Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 21:43:43 +0000 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Doug Ambrisko <ambrisko@ambrisko.com> Cc: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@fnop.net>, Shteryana Shopova <syrinx@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org, "Constantine A. Murenin" <cnst@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: Porting OpenBSD's sysctl hw.sensors framework to FreeBSD (was: Re: PERFORCE change 123040 for review) Message-ID: <53466.1184103823@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 10 Jul 2007 14:00:32 MST." <200707102100.l6AL0WPA063338@ambrisko.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
A number of observations: The main problem about hardware monitoring is the lack of a name-space. The OpenBSD sysctl doesn't get anywhere close to providing that. Putting stuff in the kernel is not a magic solution to that problem, as we have seen far too many examples of, starting with the socket(2) mistake in early BSD UNIX, and reaching a preliminary pinnacle with the SysV IPC mechanisms. The first task therefore, must be to design a namespace where all the assorted pieces of software can contribute their measurements and registrations. Once that's designed, we can start to argue if the code should live in the kernel, userland or in ports. But please don't import any half-assed "Ohh, I'll just hack this in there" non-solutions. -- 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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?53466.1184103823>