I will find out when I get to try this soon and report back. All my
threads have equal priority, although I have tried increasing the
priority of the LVGL thread. Most of the time, all threads are blocked
waiting on events (e.g. incoming CAN data - but I have stopped the
stream for this investi
Hi Philippe,
Yes, this is my understanding too.
Probably the LVGL thread on Tim's configuration is not with the right
priority, if this is the case disabling RR will not help much.
BR,
Alan
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 7:35 AM Philippe Leduc via dev
wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm not sure to underst
Hello all,
I'm not sure to understand the problem: the RR time slice shall follow a strict
priority ordering no?
This time slice only applies if threads have the same priority and that the
current one do not yield/sleep.
With a FIFO policy, it would be infinite instead of RR time slice.
What a
On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 1:37 AM Nathan Hartman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 5:19 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:10 PM Nathan Hartman
> > wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 4:48 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> > > > Another story is about LaTeX.. I want NuttX to have PDF Hand
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 5:19 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:10 PM Nathan Hartman
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 4:48 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> > > Another story is about LaTeX.. I want NuttX to have PDF Handbook
> > > generated too for offline work and as part of release
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:10 PM Nathan Hartman
wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 4:48 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> > Another story is about LaTeX.. I want NuttX to have PDF Handbook
> > generated too for offline work and as part of releases.. there was
> > initial prototype created and it works. But l
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 4:48 PM Tomek CEDRO wrote:
>
> Another story is about LaTeX.. I want NuttX to have PDF Handbook
> generated too for offline work and as part of releases.. there was
> initial prototype created and it works. But local LaTeX setup is
> complex and heavy and in search for alt
Ah sorry I just jumped in to reading :-)
As Ludovic pointed out it is possible to do a live preview. We use
Sphinx for documentation. HTML preview is generated quickly and
smoothly :-)
Sphinx is very nice and have tons of features (through
plugins/modules). I use it in my projects too. The RST is
Aha - thanks for that :-)
On 26/11/2025 20:11, Ludovic Vanasse wrote:
Ah, just the autorebuild part:
DOCUMENTATION — NUTTX LATEST DOCUMENTATION
https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/contributing/documentation.html#live-rebuild
For me, I was doing the work in VSCode also and just having my br
Ah, just the autorebuild part:
DOCUMENTATION — NUTTX LATEST DOCUMENTATION
https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/contributing/documentation.html#live-rebuild
For me, I was doing the work in VSCode also and just having my browser
on the side where the preview would be.
__
Ludovic Vanasse
m.
I simply follow:
https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/contributing/documentation.html
This is a PITA as you can't just make a change and expect it to be OK. I
started working on a simple documentation mod just the other day - in VS
Code - but the RST previewers online or within VS Code failed
Having done a bit of documentation rework in the past. There's a hot
reload function in the documentation generation.
It'll start a rebuild and refresh the page with the new edit. I
thought it was pretty convenient on my machine and we have the Nix
devshell for it also, so no need to install anyth
This would need only a trivial change to documentation, which then
doesn't need a full RST build/check I would think.
On 26/11/2025 19:04, Tim Hardisty wrote:
Think my message passed yours in the ether...yes; that's what I'm
suggesting :-)
On 26/11/2025 19:02, Alan C. Assis wrote:
I think w
Think my message passed yours in the ether...yes; that's what I'm
suggesting :-)
On 26/11/2025 19:02, Alan C. Assis wrote:
I think what we are calling "Strict Priority" is defined by POSIX as
SCHED_FIFO.
SCHED_FIFO: The thread runs until it blocks itself or it is preempted by a
higher priority
I think what we are calling "Strict Priority" is defined by POSIX as
SCHED_FIFO.
SCHED_FIFO: The thread runs until it blocks itself or it is preempted by a
higher priority thread. (This is what you want).
SCHED_RR: The thread runs until the above happens *OR* its time slice
(200ms) expires.
So,
Think it's SCHED_FIFO - SCHED_PRIORITY was my invention lol
On 26/11/2025 18:40, Alan C. Assis wrote:
I think SCHED_PRIORITY is not a standard definition, at least I didn't find
it in POSIX.
