Reply by 42Bastian Schick March 22, 20042004-03-22
> >I know it is a bit of topic, but your RTOS features reminded me a lot >of Enea's OSE ;-) >Is there any synergy there or commonality in the design and >implementation ?
Sciopta is designed from scratch(!) by all but one coder of the former OSE Epsilon team. a) Both are direct message based. A very old and apealing concept which makes SW design quiete easy. b) Both are in 100% assembly (OSE Epsilon, not Delta or OSEck !) => Small and fast. Sciopta + IPS (our TCP/IP) + PPP fits into a MCF5282 leaving 3/4 of the flash for the user-application. c) Transparent message passing in distributed systems. The user-application does not have to use special functions to transfer messages across CPU/MCU boundaries. but: (IMHO) Sciopta's API is cleaner and of course it is enhanced: - fully dynamic Nearly everything (except the init-process) can be created/killed during runtime. - multiple pools with up to 16 fixed buffer-sizes - logic/physical grouping of processes - time-sliced priority processes
>possibly some papers on it ?
Our homepage provides a technical reference, but no comparison between OSE and Sciopta. --- 42Bastian Do not email to bastian42@yahoo.com, it's a spam-only account :-) Use <same-name>@epost.de instead !
Reply by Nick March 20, 20042004-03-20
bastian42@yahoo.com (42Bastian Schick) wrote in message news:<405b1157.343463173@news.individual.de>...
> Hello Alf, > > >We have a project that demands IP connectivity and little bit of simple > >database stuff that will take about a megabyte of memory. For this project, > >something like eCos seems like a logical solution as it seems to have all > >the functionality without having the footprint and MMU requirements that > >Linux has. However, I've never used it before so need a little help in > >evaluating it against other solutions. > > When it comes to low footprint, you might consider the RTOS of my > company. The ARM kernel is 16K (fully dynamic, pre-emptiv, direct > message-passing). But of course, it is not Open Source (tm). > Check out www.sciopta.com or contact me for more info. > --- > 42Bastian > Do not email to bastian42@yahoo.com, it's a spam-only account :-) > Use <same-name>@epost.de instead !
I know it is a bit of topic, but your RTOS features reminded me a lot of Enea's OSE ;-) Is there any synergy there or commonality in the design and implementation ? possibly some papers on it ? I'm a student of OSs in general so I'd be interested cheers /NN
Reply by 42Bastian Schick March 19, 20042004-03-19
Hello Alf,

>We have a project that demands IP connectivity and little bit of simple >database stuff that will take about a megabyte of memory. For this project, >something like eCos seems like a logical solution as it seems to have all >the functionality without having the footprint and MMU requirements that >Linux has. However, I've never used it before so need a little help in >evaluating it against other solutions.
When it comes to low footprint, you might consider the RTOS of my company. The ARM kernel is 16K (fully dynamic, pre-emptiv, direct message-passing). But of course, it is not Open Source (tm). Check out www.sciopta.com or contact me for more info. --- 42Bastian Do not email to bastian42@yahoo.com, it's a spam-only account :-) Use <same-name>@epost.de instead !
Reply by Unbeliever March 19, 20042004-03-19
> > > > That's exactly the reason I'm treating the processor choice and RTOS
choice
> > as single decision. At present eCos with ColdFire, one of a couple of
ARMs
> > and a PowerPC seem to be the front runners. What we'd ideally like is
drop
> > in solution with an eCos (or ucLinux or any other small footprint rtos + > > TCP/IP stack + some peripheral drivers). eCos is probably a bit of
overkill
> > for us, but its reuseability in future projects may make it worthwhile. > > > > Alf, > as a point to make, uCLinux is _not_ an RTOS > Therefore if you're looking to build an RT system, then uClinux may > not be what you need out of the box ;-( > > NN
Thanks, Nick, Yes, further investigation has shown that uCLinux is not entirely suitable, both for its non RTness and its significantly larger footprint. We're concentrating on eCos at this stage. Doesn't come pre-built for the SOC we're looking at, but does for the underlying ARM9 core and the MACs we're looking at. Cheers, Alf --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.601 / Virus Database: 382 - Release Date: 29/02/2004
Reply by Nick March 18, 20042004-03-18
"Unbeliever" <alfkatz@remove.the.bleedin.obvious.ieee.org> wrote in message news:<4052662a$0$3952$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au>...
> Thanks Grant, > > > Firstly, Windows/Cygwin will slow you down compared to using a > > Linux host. > Real world stuff creeps in here. In the absence of systems and people, I'd > probably agree with you. > > > * Are you using Ethernet controllers for which drivers exist? > > > Maybe, maybe not. Front runners at this stage appear to be an ARM9 with > external MACs (the answer for this would almost certainly be yes) or a > Coldfire with integral MACs (I don't think these are supported). > > > * Are you using a part for which drivers/platform support > > exists? (e.g. code to handle timers, interrupt controller, > > memory controller, serial ports, etc.) > > If the answers to both no, and you've got to write the entire > > set of peripheral handlers and the Ethernet driver, then I'd > > plan on a couple months. > > That's exactly the reason I'm treating the processor choice and RTOS choice > as single decision. At present eCos with ColdFire, one of a couple of ARMs > and a PowerPC seem to be the front runners. What we'd ideally like is drop > in solution with an eCos (or ucLinux or any other small footprint rtos + > TCP/IP stack + some peripheral drivers). eCos is probably a bit of overkill > for us, but its reuseability in future projects may make it worthwhile. >
Alf, as a point to make, uCLinux is _not_ an RTOS Therefore if you're looking to build an RT system, then uClinux may not be what you need out of the box ;-( NN
Reply by Anton Erasmus March 17, 20042004-03-17
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 01:20:38 GMT, Darin Johnson <darin_@_usa_._net>
wrote:

