This is the mail archive of the
ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the eCos project.
Re: Suitability of eCos
- To: "Pamulapati, Indrasena (CTS)" <pindrase at chn dot cognizant dot com>
- Subject: Re: [ECOS] Suitability of eCos
- From: Jesper Skov <jskov at redhat dot com>
- Date: 16 Jan 2001 11:43:37 +0100
- Cc: ecos-discuss at sources dot redhat dot com
- References: <8F1D166D08ACD41196EE00B0D020944B82934E@CTSINENTSXUB>
>>>>> "Pamulapati," == Pamulapati, Indrasena (CTS) <pindrase@chn.cognizant.com> writes:
Pamulapati,> the overhead involved in processing the tick. But my
Pamulapati,> application requires tick duration as low as a
Pamulapati,> 100microseconds. I need to address such low time
Pamulapati,> resolutions.
As Ramana pointed out, the tick duration controls little more than
the kernel scheduler in eCos. Surely you don't need thread scheduling
at that rate!?!
Drivers doing IO should be driven separately, relying on device
interrupts, not scheduler interrupts, for state transitions.
But without further information about your application my comments
above are just guesses and may not actually apply...
Jesper