RTOS/EK-TM4C1294XL: Library support

Hi,

The driver libraries you suggested are for normal embedded programming. The driver libraries required for RTOS are different from the normal TIVAWARE libraries. But few peripherals are not available in TI-RTOS driver libraries.
we have developed embedded c part and tried to modify java script and html part. But it did not worked. we are unable to integrate new driver libraries into existing TI-RTOS and SYS/BIOS kernel.

Kindly support for same.

I am passing this thread to the TI-RTOS team.

Yash,

You can use driverlib calls as Bob advised. The major thing to avoid is to use the Interrupt module in driverlib to plug in the vector table. You should use Hwi_create (or Hwi_construct to avoid memory allocation). These will be managed interrupts in the kernel. You can look at the existing TI-RTOS drivers to see examples (e.g. I2C.c and I2CTiva.c).

You can have unmanaged (or we call them zero-latency) interrupts also. Use the Hwi_plug API for these.

Todd

ToddMullanix said:

You can have unmanaged (or we call them zero-latency) interrupts also.

Several clients have called us - asking about the item quoted.         You/your firm are entitled to "name or call" items as you wish - yet - would not,  "Zero ADDED Latency" prove a more factual name?

The ARM Cortex M3/M4 MCU - to firm's/my best knowledge - is incapable of a "zero-latency" interrupt - (even) when - (especially) when - harnessed to your RTOS!

Is there, "Activity on the horizon" - to "Add the many missing functions" - directly supported/included in your RTOS?      Such user "stumble/delay" - due to these "missing functions" - occurs often enough to "cause concern."       (that fact in evidence - this very thread...)

The kernel adds zero-latency, thus the name.

Yet the existing MCU interrupt latency continues - which REMAINS, "Non-Zero!"
Again - a better choice for name, "Zero RTOS-Added Latency."      And that - occurs only under the "most favorable & restricted" of conditions!     It is "normal" for any RTOS to impose, "added interrupt latency."

What do you advise we tell clients re:  Many missing functions w/in the RTOS?

Point taken, now let's move this thread passed the semantics of a name.

Agreed (there was a clear winner).      And please - "What should we advise clients re: many missing functions w/in the RTOS?"

Is there any projection of timeline - for the RTOS functions to (almost) match those w/in the API?   (in number & breadth)
Thanks for your assistance.

Yash,

Do you need anymore information other than to use driverlib and don't use the Interrupt module to plug the ISR?

Todd