Hi Pascal,
Thank you for your project. I use it successfully for my professional
> activities and it works very well.
>
Very glad to hear it, thanks for getting in touch.
> Today, I was looking for bottlenecks in one of my program, and I found
> that you use int32 integers in the AtomQueue module.
>
> typedef struct atom_queue
> {
> ATOM_TCB * putSuspQ; /* Queue of threads waiting to send */
> ATOM_TCB * getSuspQ; /* Queue of threads waiting to receive */
> uint8_t * buff_ptr; /* Pointer to queue data area */
> uint32_t unit_size; /* Size of each message */
> uint32_t max_num_msgs; /* Max number of storable messages */
> uint32_t insert_index; /* Next byte index to insert into */
> uint32_t remove_index; /* Next byte index to remove from */
> uint32_t num_msgs_stored;/* Number of messages stored */
> } ATOM_QUEUE;
>
> Atomthreads is designed to work with very small micro-controllers.
>
Although most ports are for small micro-controllers, and it is intended to
be lightweight, it is also intended to be highly portable and a universal
RTOS for many different platforms. I frequently use queues with message
sizes larger than 255 bytes, as well as queues with more than 255 entries.
Perhaps what we need here is conditional compilation or macros/typedefs to
allow reduced memory builds on 8-bit platforms as well as more flexible
sizing on larger processors. The only thing that puts me off from
committing this to the codebase is that (at least conditional compilation
within the structure definition) tends to reduce readability and make the
code look more complex. Macros/typedefs that affect the types used for
queue size etc would probably be neater than that. I'm happy to look
through any pull requests that introduce a tidy way of sizing flexibly.
Best regards,
Kelvin.
