From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,db4f13247a2521f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.megapath.net!news.megapath.net.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 05 May 2005 16:07:12 -0500 From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <9g3jomw1nprv$.1oustugm8nxot$.dlg@40tude.net> Subject: Re: Intended use of package Ada.Task_Attributes Date: Thu, 5 May 2005 16:09:46 -0500 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4927.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4927.1200 Message-ID: <-ZGdncYfgbedFuffRVn-jA@megapath.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.32.209.38 X-Trace: sv3-GNfznKlGpi5Dz6jL1tdKpI71NYidiwOx762jTCVLfcMYd14YRnETZfITVCUgKRmNEcoHv++C+RWRjSu!kBbsabwX6bXQsLCZgAtiS2p2OJ1hfll1H+rYMCv/GeFLBslAF3nhjZqV3K5hbNUz5FlhZekAYhus X-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@megapath.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10935 Date: 2005-05-05T16:09:46-05:00 List-Id: "Jerome Hugues" wrote in message news:slrnd7kf55.5rk.hugues@merlin.enst.fr... ... > If you read the implementation notes of GNAT (for GNU/Linux, see > a-tasatt.adb), you'll understand why it is not something one should > allow for any real-time system, unless your tool vendor provide strong > guarantee for your target. That's one specific implementation, and it certainly isn't the only way these could be implemented. Certainly, I wouldn't use the Janus/Ada implementation in a hard-real-time system (it being essentially what Dmitry described. But I know of at least one compiler that allocates task attributes directly in the TCBs. That of course means that the items that can be task attributes are very limited, but certainly there is no run-time penalty for having them. Those would be very appropriate for a hard real-time system. (Note that this is a perfectly legal implementation of Task_Attributes, C.7.2(29) allows any limitation at all on the number and size of task attributes.) I would suppose that the Ravenscar designers didn't think Task_Attributes were important enough to mandate a useful (for real-time) implementation. Some of the restrictions (like this one) in Ravenscar are fairly mysterious. (But I hasten to point out that real-time isn't my field, so I try not to second-guess too much in that area...) Randy.