Forums

rtos features

Started by Sagar June 22, 2004
"Nigel Day" <nigel.day@polyhedra.com> wrote in message news:<ccdmpg$nsh$1@news.freedom2surf.net>...
> have you considered OSE (www.ose.com)? Their OSE Delta product runs on ARM - > as does their lower-footprint variants. > > Nigel Day > > "Sagar" <mailsagr@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:b0a2c083.0406221507.3175ce4a@posting.google.com... > > Thanks guys for the feedback. I should have mentioned the chip specs > > earlier: > > it is an arm7tdmi-s with: 512 KB program flash, 32KB data flash, 32 KB > > ram. > > > > with these tiny resources, I am begining to feel that embOS > > (www.segger.com) may be my choice. All other RTOSes that i had > > mentioned before seemed to occupy too much space in flash or they > > needed more resources in RAM. > > > > for eg: for the features that i mentioned before, embos requires: > > kernel space in flash: 6.4 KB > > kernel ram usage: 51 bytes > > ram per task: 32 bytes > > > > the only apparent negative aspect to it compared with other RTOSes > > like threadx seems to be the context switch time(18us vs 1.9us of > > threadx) and interrupt latency (max 6us vs 1.8us of threadx). but > > threadx uses more ram per task. maybe threadx stores a lot of process > > info in ram and hence has to save less while switching. > > > > Regards > > Sagar > > > > mailsagr@yahoo.com (Sagar) wrote in message > news:<b0a2c083.0406212038.1c80d905@posting.google.com>... > > > hello, > > > > > > i am evaluating various rtos for on of our products based on arm7. i > > > have been looking at Nucleus, embOS, Rtxc, Threadx and MicroC os-ii. > > > Of the lot Threadx and embOS seem to be good. Although i believe that > > > the others are just as good. It seems hard to zero in one choice. I > > > have been searching for reviews in the newsgroups. I have found some > > > scattered info for nucleus and threadx (threadx apparently seems to be > > > better). > > > > > > I am primarily looking at these features: > > > Scheduling, events, queues, low interrupt latencies, small mem > > > footprint, fast context switching, .... > > > > > > I would appreciate if somebody could post their views/experiences on > > > these rtos'. > > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > Sagar
We really made good experience with the Segger Tools (embOS/emWin). We used it on a different CPU but will need an ARM chip for a new application for which we will choose their system again. It inlcudes a start project and the viewer (included) is very helpful. The best way to find out if it is suitable for your application is to download the trial version. Just go to www.segger.com/download.html. Mike
"Nigel Day" <nigel.day@polyhedra.com> wrote in message news:<ccdmpg$nsh$1@news.freedom2surf.net>...
> have you considered OSE (www.ose.com)? Their OSE Delta product runs on ARM - > as does their lower-footprint variants. > > Nigel Day > > "Sagar" <mailsagr@yahoo.com> wrote in message > news:b0a2c083.0406221507.3175ce4a@posting.google.com... > > Thanks guys for the feedback. I should have mentioned the chip specs > > earlier: > > it is an arm7tdmi-s with: 512 KB program flash, 32KB data flash, 32 KB > > ram. > > > > with these tiny resources, I am begining to feel that embOS > > (www.segger.com) may be my choice. All other RTOSes that i had > > mentioned before seemed to occupy too much space in flash or they > > needed more resources in RAM. > > > > for eg: for the features that i mentioned before, embos requires: > > kernel space in flash: 6.4 KB > > kernel ram usage: 51 bytes > > ram per task: 32 bytes > > > > the only apparent negative aspect to it compared with other RTOSes > > like threadx seems to be the context switch time(18us vs 1.9us of > > threadx) and interrupt latency (max 6us vs 1.8us of threadx). but > > threadx uses more ram per task. maybe threadx stores a lot of process > > info in ram and hence has to save less while switching. > > > > Regards > > Sagar > > > > mailsagr@yahoo.com (Sagar) wrote in message > news:<b0a2c083.0406212038.1c80d905@posting.google.com>... > > > hello, > > > > > > i am evaluating various rtos for on of our products based on arm7. i > > > have been looking at Nucleus, embOS, Rtxc, Threadx and MicroC os-ii. > > > Of the lot Threadx and embOS seem to be good. Although i believe that > > > the others are just as good. It seems hard to zero in one choice. I > > > have been searching for reviews in the newsgroups. I have found some > > > scattered info for nucleus and threadx (threadx apparently seems to be > > > better). > > > > > > I am primarily looking at these features: > > > Scheduling, events, queues, low interrupt latencies, small mem > > > footprint, fast context switching, .... > > > > > > I would appreciate if somebody could post their views/experiences on > > > these rtos'. > > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > Sagar
We really made good experience with the Segger Tools (embOS/emWin). We used it on a different CPU but will need an ARM chip for a new application for which we will choose their system again. It inlcudes a start project and the viewer (included) is very helpful. The best way to find out if it is suitable for your application is to download the trial version. Just go to www.segger.com/download.html. Mike