Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #25820

Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs?

From Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com>
Newsgroups comp.arch.embedded
Subject Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs?
Date 2017-02-10 17:47 -0600
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <o7lj5a$p8t$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <o79gce$om1$1@dont-email.me> <87k292ybhk.fsf@nightsong.com> <o7bmak$268$1@dont-email.me> <8760kmxyac.fsf@nightsong.com>

Show all headers | View raw


Paul Rubin wrote:
> Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> writes:
>> It's always dangerous to generalize, but anything I can easily
>> make non-blocking I will.
>
> Ok, you prefer to handle the event dispatch manually, with callbacks or
> a switch around the protocol state.  I know some people find that
> intuitive but I've never gotten the hang of it.
>

There are a small legion of approaches. It depends on the problem
domain.

But yeah - you dispatch event messages to a machine of some sort.

>> Some FSM oriented systems use an "actor" model where actors can be
>> threads or even pseudothreads[1], communicating with sequential
>> message passing.
>
> Yes, that's what I'm used to doing under the covers.  Each thread waits
> for some action while appearing to block, and moves forward when the
> action occurs.  Erlang is designed for programming in this style and
> some very complex, highly reliable systems (phone switches) have been
> programmed in it.
>

Most/many of the protocols for circuit switched phone systems
have explicit FSM drawn in the standards.

It's possible to have "pseudothreads", where the event sink
dispatches based on event type to whoever is waiting on that event.
This does not require a separate, O/S thread each. You maintain the
advantages of run-to-completion and in cases, can be done on
something which is too small for an O/S.

-- 
Les Cargill

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Do you use FSMs or HSMs? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2017-02-06 10:43 +0100
  Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 03:20 -0700
  Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Dave Nadler <drn@nadler.com> - 2017-02-06 06:38 -0800
  Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? "QL" <80499@EmbeddedRelated> - 2017-02-06 08:56 -0600
    Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 12:13 -0700
    Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? jim.brakefield@ieee.org - 2017-02-06 16:52 -0800
      Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 18:11 -0700
      Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-06 23:32 -0600
    Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 10:39 +0100
  Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? John Speth <johnspeth@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-06 09:17 -0800
    Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 18:03 +0000
      Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 11:56 -0700
        Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 20:34 +0000
          Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 14:19 -0700
            Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-06 22:12 +0000
              Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 15:29 -0700
              Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-02-08 12:15 -0500
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-08 23:52 +0000
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-02-08 19:59 -0500
              Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Steve Watt <steve.removethis@Watt.COM> - 2017-02-17 00:30 +0000
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-02-17 00:44 +0000
            Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-07 10:12 +1100
              Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-06 23:36 -0600
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-02-07 03:15 -0500
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-10 17:41 -0600
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-07 19:56 +1100
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-07 01:30 -0800
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-07 20:42 +1100
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-07 02:46 -0800
                Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-02-08 00:27 +1100
  Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-06 18:35 -0800
    Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-02-06 21:50 -0700
    Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-06 23:39 -0600
      Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-06 23:20 -0800
        Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-10 17:47 -0600
          Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-02-10 16:11 -0800
            Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-11 15:43 -0600
  Re: Do you use FSMs or HSMs? Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-02-06 23:24 -0600

csiph-web