 | | Re: multiplexor and legOS
|
|
(...) Most people's legOS kernels will be compiled so msleep uses wait_event. I haven't looked at the code, but my understanding of how wait_event works is that whenever that thread becomes eligible to execute, your even function is called. (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: multiplexor and legOS
|
|
Try the following code fragments. [Change to fixed spacing font so that it reads easily.] You should be able to find what you need. "Mark Falco" <> wrote in message news:Gr1MBL.Dop@lugnet.com... (...) <<..snip..>> (...) These are code fragment for (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: multiplexor and legOS
|
|
Ok, my last port didn't make much sense let me try that again. for an active sensor ds_handler will periodically power the sensor off to read the value. The standard firmware does this to but at a different interval. I'm wondering if this is part of (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: multiplexor and legOS
|
|
Since I'm now fairly sure that i've got the timing taken care of I'm wondering if the power cycling that ds_handler does is somehow causing the problem? I thought I might take control of this stuff in my test code. I assume if I set the sensor for (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: multiplexor and legOS
|
|
(...) It looks like the semaphore task_sm should prevent another task from being scheduled if I hold it for the length of the train. I've now tried this as well as incresing the timeslice to 100ms. It looks better but still is not consistent. Since (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: Motorized landing gear question
|
|
(...) (These are identical to Mindstorms motors - right? Certainly the motors *I* picked up from Znaps sets are indistinguishable from Mindstorms motors ...I don't think they ever shipped a different one with Znaps.) (...) Well, the worm gear should (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Motorized landing gear question
|
|
(...) I'd suggest it's not necessary for the landing gear to lift the craft - just to hold it up. If it's only operated while there's no weight on the craft, it becomes much easier, you only need some kind of locking mechanism so the motor isn't (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.space, lugnet.znap)
|
| |
| | Re: multiplexor and legOS
|
|
(...) Not bad. But as you say, still vulnerable to the task switching problem. (...) Instead of resorting to that, maybe there is a way to freeze task switching during critical operations. When I owned and programmed the AmigaOS (don't laugh :), (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Motorized landing gear question
|
|
I've been pondering using one of the Znap motors to power a landing gear mechanism strong enough to at least hold, if not lift a decent sized space craft (including the motor and battery box- if possible) Any ideas? I was thinking worm gear and some (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics, lugnet.space, lugnet.znap)
|
| |
| | Re: multiplexor and legOS
|
|
#include <sys/time.h> void systime_set_timeslice (unsigned char slice); include/sys/time.h:43-45: #ifdef CONF_TM #define TM_DEFAULT_SLICE 20 file://!< default multitasking timeslice #endif hope that helps, Albert "Michael J Ash" (...) (23 years ago, 4-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
