Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #27931
| Subject | Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.arch.embedded |
| References | (9 earlier) <a9d6mdhea5csaqnmsdbmsn4jfuj7kdg4aq@4ax.com> <j_G8D.1977041$B36.32253@fx22.am4> <pjvs32$9uu$1@dont-email.me> <_WL8D.1467$Zc2.570@fx45.am4> <pk13mi$bog$1@dont-email.me> |
| From | Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> |
| Message-ID | <l0W8D.1699490$tw.170430@fx42.am4> (permalink) |
| Organization | virginmedia.com |
| Date | 2018-08-03 11:21 +0100 |
On 03/08/18 09:28, David Brown wrote: > On 03/08/18 00:52, Tom Gardner wrote: >> On 02/08/18 22:12, David Brown wrote: >>> On 02/08/18 19:14, Tom Gardner wrote: >>>> On 02/08/18 17:56, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote: >>>>> All you need is the ability to have stacks in RAM and in addition >>>>> instructions for loading and storing the stack pointer from/to memory. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately that is difficult to implement in C, so youngsters >>>> don't think of it. >>>> >>> >>> This particular youngster grew up on small microcontrollers programmed >>> in assembly. >> >> Ditto; neither of us are spring chickens. >> >> The first computer I designed, while still an undergrad, had >> 128 bytes of memoy. I still have that ic :) > > I have never designed a chip - though in my teens I once designed key > parts of a simple 4-bit cpu with a small instruction set. I drew it all > out in two input NAND gates, on graph paper - including the single-cycle > multiplier. Mine was 6800 based. Just about everything was "suboptimal" - except that it worked and I learned a heck of a lot. I later designed a single-purpose machine using 2900 bit-slices, but it was never implemented. > >> >>> "All you need is the RAM" is not helpful when you have 512 bytes in >>> total, and the stack pointer is limited to accessing the first 128 >>> bytes of that. I have worked on microcontrollers where the context >>> switches involved in handling an interrupt could easily take 50 µs or >>> more - a proper RTOS would be far too high overhead. >>> >>> Of course you can have more minimal OS's with very limited features >>> (all the way down to "protothreads"), and perhaps cooperative >>> multi-tasking rather than pre-emptive. But then you are not going to >>> have threads with multiple message queues like the ones under discussion. >> >> Protothreads always strike me as being a kludge that is "justified" >> by the limitations of the software tools rather than the hardware >> limitations. > > They are a way to get convenient coding structures from very little > software or hardware. I haven't had a use for them myself, but I > suppose some people use them. That's my (lack of) experience, but the requirement that all context switches are in the top level code (i.e. not a function) doesn't strike me as convenient. I know why it is "necessary", but that doesn't change the inconvenience. Back in 1982 I was using cooperative multitasking with C threads on a Z80 (or PDP11 or whatever was convenient), with a little bit of assembler to save/restore the stacks and other context. That always seemed pretty natural - provided I used message passing (with timeouts) for large-scale flow control.
Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro "gp.kiwi@gmail.com" <graeme.prentice@gmail.com> - 2018-07-20 04:01 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-07-20 20:19 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro graeme.prentice@gmail.com - 2018-07-20 15:54 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-20 18:27 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro graeme.prentice@gmail.com - 2018-07-20 23:58 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-07-21 14:32 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro mac <acolvin@efunct.com> - 2018-07-26 19:37 +0000
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2018-07-21 21:48 +0300
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@highlandtechnology.invalid> - 2018-07-23 09:58 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2018-07-22 13:15 -0500
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro StateMachineCOM <statemachineguru@gmail.com> - 2018-07-27 08:51 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro "gp.kiwi@gmail.com" <graeme.prentice@gmail.com> - 2018-07-27 14:53 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2018-07-27 15:23 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro StateMachineCOM <statemachineguru@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 09:08 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-07-31 09:21 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-07-31 09:13 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro StateMachineCOM <statemachineguru@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 15:16 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-01 07:53 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 15:49 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro upsidedown@downunder.com - 2018-08-01 21:47 +0300
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro StateMachineCOM <statemachineguru@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 12:11 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-08-01 20:23 +0100
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-02 12:24 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro upsidedown@downunder.com - 2018-08-02 16:14 +0300
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-02 16:43 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro StateMachineCOM <statemachineguru@gmail.com> - 2018-08-02 09:12 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-08-02 18:13 +0100
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-02 23:05 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro StateMachineCOM <statemachineguru@gmail.com> - 2018-08-02 14:22 -0700
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2018-08-03 10:14 +0300
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-03 10:22 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-08-02 23:48 +0100
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro upsidedown@downunder.com - 2018-08-02 19:56 +0300
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-08-02 18:14 +0100
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-02 23:12 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-08-02 23:52 +0100
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-03 10:28 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-08-03 11:21 +0100
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-03 13:51 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro upsidedown@downunder.com - 2018-08-03 09:11 +0300
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-08-04 03:00 -0400
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-02 12:23 -0500
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-02 23:13 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-08-04 03:08 -0400
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2018-08-02 12:23 -0500
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2018-08-02 14:15 -0400
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-08-02 19:21 +0100
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2018-08-02 23:18 +0200
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2018-08-03 00:02 +0100
Re: C++ threads versus PThreads for embedded Linux on ARM micro StateMachineCOM <statemachineguru@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 12:28 -0700
csiph-web