On 28/04/2014 9:38 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
Look
On Apr 27, 2014 5:35 PM, Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org> wrote:
>
> On 27/04/2014 10:36 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> > On 04/26/2014 08:03 AM, Chris Johns wrote:
> >> On 25/04/2014 11:51 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >>> The intention with confdefs is that the user does not have to
> >>> know the implicit requirements of the higher level capability
> >>> they configured. User configures number of file descriptors,
> >>> Ada tasks, etc.
> >>>
> >>> So if a filesystem needs resources, confdefs.h should reserve
> >>> them.
> >>>
> >>
> >> If the user needs more than 1 mount per configured file system the
> >> user will need to supply that number.
> >
> > The file system tests should use this new mechanism.
> >
>
> Do any tests use more than one instance of a configured file system ?
The only case I can think of off the top of my head is mounted imfs tests.
Does the IMFS use a semaphore ? I do not think I added one for that file
system. I grep'ed the libfs tree and did not see anything.
None of the fstests fail on the Beagleboard.
Chris
_______________________________________________
rtems-devel mailing list
rtems-devel@rtems.org
http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-devel
