xiaoxiang781216 commented on pull request #4233: URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/4233#issuecomment-887598705
> > How do you suggest that an application performs the loading and execution of the next application image? > > I would suggest using BOARDIOC_IOCTL. That allows board-specific boarctl() commands. It works exactly like the other BOARDIOC commands but does not clutter the system with garbage BOARDIOC commmands. Imagine where that will go in the long run i we allow everyone to do that? > The best thing what we can do is invite all interesting party review the design and ensure it's general enough to support the range of scenario. But, it's wrong to ignore the requirement and let's vendor expose the different IOCTL for the same thing and then create the unnecessary inconsistence between the different vendor. especially, if the requirement is a general and common feature needed by many usecase or application. > The only real difference is that the board-specific IOCTL commands would be defined in a different header file in the board/include or in the arch/include directory. > If IOCTL is defined in the board specific header file, my question is: 1. How to ensure the different vendor define the same IOCTL for the same functionality 2. If they have the different idea, how to write a general application which depend on these vendor specific IOCTL -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@nuttx.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
