On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 08:54 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> Can you upload the new interface when we've got the changes
> in? Since it's public API and all, another round of review might be
> good.
New interface uploaded here:
http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/DeviceKit-power/gtk-doc/Latency.
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 08:54 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 12:08 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > > Why wouldn't the admin just use the same method? I'm not sure why we
> > > need two separate methods. I mean, with a CancelLatencyRequest() and
> > > proper user interface the ad
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 12:08 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > Why wouldn't the admin just use the same method? I'm not sure why we
> > need two separate methods. I mean, with a CancelLatencyRequest() and
> > proper user interface the admin can just remove requests that way.
>
> Nahh, the admin inte
On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 12:26 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> If a cookie is what we want (and I think we do), we shouldn't implement
> it this way. Second, everything in a process share the D-Bus connection
> so this wouldn't be a very good cookie anyway.
Agreed, I've changed the interface.
> The po
On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 13:34 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 12:26 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 16:47 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > > I’ve put an interface file up here:
> > > http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/DeviceKit-power/gtk-doc/Latency.ht
On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 12:26 -0500, David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 16:47 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> > I’ve put an interface file up here:
> > http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/DeviceKit-power/gtk-doc/Latency.html
>
> Some comments
>
> 1. Regarding GetRequests() returning a
On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 16:47 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> I’ve put an interface file up here:
> http://people.freedesktop.org/~hughsient/DeviceKit-power/gtk-doc/Latency.html
Some comments
1. Regarding GetRequests() returning a(ussi), e.g. an array of
- pid, connection, type, value
why is t
Hi!
On Thu, 2008-11-06 at 16:47 +, Richard Hughes wrote:
> Why don’t applications use the PMQoS interface directly?
In case someone is wondering: PMQoS is an acronym for 'Power Management
Quality of Services'. Mark Gross (the author of the corresponding
kernel patches) has some pretty slid
As requested by davidz, forwarding on the blog post at:
http://blogs.gnome.org/hughsie/2008/11/06/devicekit-power-latency-control/
DeviceKit-power latency control
We all know controlling latency is the best way to control power
consumption and still have a usable system. Putting the processor int
