This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

RTX Kernel vs UCOS2

We are planning to move our flagship product to ARM platform along with RealView RTX kernel RTOS. We have used UCOS2 RTOS for years and it has proved itself to be a very robust operating system.
I would like to have expert comments on features and robustness of RealView RTX Kernel RTOS in comparison with UCOS2 RTOS robustness in preemptive multitasking environment on ARM processor.

Parents
  • I originally used UCOS-II on a 80C390 processor and ported my applications to the RTX kernel for ARM. I did this about a year ago, and it didn't actually take that long for both the processor and OS ports, maybe a month.

    I would generally say UCOS-II is a bit more advanced than RTX, as RTX lacks some UCOS-II features. However with some recoding I was able to do everything I was doing in UCOS-II on RTX. I did miss UCOS-II's extra features, however I feel that RTX's integration with the Keil simulator is worth more than all of RTX's other limitations.

    We did this to remove the need for re-licensing UCOS-II, as well as the better Keil simulator integration.

    Stuart

Reply
  • I originally used UCOS-II on a 80C390 processor and ported my applications to the RTX kernel for ARM. I did this about a year ago, and it didn't actually take that long for both the processor and OS ports, maybe a month.

    I would generally say UCOS-II is a bit more advanced than RTX, as RTX lacks some UCOS-II features. However with some recoding I was able to do everything I was doing in UCOS-II on RTX. I did miss UCOS-II's extra features, however I feel that RTX's integration with the Keil simulator is worth more than all of RTX's other limitations.

    We did this to remove the need for re-licensing UCOS-II, as well as the better Keil simulator integration.

    Stuart

Children