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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.236.138.19 with SMTP id z19mr878867yhi.45.1410341736177; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 02:35:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.84.73 with SMTP id k67mr48175qgd.6.1410341736160; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 02:35:36 -0700 (PDT) Path: border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!m5no18040qaj.0!news-out.google.com!q8ni0qal.1!nntp.google.com!m5no18038qaj.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 02:35:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=77.8.88.109; posting-account=Fmp50goAAAA9sbkA2aX-X9YQy6-lkg3J NNTP-Posting-Host: 77.8.88.109 References: <60a42dc6-d8d0-4432-ae5a-86de18b82840@googlegroups.com> <5kkrv9hejn2qhdckkeo8lidkbh3bkme1gn@4ax.com> <5b91313c-acf9-4a6e-b157-6ba7c8021567@googlegroups.com> <0513ad07-6fbe-463a-be6f-097cd5113f52@googlegroups.com> <4f1ec65a-d66a-40bf-a0d6-278fde206e70@googlegroups.com> <1cjwzr30b24xy.11kpydntxhfo5$.dlg@40tude.net> <929e9226-e4aa-474e-843c-68ed800eefad@googlegroups.com> <5b5583ca-c7b2-40be-9090-6253f0514db5@googlegroups.com> <7feccd2d-dcfd-405e-ae5d-e27d6662daa9@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <95c8d65c-b365-48d6-9324-dbc7fa97c2d6@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: STM32F4 Discovery, communication and libraries From: Roy Emmerich Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 09:35:36 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:188941 Date: 2014-09-10T02:35:36-07:00 List-Id: On Wednesday, 10 September 2014 05:20:12 UTC+2, Mike Silva wrote: > I agree that concurrency fits your desired behavior more naturally. It w= as just that you started to worry if the extra overhead would bust your pow= er budget. Not only busting my power budget but also the angst of spiralling complexit= y when using an RTOS. Using something like www.nuttx.org seems good as it b= rings a lot of benefits but I know it will be a steep learning curve, while= topics like power management will probably be less than ideally dealt with= . Having said that, my project is pretty simple, initially. An RTOS will be a= n overkill to start with but what about later on? I'm finding this a diffic= ult decision to make. > BTW, a multi-core microcontroller would not (presumably) be able to do si= multaneous samples, because (presumably) all the cores would share the same= GPIO, ADC and other I/O resources and would thus compete for those resourc= es via some form of critical sections. Now this is providing some good perspective! Thanks. What could be parallel= ised is any form of calculations not requiring I/O or tasks such as data co= mpression prior to remote transmission.