comp.lang.ada
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: labtek@cs.yale.edu (Tom Griest)
Subject: Re: GNAT R/T Annex and Win95
Date: 1996/04/20
Date: 1996-04-20T00:00:00+00:00	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4lc039INNsl0@RA.DEPT.CS.YALE.EDU> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 96041916380674@psavax.pwfl.com

"Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93" <condicma@PWFL.COM> writes:

[snip]

>    Do you consider Windows NT capable of being a "realtime" operating
>    system? (It doesn't seem to be advertised as such.... yet.)

That's correct.  NT is not designed for real-time use.  But many are
using it for soft real-time applications.

>    We'd like to build some of our data systems and ground support
>    systems around Ada and NT, but we're not sure we can get the
>    needed behavior out of it for a realtime system. (GNAT might even
>    be usable here since most of this is "in house" development and
>    not a contract deliverable. More leeway with what you do in this
>    case.)
>
>    We need to know things like "If I execute a delay statement, will
>    I wake up and have a deterministic span of time between the clock
>    going off and my code resuming?" Similar questions for interrupt
>    processing and such. Or "will the OS dynamically rescale my task
>    priorities and screw everything up?"

No.  NT does not do this.  Of course this means you can lock out rather
important operations... but usually your real-high priority stuff should
be fairly short duration.

> Or priority inversions that
>    can occur if a low priority thread uses an uninterruptable OS
>    routine. Lots of things are uncertain about NT WRT its use as a
>    realtime OS.

True.  There are multithreaded libraries, but you always have to
be aware of any locks that might be held.  NT does not have priority
inheritence.

>    (Of course, you can always buy a processor that executes a
>    quintillion instructions per second and hope the latencies never
>    get big enough to matter! ;-)

Or you can take a two-processor system and run NT on one and some
real-time code on the other, using shared memory and interprocessor
interrupts.

>    Opinions? I'd really like to have some best guesses to pass on to
>    the folks here who do these sort of systems.

In the end it depends on two things:
  1) what happens if you miss a deadline
  2) how much laxity do you have in your timeline?

If the answer to #1 is: loss of life/property, I'd recommend not using NT.
On the other hand, if it is system runs a little slower then you're probably
ok depending on #2.

-Tom




  reply	other threads:[~1996-04-20  0:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
1996-04-19  0:00 GNAT R/T Annex and Win95 Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93
1996-04-20  0:00 ` Tom Griest [this message]
1996-04-20  0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-04-27  0:00   ` Dave Wood
1996-04-27  0:00     ` Robert Dewar
1996-04-20  0:00 ` ADA, Windows NT and Real-Time (was GNAT R/T Annex and Win95) Brian K. Catlin
1996-04-21  0:00   ` steved
1996-04-21  0:00     ` Brian K. Catlin
1996-04-20  0:00 ` GNAT R/T Annex and Win95 Wiljan Derks
1996-04-22  0:00 ` Theodore E. Dennison
1996-04-23  0:00   ` Wiljan Derks
1996-04-22  0:00 ` Greg Bond
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1996-04-23  0:00 Marin David Condic, 407.796.8997, M/S 731-93
1996-04-23  0:00 ` Theodore E. Dennison
1996-04-16  0:00 Greg Bond
1996-04-17  0:00 ` Tom Griest
1996-04-18  0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-04-22  0:00   ` Greg Bond
     [not found] ` <4l2sliINNl7m@ra.dept.cs.yale.edu>
1996-04-18  0:00   ` Dale Pontius
replies disabled

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox