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=1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, TO_NO_BRKTS_PCNT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f25a99cd690cb86e,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: synoptik@home.com (Andrew Logue) Subject: Embedded Concurrency in Ada Date: 1999/10/21 Message-ID: <8E65D75A8synoptikdamudderfuck@news>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 538679445 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news1.rdc1.ab.home.com 940475279 24.65.193.154 (Wed, 20 Oct 1999 20:07:59 PDT) Organization: @Home Network Canada User-Agent: Xnews/2.06.20 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 20:07:59 PDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-10-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Hi All, I have an Ada specific question that is specific to embedded systems based on the Rational (verdix) VADSNet kernel. The target platform has a single 40 MHZ processor. The Vads kernel provides system calls (memory management, hardware interrupt management, task scheduling, etc.) and system elaboration for a single Ada program. I believe the task management/scheduling is implemented in C, but probably doesn't matter anyway. What is the maximum number of Ada tasks supported by the kernel? If there is no set limit, how can I determine the "point of no return", where task management overhead consumes, say 20% of total CPU power. This question assumes that heap and code space are unlimited. At what point does context switching/stack management overhead become detrimental to system performance, especially in a real-time system? Obviously the hard-line answer to this question lies with system timing requirements, hardware constraints, etc. But is there a way to gather some metrics on how much system CPU resources are "wasted" or eaten up by the kernel itself? Regards, Andrew Logue Systems Architect/Bug Squisher Computing Devices Canada andrew.logue@cdcgy.com synoptik@home.com