Philippe Gerum wrote:
Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:

Philippe Gerum wrote:
 > Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> > When using xenomai trunk, it appears that /proc/xenomai is no longer a
 > > directory but a file returning "0".
> > > > Check your recent changes for giving the nucleus a regular syscall > table. I would not be surprised of some side-effect there. i.e. > something going on with the xnptree_t descriptor?

That is exactly the source of the problem, since iface_proc_root in
nucleus/module.c has not yet been set, the proc entry for the nucleus
interface get created directly under /proc instead of
/proc/xenomai/interfaces.

Do we need a /proc entry for this interface ?


Not really. This would only give the exact number of processes bound to the nucleus, whilst major interface counters already display the number of bound threads.


This said, the other option would be to move the call to xnshadow_mount() from the xnarch_init() to __xeno_sys_init() in a kernel-only section, just after xnpod_init_proc() has returned. There is nothing done in the arch-layer for any architecture that would prevent this. Btw, I'd say that "core" would be better than "xenomai" to name this internal interface.

--

Philippe.

_______________________________________________
Xenomai-core mailing list
Xenomai-core@gna.org
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-core

Reply via email to