Is anyone here using RTOS from Keil?
Does it make job much easier?
What are it's advantages and dissadvantages?
Thanx, Mickey.
Is anyone here using RTOS from Keil?
Does it make job much easier?
What are it's advantages and dissadvantages?
Thanx, Mickey.
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 23:33:38 -0000, "Mickey" wrote in comp.arch.embedded:
I have used a few different RTOS from different vendors, and written a few myself, but I haven't used that one.
What job is that?
There are two very different issues here.
Below is copy of a reply to another post I made here in comp.arch.embedded to another poster's question about use of an RTOS in embedded systems. I still feel that it is a very satisfactory answer. At least one small company that produces an RTOS for several embedded processors thought it was satisfactory also -- they asked me for permission to quote it on their web site, which I gave.
======== To answer the question of when there is a need for an RTOS, the answer is almost never, at least in the sense that something that is possible with one would be literally possible without one.
As to when it might be a very good idea to use an RTOS, that's a little different. In my experience it becomes a good idea to consider using an RTOS when the requirements for a system include a large number of asynchronous events, multiple priority levels, and a significant percentage of processor loading.
There are many different RTOS, commercial, freeware, and open source, that can be used on different processors, but that is mostly practical for 16-bit and up processors.
As to a good place to read about, and ask questions about, RTOS issues is news:comp.realtime. Look for their FAQ, there is a large amount of information. ========
The full thread may be found at the following link:
-- Jack Klein Home: http://JK-Technology.Com
I looked into their Tiny RTOS some years ago. When it switches contexts it swaps out all 256 bytes of on-board RAM, which made it too slow for our purposes. That was for a "basic" 8051, it may do better with some of the newer and faster 8051 derivatives.
Do you really need a full-featured RTOS? We found that the best move for us was to roll our own - a simple round-robin task switcher that was quite effective for our moderate-complexity application.
Mark Ainsworth
I have also done quite a few things without RTOS I just wanted to find out is it worth to learn for example Keil RTOS, and does it make development much faster and does it take too much resources and so on.
Thanks for comments anyways.
I ment to comment this question of yours above but I realised it is in place, I spoke of "job" as generally a medium sized project (device), like using keys, LCD, EEPROM, AD and so ...
Hi, Mark.
What was the reason you considered that RTOS in the first place?
I think they have worked it out allready. They should have in few years.
us
Why did you make your own RTOS, was it too complex to handle all the things without RTOS?
IMO, the major factors are whether you need to doing more than one thing "simultaneously" (multi-tasking), and whether the various tasks have complicated states, which would make round-robin processing messy.
Thad
I have not used Tiny, but I can say the FULL version of RTX51 works extremely well, even on a plain 8051 at 11.059MHZ.. quite efficient, even with banking support for my application. Your application may or may not need an RTOS.. as always, it's the application that determines the resources and OS ( if any )..
Another small RTOS to check out is Sciopta
So can anyone say when RTOS would be necessery it seems to me that for 8051 complexity of projects it is almost never needed?
What kind of applications would "need" RTOS?
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.