From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 2 10:19:56 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBF8116A4CE; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 10:19:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D02643D1F; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 10:19:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i12IJss7002250; Mon, 2 Feb 2004 19:19:54 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk) To: Nate Lawson From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 02 Feb 2004 10:03:35 PST." <200402021803.i12I3ZJW016336@repoman.freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 19:19:54 +0100 Message-ID: <2249.1075745994@critter.freebsd.dk> cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/acpica acpi_thermal.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 18:19:57 -0000 In message <200402021803.i12I3ZJW016336@repoman.freebsd.org>, Nate Lawson write s: >njl 2004/02/02 10:03:35 PST > > FreeBSD src repository > > Modified files: > sys/dev/acpica acpi_thermal.c > Log: > If the temperature is at _HOT or _CRT for 3 sequential readings, shutdown > the system. I realize that this is an important feature to preserve the hardware, but I still find it rather draconian, and suboptimal from a UI perspective. Could we change it to be: after N seconds: go to single user. after N + M seconds: shutdown. This would normally allow X11 to shut down cleanly, which again means we can printf a message to the user about what is happening instead of simply going black screen on them. It would also save people some fsck'ing subsequently. I realize there is a rainbow of bikeshed proposals about not scheduling non-root/userland/cpu-hog processes etc etc etc. Apart from the fact that it is merely sugarcoating the broccoli, we are not geared for that scheduler-wise and we should not add features to our schedulers until the current issues with them have been solved and settled. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.