We are running a survey to help us improve the experience for all of our members. If you see the survey appear, please take the time to tell us about your experience if you can.
"RL-TCPnet is designed as a stand alone TCP/IP Operating System. This means it does not need any external RTOS or File System to run. It has an integrated tiny task scheduler that manages timeouts, events, and internal tasks." Are the tiny task scheduler preemptive?
Don't just start a new thread on exactly the same topic, without even mentioning its existence - post a correction in the original one!
http://www.keil.com/forum/docs/thread10528.asp
A common problem on a forum that doesn't have any logic to stop repeated post operations.
"A common problem on a forum that doesn't have any logic..."
Is that the forum's job?
Wouldn't you have hoped that someone with any hope of getting anywhere with any sort of programming would be able to apply a little logic themselves to their own posts...?
It helps with forums who detects a browser reload or backward/forward and realizes that the user doesn't want to add a duplicated post.
My browser warns about reload or backward/forward of a posted page, but I have manageed to double-post twice (that I know/remember) to this forum because I have pressed back once and then got a call or similar and later thought that I had forgotten to press send.
The feature is easy to add to a web service and helps a lot.
Actually, there is logic to prevent duplicate posts. However, this is not a duplicate post. The time difference between the two posts is over 1 hour AND the text is different.
The OP just got impatient waiting for an answer.
Jon
I just verified with this posting, and the duplicate post logic still works. It's been there for quite a while, now.
You can verify it if you like by posting a reply to this, hit back in your browser and try to post it again.
Yes: it is a deliberate re-post of exactly the same question - not just some accident with the Browser.
Hence the faulty logic lies with the poster, not the forum.
He also seems to have lost the sense of urgency...
:-(
My bad.
The text looked so similar when I first saw the post (I did check the time stamps) that I thought it was a browser resend.
Spending the time to write the same text twice is an interesting concept...
Jon - is there a time limit for the duplicate-post protection or is it a more recent improvement? Question asked since I have managed to go back to the preview and then at a later time press Post again.
The ARM RTX kernel is pre-emptive. See: www.keil.com/.../rlarm_ar_preempt_multit.htm
He was asking about the "integrated tiny task scheduler" within RL-TCPnet
Or is this "integrated tiny task scheduler" the same as ARM RTX?
Maybe if he'd given the context for his quote, as requested, that would be obvious...?
"Spending the time to write the same text twice is an interesting concept..."
And then still not stating where the quote came from!
Yes, ten minutes not spent on writing a good question, normally results in many days of not receiving a good (or any at all) answer.
I can't understand why that takes so long to learn.
My answer was an attempt to help.
RL-ARM contains both RTX + TCPnet (see: http://www.keil.com/support/man/docs/rlarm/). Scheduling is done with the RTX kernel.
But he is quoting something as saying, "RL-TCPnet is designed as a stand alone TCP/IP Operating System ... it does not need any external RTOS ... It has an integrated tiny task scheduler..."
He hasn't cited the source, so we can't check if it's a faithful quote...
However, the question seems to be, "When RL-TCPnet is used without an external RTOS is its scheduling preemptive?"
Then again, as he's made no attempt whatsoever to clarify the question, he's presumably lost interest...
The quote appears to be from this page:
www.keil.com/.../rlarm_tn_using_standalone.htm
the rest of the text on that page certainly seems to suggest a non-preemptive system to me...