 | | Re: Idle process —Lou Sortman
|
| | | (...) I, too, consider power saving to be a valuable (indispensible) feature. That is precisely the sort of thing that I feared I might be overlooking. Up 'till now, I had not worked on an embedded project which would benefit from using (...) (26 years ago, 9-Mar-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Idle process —Markus L. Noga
|
| | | | (...) The idle task actually has the lowest priority in my scheme, but there was some efficiency gained in making the task list loop around. If the idle task is always there, it makes for simplified code in multitasking startup if you rely on that. (...) (26 years ago, 11-Mar-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Idle process —Lou Sortman
|
| | | | I guess my earlier posting got out after all. I got the message from the NNTP server telling me to register. That is why a slightly different version of my message appears later in the group. (...) I plan to keep the idle task, now that I understand (...) (26 years ago, 11-Mar-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Idle process —Markus L. Noga
|
| | | | Hi Lou, I'm discussing datagram networking with Jacob Barrett currently. They have some people working on it. The idea is to provide 1 byte of address space, using a per-host hostmask, just like TCP/IP uses per-net netmasks. A host with address 0x10 (...) (26 years ago, 19-Mar-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Idle process —Lou Sortman
|
| | | | (...) Cool! (...) I had been thinking along the same lines. (...) What is the ID? Is it for framing? Is it a byte that is not currently taken up by a Lego bytecode? Do we even care about colliding with Lego's communication protocol? (...) (...) (26 years ago, 19-Mar-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Idle process —Markus L. Noga
|
| | | | (...) Yes, it's a start byte. Jacob suggested using 0xFn to identify protocol versions, 0xFF being the LEGO standard. (...) Actually, you wouldn't have to change much, just treat P_SUSPENDED tasks like they're P_WAITING and the condition failed. (...) (26 years ago, 20-Mar-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Idle process —Lou Sortman
|
| | | | (...) That is true. (...) Yes, we do, but is that something the tasks need to worry about? If the kernel has buffered 3 datagrams since the last timeslice, the next 3 waits would return immediately, since their criterion (datagram ready for reading) (...) (26 years ago, 20-Mar-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| | | | |
