| |
I posted some code and a simple explaination of my implementation. Here is
the link:
http://home.insight.rr.com/worldof/lego/LegOS/index.html
Let me know if you need clarification or want more information/code (I have
the .tar.gz to compile a LegOS kernel that is somewhere between 2.6 and 2.7
and my changes added in). I want to avoid confusing the development effort
by releasing the whole thing publicly... but it is available for further
examination if necessary.
"Joel Uddén" <afroo@ul.shacknet.nu> wrote in message
news:Gxxwnz.1Hq@lugnet.com...
> Joe
>
> I think proportional timeslicing would be a nice thing if the • implementation
> would be efficient and straightforward. I don't consider my patch to be
> that. Would still be nice to see a snippet of your code.
>
> How do the other kernel developers feel about proportional timeslicing? Is
> it really necessary?
Anyone have an opinion here? I am also interested in hearing what everyone
else thinks about this topic.
> Once again I wonder about the progress of the sensor handling rewriting. I
> think this would be the most important change for the new version of
LegOS.
I agree, however, I am not sure we need something as fancy as the DAT4
implementation. I think in nearly all cases, 99.99% sensor accuracy is
acceptable. I bet we can achieve that with a smaller/simpler mechanism. In
the cases where 100% accuracy is needed, then the DAT4 implemenation may be
the way to go. Other opinions?
Thanks,
// Joe
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Re: Scheduler patch
|
| (...) Thanks for the link, your solution of proportional timeslicing is more straightforward than mine which I like. The only downside would be that a high prioritized process would have it's wakeup conditions checked less frequently than a low (...) (22 years ago, 10-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| | | Re: Re: Scheduler patch
|
| Joseph, Not to add too much work load, if you have a chance could you give an overview of the proposals out there for the task scheduling and sensor modifications (if any). This could be simply a quick list of lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos threads which (...) (22 years ago, 11-Jul-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Re: Scheduler patch
|
| Joe I think proportional timeslicing would be a nice thing if the implementation would be efficient and straightforward. I don't consider my patch to be that. Would still be nice to see a snippet of your code. How do the other kernel developers feel (...) (22 years ago, 19-Jun-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
17 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
|
|
|
|
