On 2009-03-16, Michael Schnell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Run-to-completion .... You've lost me. AFAICT, that's pretty
>> much how both Linux and all the RTOSes I've ever seen work.
>
> Not at all.
>
> Linux and many "big" RTOSes do "preemptive multitasking":
I've you've configured them to do that.
> A threat thread/process gets interrupted and stalled for some
> time, if a higher priority get active by some event (timer,
> hardware interrupt or freeing of a semaphore by another
> thread).
And the priorities and scheduling policies are under_user_control_.
You can set things up so that threads run to completion.
> "Run to completion" is very simple "cooperative multitasking:"
> A threat thread/process gets interrupted only for a few CPU
> cycles by hardware interrupts.
Yes, I've written RTOS kernels. I'm aware of how things work.
> But a thread/process never runs wile another thread is active.
Right. And that's the paradigm I'm using under eCos and Linux.
> It only can run after that thread completes (and then waits to
> get rescheduled at a later time.
I know. That's how my threaded app works.
> This very simple paradigm is often used instead of a real OS
> with small processors and as an internal multitasking in a
> program/process run by a real OS (this is called "event-driven
> programming").
I know. I've been using RTOSes and event-driven programming
for 25 years.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! NANCY!! Why is
at everything RED?!
visi.com
_______________________________________________
uClinux-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by [email protected]
To unsubscribe see:
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/options/uclinux-dev
