Reply by 42Bastian Schick March 26, 20042004-03-26
On 25 Mar 2004 12:29:31 -0800, hatespammm@yahoo.com (Nick) wrote:

>Are there any major (and interesting;-) differences between OSE >Epsilon and Sciopta in terms of paradigms and design ?
Note: My OSE Epsilon knowledge is 1 year old. In no special order: - Sciopta is fully dynamic: Creating/killing of any OS object is allowed any time. Esp. it is allowed for processes to kill others. - Logical/physical grouping of processes/pools in modules. - Up to 128 pools per module. - 4,8 or 16 fixed buffer sizes per pool - runtime pool-usage statistics (if enabled) to fine-tune buffersizes - Up to 16384 processes per module - priority processes can be time-sliced (comparable with the background processes of OSE, but IMHO more flexible) - memory allocation with tmo This allows e.g. to do flow control using a dedicated pool between two or more processes - enhanced security: a buffer is always in a list, so killing a process can clean up pools. - observing of processes (local and remote) possible - msgRx (OSE: receive) has more options, esp. select msg by sender _and_ msg-id - cleaner API - object-oriented (though not C++) device-driver concept - simple filesystem allows things like: open("/dev/ttyS0",O_RDWR); - MMU support if wanted - support for a wider range of CPUs (including PPC,x86, HCS12) - graphical configuration tool - GCC support if possible - even a bit faster (ARM) ;-) And : We are more flexible, since we don't have to be compatible to a big brother (OSE Epsilon => OSE Delta). But: Due to the dynamic, Sciopta is larger than OSE Epsilon, but a lot smaller than OSE Delta. (full Epsilon ARM kernel is about 6K, Delta (AFAIK) 50K, full Sciopta ARM kernel is about 15K) Enough ?! :-) --- 42Bastian Do not email to bastian42@yahoo.com, it's a spam-only account :-) Use <same-name>@epost.de instead !
Reply by Nick March 25, 20042004-03-25
"Daniel Navarro" <dani_dnm_zgzREMOVE_THIS@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<Z_F8c.4191898$uj6.13231772@telenews.teleline.es>...
> > > > OSE is a very modern (although based on older distributed computing > > principles) RTOS that will come extremely handy to you if you need to > > work on more than one CPU per device (e.g., mobile phones etc). > > It's message passing paradigms may seem strange at the beginning but > > are very powerful. OSE is also very configurable which may come handy > > if you are embarking on new territory and are not really sure what you > > need. It is used ALOT in telecom environments like low-power mobile > > phones and in infrastructural High Availability systems as well. > > > > Nucleus on the other hand is based on a more classic design, which > > people may be more used to. Both are good and reliable with good > > tooling and reputation. Have a look at Enea's papers on message > > passing paradigms and other OSE goodies, it is worth the effort. > > > > It really depends on what you're trying to do :-) > > can you give us a bit more info ? > > We are talking about mobile phones working in a private network (not GSM but > similar). > > Many things to be on mind but I will try to sumarize it: > > - We use OMAP Platform which group an ARM and DSP MS320C5xx. > - Number of threads won't be to high. > - There will be a main task doing most of the work (we are going to migrate > the code from an old device which is not using OS and probably it will be > done as a single task). > - There will be another tasks like the user interface, serial communications > (USB), TCP/IP protocol, OMAP peripheral interfaces (maybe Bluetooth), > battery control (portable device)... > - In the future, maybe some applications running in the operating system > (WAP??, games??... we must prepare but we don't know which ones) > > Something else?? > > Thank you in advance > Daniel Navarro
Hmm, we're talking serious mobile terminal teritory here ;-/ whether this is DECT, Tetra, GSM or VoIP/WLAN is irrelevant at this stage although i have a feeling it sounds more like DECT-type stuff than VoIP/WLAN :-) I believe TI (since you said OMAP) give you OMAP with Nucleus integration and lots of DSP code, which is a reason to go for Nucleaus. Nevertheless I'd go for OSE, since it was designed for such domains. I'd also suggest Symbian OS, but Symbian wouldn't even talk to you if you're below the few million handset sales per year mark ;-(. If you want to really make this 'open' and allow apps to run on it, especially if it is non-java apps, then you should also look into other things as well. In my experience you'll not avoid having many threads on your system, if you're looking at running all that, while keeping strict RT deadlines with the comms/signaling stack (unless you're doing VoIP/WLAN which makes it a different story all together). My guess would be that you'll need to run the layer 2 comms/signaling and baseband code on the DSP, while letting the ARM do all the other bits,like apps, UI, TCP/IP etc. Now if you want to add Bluetooth in there you may be stretching it a bit since it's lower layers need very strict RTness (unless you have separate MCU/DSP for that). Therefore if you do run all the RT stuff on the DSP, Linux or uClinux may be an option for the ARM CPU (assuming you have enough memory). If not, then OSE sounds more likely candidate (or even Sciopta ;-). whatever you do, make sure you have good tooling (and people;-) to inspect the system, because it sounds like you gonna end with alot of complexity in your hands. Especially if you're going to have so many protocols. Also I'd be weary of the idea that you're simply going to port the older code in just one thread, because usually such code is designed to not care about multitasking or concurrent access to resources and this may be a problem. I'd also expect such code to include OS-type primitives, like timers etc that will now have to be migrated outside that code, since the OS will offer them. Moreover be very careful of your design and decisions, regarding power-consumption. cheers /NN
