|
| | Re: Idle process
|
| 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
|
| (...) 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
|
| Sorry this message is so late, I had to get registered for posting from my work address. (...) 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 (...) (26 years ago, 11-Mar-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| | | | Re: Idle process
|
| (...) 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
|
| Hi Lou, the sleep instruction effectively shuts down the CPU until the next interrupt occurs. Thus, the idle process conserves battery power if no task wishes to run. I consider this a worthwile feature. If you can do this without a dedicated idle (...) (26 years ago, 8-Mar-99, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
| |