From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=linux.vnet.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=dkodihal@linux.vnet.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.vnet.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40539b72wdzF1jw for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:36:19 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098404.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w2K6a9WI053496 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 02:36:17 -0400 Received: from e06smtp12.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp12.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.108]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2gtuue2v7b-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA256 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 02:36:16 -0400 Received: from localhost by e06smtp12.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 06:36:14 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.198) by e06smtp12.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.142) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 06:36:12 -0000 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps4076.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id w2K6aCHh57868322 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 06:36:12 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A532AE056 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 06:26:33 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id A32D1AE045 for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 06:26:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from Deepaks-MacBook-Pro.local (unknown [9.195.47.74]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 20 Mar 2018 06:26:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: Sdbusplus-based Shared Library To: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org References: From: Deepak Kodihalli Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 12:06:09 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18032006-0008-0000-0000-000004E0233D X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18032006-0009-0000-0000-00001E733E89 Message-Id: <6be20d85-1892-d5ad-336f-ff63840a25d5@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2018-03-20_02:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=1 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1709140000 definitions=main-1803200080 X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2018 06:36:20 -0000 On 19/03/18 10:41 pm, Patrick Venture wrote: > We have a lot of duplication across daemons using sdbusplus, and no > new utility library. To avoid every daemon having their own timer > object, and their own this or that, I suggest we create this shared > library. > > Thoughts? We can start simple, just have a timer object in there, and > then the new timers being introduced to phosphor-hwmon and > phosphor-host-ipmid can be the first customers. > > Patrick I think sdbusplus is specifically a systemd D-Bus API wrapper. So I wonder if need more such wrappers (for eg one around the systemd event loop, to add objects like timers, IO etc) around systemd-based API than having them all in sdbusplus. Regards, Deepak