Tim Blechmann wrote:
Surely if there were a procedure in place for using the idlehook, this could be made to work: e.g. any external could check to see if idlehook was taken already. If so, copy the existing idlehook into its local space and replace the idlehook with its own. When the new idlehook is called, it should first call the old one and then its own before returning the 'or' of the two results. On deallocating an idlehook, the external's deconstructor should replace the old idlehook. The last idlehook to be removed would be replaced with NULL.
right, but there are no guaranties that assure this. one badly written external could ruin the whole system.
imo, this is something, that should be done by the kernel.
t
Yes, there should be a function in the kernel to register a callback, and then it would manage the chaining for the externals. But since one can already register a callback with clock_new(), this is probably redundant(?).
Martin