Subject:
|
Re: multiplexor and legOS
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos
|
Date:
|
Tue, 5 Feb 2002 02:49:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2247 times
|
| |
|
|
>
> Not bad. But as you say, still vulnerable to the task switching problem.
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 my end goal is to be constantly switching the mux I don't
think locking the other threads will be a good idea. In the end I think I'll
need to put this in ds_handler similar to how rotation sensors are handled
specially there.
I'm confused why what I'm doing now isn't working, I've even timed the pulse
trains and they are exactly the time I'd expect. I may need to go all out and
time each pulse (kinda hard to display on the lcd).
mark
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | 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 (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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 :), (...) (22 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
19 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
