timerfd is a very nice feature, but is it better to call wd_* api than timer_ api?
> -----Original Message----- > From: Matias N. <mat...@imap.cc> > Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2021 10:01 AM > To: dev@nuttx.apache.org > Subject: timerfd > > Hi, > > I would like to implement timerfd interface to overcome some of the issues > around handling signals and threads and the limitation of > SIGEV_THREAD we discussed. I see eventfd is supported and looking at the > implementation I think it can be done relatively simple using > most of the existing timer_* functionality. I was wondering if anyone already > did this work outside of mainline or had any thoughts about > what to consider when doing so. > > Best, > Matias
