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


Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #29008

Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems

From David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>
Newsgroups comp.arch.embedded
Subject Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems
Date 2020-01-05 13:56 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <qusmdc$idf$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <qung9m$m79$1@dont-email.me> <qunihq$450$1@dont-email.me> <qurcak$puc$1@dont-email.me> <qHcQF.22112$MS2.17419@fx19.iad>

Show all headers | View raw


On 05/01/2020 04:26, Clifford Heath wrote:
> On 5/1/20 11:58 am, pozz wrote:
>> Il 03/01/2020 15:19, David Brown ha scritto:
>>> With pre-emptive scheduling, you will have to go
>>> through your existing code and make very sure that you have locks or
>>> synchronisation in place for any shared resources or data.
>>
>> As I already wrote many times, I don't have experience with RTOS and 
>> task sync mechanism such as semaphores, locks, mutexes, message queues 
>> and so on.
>> So I'm not able to understand when a sync is really needed.
>> Could you point on a good simple material to study (online or book)?
> 
> I wish I could, but it is actually a frightfully difficult subject.
> Basically it's the same as thread-safe programming.
> Only about 1% of programmers think they can do it.
> Of those, only about 1% actually can.
> 
> It's the 0.99% that you have to worry about. At least some of them for 
> Toyota. Don't be one of them!

All good points.

> 
> However, this difficulty is precisely why Rust was created. Although I 
> haven't yet done a project in Rust, I've done enough multi-threaded work 
> in C++ to know that the ideas in Rust are a massive leap forwards, and 
> anyone doing this kind of work (especially professionally) owes it to 
> their users to learn it.

"Safe" languages like Rust can help for simple issues, but won't give 
any benefits of the more challenging cases.  If you understand the 
basics of multi-threading, and have a good, careful development 
methodology, you won't have the kind of problems that Rust would help 
you with.  Maybe Rust will help for some cases, but don't believe that 
it is a game-changer.

> 
>> Supposing all the variables are of type int (i.e., they are changed 
>> atomically in serial_task()), should I need to protect them with 
>> locks, because they are used by main_task() too?
> 
> If "int" is your CPUs word size, you are using word alignment, and you 
> don't have multiple CPUs with separate caches accessing the same RAM, 
> you're probably ok for individual variables. However you will come 
> unstuck if you expect assignments and reads to be performed in the same 
> order you wrote them. A modern compiler will freely re-order things in 
> extremely ambitious and unexpected ways, in order to keep the pipeline 
> flowing.

Yes.  Simple reads and writes of aligned data that is no bigger than the 
cpu's word size will be atomic without any more effort.  But complex 
accesses (like "x++;") are not atomic on most processors.  And you don't 
have any ordering unless you use "volatile", or memory fences of some kind.

A key mistake many people make is to think that non-volatile accesses 
are also ordered by volatile accesses - this is, of course, untrue.

> 
> I cannot emphasise this enough. The compiler will do what it can to make 
> your program do what it thinks you have asked for - which will NOT be 
> the same as what you think you have asked for.

Well, it /will/ be the same as you think you asked for when you know 
what you are doing!

> 
> You need to understand about basic mutex operations, preferably also 
> semaphores, and beyond that to read and write barriers (if you want to 
> write lock-free code). It's a big subject.
> 

Yes.

Or he can use cooperative multitasking, and avoid many of these issues!

> Clifford Heath.

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


Thread

Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2020-01-03 14:41 +0100
  Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-03 15:19 +0100
    Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2020-01-05 01:25 +0100
      Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-05 13:32 -0600
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2020-01-05 16:49 -0500
          Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-05 21:05 -0600
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-05 17:08 -0700
          Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-05 21:26 -0600
            Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-05 22:10 -0700
              Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-06 07:37 -0600
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-06 17:21 -0700
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-07 19:23 -0600
              Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2020-01-06 20:36 -0500
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-07 01:38 -0600
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2020-01-07 06:53 -0500
            Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2020-01-06 07:13 -0500
            Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-07 10:11 +0100
              Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2020-01-07 07:05 -0500
              Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-07 19:34 -0600
          Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-06 10:44 +0200
            Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-06 02:51 -0700
              Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-06 15:39 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2020-01-06 13:29 -0500
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-06 14:38 -0700
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-07 07:05 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2020-01-07 13:09 -0500
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2020-01-07 20:53 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2020-01-08 08:43 +1100
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-08 00:33 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Dimiter_Popoff <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2020-01-08 15:26 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-08 00:08 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-07 10:37 +0100
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-06 16:10 -0700
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-07 07:37 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-07 01:49 -0600
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-07 06:43 -0700
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-07 10:21 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-07 06:42 -0700
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2020-01-07 22:23 -0500
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-09 22:07 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-07 10:54 +0200
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-07 06:43 -0700
          Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2020-01-06 18:01 +0100
            Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2020-01-06 19:47 +0200
    Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2020-01-05 01:58 +0100
      Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2020-01-05 14:26 +1100
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-05 11:21 +0200
          Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-05 14:07 +0100
            Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-05 17:46 +0200
              Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-05 19:08 +0100
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-05 13:56 +0100
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-05 13:39 -0600
          Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2020-01-06 07:44 +1100
            Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-05 21:00 -0600
              Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2020-01-06 14:50 +1100
                Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-06 07:12 -0600
      Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2020-01-04 22:34 -0800
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-05 14:12 +0100
          Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2020-01-05 18:00 +0200
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-05 13:44 -0600
      Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2020-01-06 14:52 -0500
      Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2020-01-06 15:05 -0500
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems gtwrek@sonic.net (gtwrek) - 2020-01-06 22:41 +0000
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2020-01-06 19:50 -0700
          Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2020-01-07 13:26 -0500
  Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2020-01-03 16:28 +0200
    Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2020-01-05 01:37 +0100
      Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2020-01-05 13:46 -0600
        Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2020-01-05 22:44 +0200
  Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> - 2020-01-03 11:49 -0800
  Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems upsidedown@downunder.com - 2020-01-03 22:51 +0200
    Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2020-01-05 01:48 +0100
  Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Joe Chisolm <jchisolm6@earthlink.net> - 2020-01-03 15:34 -0600
  Re: Task priorities in non strictly real-time systems Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2020-01-03 21:46 -0500

csiph-web