From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8815 invoked by alias); 24 Jun 2005 12:54:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Received: (qmail 8794 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Jun 2005 12:54:45 -0000 Received: from smtp2.iitb.ac.in (HELO smtp1.iitb.ac.in) (203.197.74.149) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with SMTP; Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:54:45 +0000 Received: (qmail 3535 invoked from network); 24 Jun 2005 18:24:42 +0530 Received: from unknown (HELO ldns1.iitb.ac.in) (10.200.12.1) by smtp1.iitb.ac.in with SMTP; 24 Jun 2005 18:24:42 +0530 Received: (qmail 6930 invoked by uid 509); 24 Jun 2005 12:50:53 -0000 Received: from 10.6.202.53 by ldns1 (envelope-from , uid 501) with qmail-scanner-1.25 (clamdscan: 0.85.1/955. spamassassin: 3.0.2. Clear:RC:1(10.6.202.53):. Processed in 0.0188 secs); 24 Jun 2005 12:50:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (10.6.202.53) by ldns1.iitb.ac.in with SMTP; 24 Jun 2005 12:50:53 -0000 Message-ID: <42BC02AC.3070109@cse.iitb.ac.in> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:54:00 -0000 From: "R. Vamshi Krishna" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kozo Kakehi CC: ecos-discuss@sources.redhat.com References: <20050624112732.GA7187@lunn.ch> <200506242130.JFG48907@vaio505r.kme.co.jp> In-Reply-To: <200506242130.JFG48907@vaio505r.kme.co.jp> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [ECOS]: Is eCos Hard Real Time OS ?? X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00239.txt.bz2 Kozo Kakehi wrote: >Hello. Vamshi. > > I'm a one of user in japan. > >in > "Re: [ECOS]: Is eCos Hard Real Time OS ??" > "R Vamshi Krishna " wrote > > > >>Then what parts do I re-write to make it hard-real time ? >>Because I want to use eCos but also I need a hard reak-time >>OS. >> >> > > Choose eCos is better idea, and fast enough for realtime application. > > I don't know how hard real-time you need in your system. >Where or what is a border about hard vs soft real-time. > > In my experience, someone force very hard response to OS, it's a bad design >about elements (threads, messaging, mutex..) or whole system. In such system, >may crash cause critical design. > > Let's try to use current eCos, just as it is. > > I think I might have given the wrong impression. I would like to add a compliance layer. That means that if somebody does not want hard real-time behaviour, he continue using eCos normally. But if hard real-time is needed then he will use the alternative. i.e some specific scheduler, drivers, some specific API etc .. >// Kozo Kakehi from Osaka >// kakehi@kme.co.jp > > -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss