On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Ken Emmons, Jr. wrote: > Hi Norm, > > Yes, I am actually proposing a pre-allocated memory routine. I am not interested in >accessing memory through the linux kernel per se (although if such a mechanism >existed I would use it). What I do want to do is to have a memory pool available that >gets allocated at load time and dispatched to threads upon need. I started to write a >memory pool interface for the specific need that I had but I was thinking, why not >make it generic?? > > I was going to call the routines rt_malloc() and rt_free() unless this would not be >compatable in the mindset of what malloc does. I guess by calling it rt_malloc() you >are assuming that it does not block (which it doesnt), it is relatively quick (it >is), and that there will be tradeoffs (there are). The main tradeoffs are its fixed >size, which I feel can be handled by proper use of the functions and proper care (we >are RT programmers and always need to be careful after all). > > I am almost done with a simple implementation and it looks like it will work (famous >last words, considering I haven't event tried to compile it yet! hehe :o) I will try >it out. > > Hmmm... Someone has just pointed out to me that RTAI has a dynamic memory manager >available already. It looks like my code may not be of much value if I end up >switching to RTAI. I'll finish it on general principle and so I can finish my code >that prompted this whole thing using RTLinux. Hmm.. another reason to port my stuff >to RTAI. Are there any real technical disadvantages to RTAI (coming form people who >actually use both RTOS's ).. everything I have seen has looked like speculation or a >Holy/Philosophical decision. Please, no flames .. I am new to this list, I dont mean >to cause problems!! :o)
Well it depends who you ask. Of course Paulo Mantegazza will tell you RTAI is excellent. Victor Yodaiken will tell you that RTAI is fine, but philosophically he can't agree to all those dirty little features (or something along those lines--I don't my any means pretend to speak for Victor or anything.. I have never even met him). Personally, I think given the nature of your project and whatnot, I think RTAI would be a great choice (after all it already has features that you want which are missing in RTLinux). As far as its performance numbers, I know of at least one NIST guy (who evaluates RTOS's all the time) who evaluated RTAI and was quite pleased with the numbers. -Calin > > thanks. > > ~Ken > > -- [rtl] --- > To unsubscribe: > echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR > echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- > For more information on Real-Time Linux see: > http://www.rtlinux.org/ > -- [rtl] --- To unsubscribe: echo "unsubscribe rtl" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] OR echo "unsubscribe rtl <Your_email>" | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- For more information on Real-Time Linux see: http://www.rtlinux.org/