>Anton Erasmus <junk@junk.net> writes: > >> Especially if one invest in a KVM. Keep the same monitor, keyboard and >> mouse, and with a simple button press on the KVM or a sequence of >> keystrokes on the keyboard one can switch between Linux and Windows. > >I tried this at work, with a reasonable quality KVM switch, and it >noticably degraded the video quality. But this was a high end monitor >running 1600x1200. The KVM switches do work very well with lower >resolutions though, and are great for lab machines and such.
With the slightly more expensive KVMs (The pricing here in South Africa is approx US$300 for a 4port one) the quality on 1200x1600 is not noticably worse than without the KVM. The high spec monitors often have more than one input so one can use the KVM to switch the keyboard and mouse, and use the monitor's own select functions to select the video input. Regards Anton Erasmus
Reply by March 16, 20042004-03-16
Anton Erasmus <junk@junk.net> writes:

> Especially if one invest in a KVM. Keep the same monitor, keyboard and > mouse, and with a simple button press on the KVM or a sequence of > keystrokes on the keyboard one can switch between Linux and Windows.
I tried this at work, with a reasonable quality KVM switch, and it noticably degraded the video quality. But this was a high end monitor running 1600x1200. The KVM switches do work very well with lower resolutions though, and are great for lab machines and such. -- Darin Johnson "You used to be big." "I am big. It's the pictures that got small."
Reply by Rene March 16, 20042004-03-16
"Anton Erasmus" <junk@junk.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:808c50l5j7gr9pgjhkj8nsj5f6ec4esorr@4ax.com...
> On 13 Mar 2004 22:20:12 GMT, Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com> wrote: > > >On 2004-03-13, Unbeliever <alfkatz@remove.the.bleedin.obvious.ieee.org>
wrote:
> > > >> When I say systems, of course I mean business systems used by > >> the rest of the company as well as the R&D dept. Such things > >> as e-mail systems for meetings, faxes and even telephone > >> calls, revision management systems, change management systems, > >> project and team management systems, OO analaysis and design > >> systems, databases of various sorts, word processing systems. > > > >If you're required to use the same host for developmeand as > >those other things, then I guess you've got no choice. At my > >last job we were required to use Windows for that sort of > >stuff, but we still did all of our actual eCos development work > >under Linux. Of course it required that the company invest in > >a second computer for people, but computers are dirt cheap -- > >especially considering a P166 will work just fine for code > >development. > > Especially if one invest in a KVM. Keep the same monitor, keyboard and > mouse, and with a simple button press on the KVM or a sequence of > keystrokes on the keyboard one can switch between Linux and Windows.
You might consider using a PC Emulator as VMWare. If you have sufficient RAM in your PC, you will like it. Yours - Rene
Reply by Grant Edwards March 16, 20042004-03-16
On 2004-03-16, Anton Erasmus <junk@junk.net> wrote:

>>> When I say systems, of course I mean business systems used by >>> the rest of the company as well as the R&D dept. Such things >>> as e-mail systems for meetings, faxes and even telephone >>> calls, revision management systems, change management systems, >>> project and team management systems, OO analaysis and design >>> systems, databases of various sorts, word processing systems. >> >>If you're required to use the same host for developmeand as >>those other things, then I guess you've got no choice. At my >>last job we were required to use Windows for that sort of >>stuff, but we still did all of our actual eCos development work >>under Linux. Of course it required that the company invest in >>a second computer for people, but computers are dirt cheap -- >>especially considering a P166 will work just fine for code >>development. > > Especially if one invest in a KVM. Keep the same monitor, keyboard and > mouse, and with a simple button press on the KVM or a sequence of > keystrokes on the keyboard one can switch between Linux and Windows.
I used VNC and a headless Windows machie for a long time. Then BOFH split the "office" network from the "engineering" network and I couldn't VNC the two machines together anymore. Then I bought a KVM. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! NOW do I get to blow at out the CANLDES?? visi.com
Reply by Anton Erasmus March 16, 20042004-03-16
On 13 Mar 2004 22:20:12 GMT, Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com> wrote:

>On 2004-03-13, Unbeliever <alfkatz@remove.the.bleedin.obvious.ieee.org> wrote: > >> When I say systems, of course I mean business systems used by >> the rest of the company as well as the R&D dept. Such things >> as e-mail systems for meetings, faxes and even telephone >> calls, revision management systems, change management systems, >> project and team management systems, OO analaysis and design >> systems, databases of various sorts, word processing systems. > >If you're required to use the same host for developmeand as >those other things, then I guess you've got no choice. At my >last job we were required to use Windows for that sort of >stuff, but we still did all of our actual eCos development work >under Linux. Of course it required that the company invest in >a second computer for people, but computers are dirt cheap -- >especially considering a P166 will work just fine for code >development.
Especially if one invest in a KVM. Keep the same monitor, keyboard and mouse, and with a simple button press on the KVM or a sequence of keystrokes on the keyboard one can switch between Linux and Windows. Regards Anton Erasmus