit.edu>
Write a poem, share your heart!
Home page: <URL:http://people.ne.mediaone.net/jtk/>
Note new home zip code as of July 1, 1998: 02476