Re: [fpc-pascal] Realtime and freepascal???
On 31/05/18 10:45, Dennis wrote: Darius Blaszyk wrote:> Hi,>> For a hard real-time project I am considering using freepascal. As > this is my first endeavour in real-time I would like to ask the > community on their experiences. Is FPC suitable for this kind of > applications? If so what commercially available boards are out there? > I believe a beagle bone for instance is capable of doing realtime > applications because of the PRU. Which are certainly good for data capture, anything more complicated than that and I hope you're good at assembler. other credit card size boards > worthwhile investigating? What RTOS do people have good experience > with in combination with freepascal?>I am not sure Beagle Bone is a good choice because it seemed to have supply problem for many years. It is hard to purchase large quantity of it.In the past, I have use raspberry Pi connected to many simple devices via a serial bus. The PI acts as a server to accept commands from the internet and forward them to the devices on the serial bus and pass back the responses to the internet. The software was written in FPC. It's notable that the Boeing "Dreamliner" uses Ethernet heavily for both control and passenger entertainment, allegedly with the various subsystems both firewalled and airgapped (which raises the question: would one really need both if one were confident in what he was doing?). Also, check out this https://ultibo.org/Which is an embedded OS written in FPC, so you just modify the source code to include your application and recompile a new embedded OS for use with raspberry Pi.That way, it has lower latency and lower RAM requirement than running your FPC program on top of the Linux OS. Which is certainly a valiant attempt, although my tastes run towards systems with robust protection between segments/addressspaces. -- Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues] ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Realtime and freepascal???
Darius Blaszyk wrote: Hi, For a hard real-time project I am considering using freepascal. As this is my first endeavour in real-time I would like to ask the community on their experiences. Is FPC suitable for this kind of applications? If so what commercially available boards are out there? I believe a beagle bone for instance is capable of doing realtime applications because of the PRU. Any other credit card size boards worthwhile investigating? What RTOS do people have good experience with in combination with freepascal? I am not sure Beagle Bone is a good choice because it seemed to have supply problem for many years. It is hard to purchase large quantity of it. In the past, I have use raspberry Pi connected to many simple devices via a serial bus. The PI acts as a server to accept commands from the internet and forward them to the devices on the serial bus and pass back the responses to the internet. The software was written in FPC. Also, check out this https://ultibo.org/ Which is an embedded OS written in FPC, so you just modify the source code to include your application and recompile a new embedded OS for use with raspberry Pi. That way, it has lower latency and lower RAM requirement than running your FPC program on top of the Linux OS. Dennis ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
Re: [fpc-pascal] Realtime and freepascal???
In our previous episode, Darius Blaszyk said: > To get an idea of the scope of the project: > > My project is planned to do data acquisition, either storing data to flash > memory or sending it over RF, not decided yet. Later on video should be > incorporated, also over RF. There are also multiple analogue controllers > planned to be implemented. Some "simple" bus system (such as CAN??) I mostly work with barebone MCUs instead MPU's with RTOS, so I can't answer the question, but CAN doesn't really have the bandwidth for audio or video. It is meant for short (<=8bytes) control packets and has considerable per packet overhead. ___ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
