Philippe Gerum wrote:
> 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.
Ok for renaming. But no thread is ever bound to this interface, so the
count is always 0.
Xenomai-core mailing list