Reply by Nick March 25, 20042004-03-25
bastian42@yahoo.com (42Bastian Schick) wrote in message news:<40628550.831876405@news.individual.de>...
> > > >Of course, OSE is more expensive than Nucleus but I want to know wheter the > >difference is worth it?? > > I was responsible for OSE Epsilon ARM before the team switched to make > our own message based RTOS. > > OSE Epsilon (runs on any ARM !) is one of the fastest RTOS arround (I > spend some time to make it such :-) > > It is - like Sciopta - written in 100% assembly (but more expensive > :-) > > --- > 42Bastian > Do not email to bastian42@yahoo.com, it's a spam-only account :-) > Use <same-name>@epost.de instead !
Bastian, Are there any major (and interesting;-) differences between OSE Epsilon and Sciopta in terms of paradigms and design ? cheers /NN
Reply by Daniel Navarro March 25, 20042004-03-25
> > OSE is a very modern (although based on older distributed computing > principles) RTOS that will come extremely handy to you if you need to > work on more than one CPU per device (e.g., mobile phones etc). > It's message passing paradigms may seem strange at the beginning but > are very powerful. OSE is also very configurable which may come handy > if you are embarking on new territory and are not really sure what you > need. It is used ALOT in telecom environments like low-power mobile > phones and in infrastructural High Availability systems as well. > > Nucleus on the other hand is based on a more classic design, which > people may be more used to. Both are good and reliable with good > tooling and reputation. Have a look at Enea's papers on message > passing paradigms and other OSE goodies, it is worth the effort. > > It really depends on what you're trying to do :-) > can you give us a bit more info ?
We are talking about mobile phones working in a private network (not GSM but similar). Many things to be on mind but I will try to sumarize it: - We use OMAP Platform which group an ARM and DSP MS320C5xx. - Number of threads won't be to high. - There will be a main task doing most of the work (we are going to migrate the code from an old device which is not using OS and probably it will be done as a single task). - There will be another tasks like the user interface, serial communications (USB), TCP/IP protocol, OMAP peripheral interfaces (maybe Bluetooth), battery control (portable device)... - In the future, maybe some applications running in the operating system (WAP??, games??... we must prepare but we don't know which ones) Something else?? Thank you in advance Daniel Navarro
> > /NN
Reply by Nick March 25, 20042004-03-25
"Daniel Navarro" <dani_dnm_zgz@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<84p8c.4175700$uj6.13152102@telenews.teleline.es>...
> Thank you all for your quick response, but... > > what's wrong with OSE??... nobody works with it?? > I mean, I've heard it said that many mobile phones use it and thats the > reason we consider OSE as an option (our product will be like a mobile phone > but in private networks). > > Of course, OSE is more expensive than Nucleus but I want to know wheter the > difference is worth it?? > > > "Daniel Navarro" <dani_dnm_zgz@hotmail.com> escribi&#2013265923; en el mensaje > news:U_k8c.4170454$uj6.13113224@telenews.teleline.es... > > Hi all, > > > > Does anyone use Nucleus or OSE RTOS with ARM9? > > > > We're starting development of a new product with ARM9 and we're looking > for > > a RTOS, but we have no experience in this field. We need your opinion > about > > them or any other OS you can recommend us. > > > > Thanks, > > Daniel Navarro > > > >
OSE is a very modern (although based on older distributed computing principles) RTOS that will come extremely handy to you if you need to work on more than one CPU per device (e.g., mobile phones etc). It's message passing paradigms may seem strange at the beginning but are very powerful. OSE is also very configurable which may come handy if you are embarking on new territory and are not really sure what you need. It is used ALOT in telecom environments like low-power mobile phones and in infrastructural High Availability systems as well. Nucleus on the other hand is based on a more classic design, which people may be more used to. Both are good and reliable with good tooling and reputation. Have a look at Enea's papers on message passing paradigms and other OSE goodies, it is worth the effort. It really depends on what you're trying to do :-) can you give us a bit more info ? /NN
Reply by 42Bastian Schick March 25, 20042004-03-25
> >Of course, OSE is more expensive than Nucleus but I want to know wheter the >difference is worth it??
I was responsible for OSE Epsilon ARM before the team switched to make our own message based RTOS. OSE Epsilon (runs on any ARM !) is one of the fastest RTOS arround (I spend some time to make it such :-) It is - like Sciopta - written in 100% assembly (but more expensive :-) --- 42Bastian Do not email to bastian42@yahoo.com, it's a spam-only account :-) Use <same-name>@epost.de instead !
Reply by Ulf Samuelsson March 24, 20042004-03-24

