Undocumented configuration options
Chris Johns
chrisj at rtems.org
Tue Mar 31 08:14:54 UTC 2020
On 2020-03-31 00:51, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 8:39 AM Sebastian Huber
> <sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de
> <mailto:sebastian.huber at embedded-brains.de>> wrote:
>
> On 30/03/2020 15:35, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>> What about the
>>
>> CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_DEVFS
>> CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_DOSFS
>> CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_FTPFS
>> CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_IMFS
>> CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_JFFS2
>> CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_NFS
>> CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_RFS
>> CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_TFTPFS
>>
>> configuration options? Is this really something a user should
>> be able to
>> define?
>>
>>
>> Chris will likely chime in later but I believe these are needed so
>> that
>> filesystem type is listed in the set of mountable filesystems.
>> The mount
>> command depends on those settings.
>
> Yes, it depends on the settings, but the
> CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_* options give you an extra level of
> control. For example, you can enable the RFS with:
>
> #define CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_RFS
>
> Optionally, you can fine tune the entry:
>
> #if defined(CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_RFS) \
> && !defined(CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_RFS)
> #define CONFIGURE_FILESYSTEM_ENTRY_RFS \
> { RTEMS_FILESYSTEM_TYPE_RFS, rtems_rfs_rtems_initialise }
> #endif
>
> I am not sure if this fine tuning is really necessary.
>
>
> Me either. Looks like a way for someone to provide their own
> version of the definition which seems in the class of defining your
> own Configuration Table structures. And we removed those.
>
> Let's wait for Chris. :)
This dates back to 2010 [1] and I suspect I was attempting to follow the
way confdefs tables were defined then. Anything that makes things
simpler is good.
Chris
[1]
https://git.rtems.org/rtems/commit/?id=29e92b090c8bc35745aa5c89231ce806bcb11e57
More information about the devel
mailing list