This could be just my inexperience with using an RTOS (and NuttX)!
This stems from me having a thread to handle LVGL. It seems to only run
its usual update function every 200ms - the RR default - rather than the
supposed 1ms it wants; but I am yet to try and prove this to be fair.
If I'm righ
Do you suggest moving from RST to Markdown?
I think SCHED_PRIORITY is not a standard definition, at least I didn't find
it in POSIX.
You can propose using RR slice equal 0 by default, but I don't know the
side effects (it could be considered a breaking change, because some user
applications could
Yes, the Documentation needs to be fixed first.
Setting RR slice to 0 by default could be an option to get the
Documentation fixed, but I think Greg setup RR slice to 200ms to avoid
mistakes, although NuttX is a RTOS most users will want to use it more like
a time sharing system.
This is my suppo
I don't mind doing documentation - but it does take a lot more effort
since RST doesn't have very good previewers that I have found: it is
difficult to know if will it render correctly on the website unless you
do the whole RST build stuff.
Quicker - if agreeable as a short term fix - would be
I agree with your assessment Tim, it is definitely misleading and should be
improved!
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 1:17 PM Tim Hardisty
wrote:
> OK - but see here:
> https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/reference/user/02_task_scheduling.html
>
> Hardly a "default" if you have to read the help of Kcon
OK - but see here:
https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/reference/user/02_task_scheduling.html
Hardly a "default" if you have to read the help of Kconfig to see what's
going on?
I know the documentation is, um, lacking...so if it can be improved here
let's do it!
On 26/11/2025 18:12, Alan
Guess what? We are still missing a proper Documentation! :-)
BR,
Alan
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 3:11 PM Tim Hardisty
wrote:
> So do we agree the documentation is at best misleading? And, to me,
> simply wrong?
>
> On 26/11/2025 18:07, Alan C. Assis wrote:
> > Exactly!
> >
> > You can refer to sc
There is not a checkbox to ROUND ROBIN in the menuconfig:
[image: image.png]
Only for Sporadic scheduling. The the for the RR timeslice explains
it:
│ The round robin timeslice will be set this number of milliseconds;
│
│ Round robin scheduling (SCHED_RR) is enabled by setting this
│
So do we agree the documentation is at best misleading? And, to me,
simply wrong?
On 26/11/2025 18:07, Alan C. Assis wrote:
Exactly!
You can refer to sched/sched/sched_timerexpiration.c line 207
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 3:00 PM Tim Hardisty
wrote:
That's what I inferred (yet to try it) - so
Exactly!
You can refer to sched/sched/sched_timerexpiration.c line 207
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 3:00 PM Tim Hardisty
wrote:
> That's what I inferred (yet to try it) - so is the documentation
> misleading since the default CONFIG_RR_INTERVAL=200 forces RR scheduling
> rather than the stated "stri
I suppose I would agree, that does seem misleading if the default is RR.
Does the RR scheduling on NuttX have priority-based preemption/priority
inversion avoidance mechanisms? Maybe that could be the reasoning for
the wording.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 1:00 PM Tim Hardisty
wrote:
> That's what I
That's what I inferred (yet to try it) - so is the documentation
misleading since the default CONFIG_RR_INTERVAL=200 forces RR scheduling
rather than the stated "strict priority scheduling"?
On 26/11/2025 17:54, Alan C. Assis wrote:
CONFIG_RR_INTERVAL=0
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 2:22 PM Tim Har
CONFIG_RR_INTERVAL=0
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 2:22 PM Tim Hardisty
wrote:
> Apologies if this isn't really a NuttX question...
>
> Documentation says "By default, NuttX performs strict priority scheduling".
>
> Default CONFIG_RR_INTERVAL is 200ms.
>
> I have multiple threads, but have not set any
Apologies if this isn't really a NuttX question...
Documentation says "By default, NuttX performs strict priority scheduling".
Default CONFIG_RR_INTERVAL is 200ms.
I have multiple threads, but have not set any scheduling parameters, but
it seems threads are being scheduled every 200ms rather o
30 matches
Mail list logo
