Technically saying I didn't use the right name, it should be kernel thread.
But in fact of udev it should be a userspace daemon.
BR,
Alan
On 2/21/24, Saurav Pal wrote:
> Hi Xiang,
>
> I meant multiple daemons in reference to what Alan mentioned about there
> being daemons to detect the
Hi Xiang,
I meant multiple daemons in reference to what Alan mentioned about there
being daemons to detect the various components currently. Hope this clears
it.
Regards,
SP
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 12:00 PM Xiang Xiao
wrote:
> Even though PCs just have one udev daemon, I don't see why MCU
Even though PCs just have one udev daemon, I don't see why MCU needs
multiple daemon.
On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 2:07 PM Saurav Pal wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> Also, am I right in thinking it would increase performance if there was a
> single daemon working rather than
Hi,
Thanks for the clarification.
Also, am I right in thinking it would increase performance if there was a
single daemon working rather than multiple? (I am thinking in terms of
context switches for tasks, even if, say, somehow the memory consumption
remains the same).
Regards,
SP
On Tue, Feb
Since all devices expose through vfs (/dev, /proc), udev could be
implemented through inotify API.
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 11:31 PM Alan C. Assis wrote:
> Hi Saurav,
>
> There is not something like a "udev" for NuttX, but there are
> daemons/services used to detect when a SDCard is plugged,
Hi Saurav,
There is not something like a "udev" for NuttX, but there are
daemons/services used to detect when a SDCard is plugged, when a USB
device is attached, etc.
We could add something like a lite "udev" for NuttX.
Best Regards,
Alan
On 2/20/24, Saurav Pal wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am not