"Daniel Navarro" <dani_dnm_zgz@hotmail.com> skrev i meddelandet
news:84p8c.4175700$uj6.13152102@telenews.teleline.es...
> Thank you all for your quick response, but... > > what's wrong with OSE??... nobody works with it?? > I mean, I've heard it said that many mobile phones use it and thats the > reason we consider OSE as an option (our product will be like a mobile
phone
> but in private networks).
OSE is a modern message passing operating system and it supports the ARM9 MMU. The message passing is the key to why it is used by companies like Sony-Ericsson and Nokia. Sony-Ericsson run OSE on AVRs and on ARM. It is also used in Wireless Infrastructure. The complete Ericsson WCDMA basestation is based on OSE Delta. My friends at ENEA has an AT91RM9200 board since November last year. OSE Delta (the more advanced version) requires an MMU but there are MMU less versions that could run on let's say an ARM7 or ARM946. Atmel has some cool chips for VoIP/WLAN phones which might be useful for you instead of those nassssty OMAPpers.
> Of course, OSE is more expensive than Nucleus but I want to know wheter
the
> difference is worth it?? > > > "Daniel Navarro" <dani_dnm_zgz@hotmail.com> escribi&#2013265923; en el mensaje > news:U_k8c.4170454$uj6.13113224@telenews.teleline.es... > > Hi all, > > > > Does anyone use Nucleus or OSE RTOS with ARM9? > > > > We're starting development of a new product with ARM9 and we're looking > for > > a RTOS, but we have no experience in this field. We need your opinion > about > > them or any other OS you can recommend us. > > > > Thanks, > > Daniel Navarro > >
-- Best Regards, Ulf Samuelsson ulf@a-t-m-e-l.com This is a personal view which may or may not be share by my Employer Atmel Nordic AB
Reply by Daniel Navarro March 24, 20042004-03-24
Thank you all for your quick response, but...

what's wrong with OSE??... nobody works with it??
I mean, I've heard it said that many mobile phones use it and thats the
reason we consider OSE as an option (our product will be like a mobile phone
but in private networks).

Of course, OSE is more expensive than Nucleus but I want to know wheter the
difference is worth it??


"Daniel Navarro" <dani_dnm_zgz@hotmail.com> escribi&#2013265923; en el mensaje
news:U_k8c.4170454$uj6.13113224@telenews.teleline.es...
> Hi all, > > Does anyone use Nucleus or OSE RTOS with ARM9? > > We're starting development of a new product with ARM9 and we're looking
for
> a RTOS, but we have no experience in this field. We need your opinion
about
> them or any other OS you can recommend us. > > Thanks, > Daniel Navarro > >
Reply by Daniel Navarro March 24, 20042004-03-24
OK, we're going to take a quick look at MQX because we didn't know about it
thanks

"FLY135" <fly_135(@ hot not not)notmail.com> escribi&#2013265923; en el mensaje
news:6Xm8c.5167$V66.4149@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> > "Daniel Navarro" <dani_dnm_zgz@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:U_k8c.4170454$uj6.13113224@telenews.teleline.es... > > Hi all, > > > > Does anyone use Nucleus or OSE RTOS with ARM9? > > > > We're starting development of a new product with ARM9 and we're looking > for > > a RTOS, but we have no experience in this field. We need your opinion > about > > them or any other OS you can recommend us. > > We use Arc Internationals dev tools and MQX OS on the ARM7 and it has
worked
> pretty well. Not exactly sure where they are with the ARM9, but I'm > guessing that they have it. > >
Reply by Daniel Navarro March 24, 20042004-03-24
"tim" <520010973502removethis@t-online.de> escribi&#2013265923; en el mensaje
news:c3t08n$kgj$04$1@news.t-online.com...
> > "Daniel Navarro" <dani_dnm_zgz@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:U_k8c.4170454$uj6.13113224@telenews.teleline.es... > > Hi all, > > > > Does anyone use Nucleus or OSE RTOS with ARM9? > > > > We're starting development of a new product with ARM9 and we're looking > for > > a RTOS, but we have no experience in this field. We need your opinion > about > > them or any other OS you can recommend us. > > Nucleus is a fairly good choice. > > It is mature, works well, easily supported and reasonably priced > and you should find a reasonable pool of people who have used > it, if you need any help (when can I start :-)?).
Thanks, maybe I consider your offer in the near future, it will be very useful for sure ;-).
> > Yes, you can get an 'unsupported' OS cheaper but for a commercial > project the cost of something like Nucleus with a proper support > contract pays for itself in a couple of months > > tim > > > > > > > Thanks, > > Daniel Navarro > > > > > >