Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?
From: Grant Edwards (grante_at_visi.com)
Date: 10/15/05
- Next message: gordy: "Re: Recommand ARM Emulator / Demo board"
- Previous message: Drily Lit Raga: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- In reply to: Drily Lit Raga: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Next in thread: Drily Lit Raga: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: Drily Lit Raga: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2005 02:32:49 -0000
On 2005-10-15, Drily Lit Raga <midicad2001@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 1) Lack of resources? [It's pretty hard to run Linux with 40KB of
>> RAM and 132KB of ROM.]
>
> Seems like 2 MB ROM and 16 MB RAM practical minimum for EL from what
> I've read?
That sounds about right.
>> 2) It's not real-time?
>
> It's not a pre-emptive multitasker?
Yes.
> Or is there some other specific aspect of it that prevents it
> from being RT (trying to learn all this)?
Linux doesn't guarantee latencies between events and the
handling of those events. The latencies caused by the kernel
have been greatly improved recently, but it's still not
suitable for hard, low-latency, real-time projects.
-- Grant Edwards grante@visi.com
- Next message: gordy: "Re: Recommand ARM Emulator / Demo board"
- Previous message: Drily Lit Raga: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- In reply to: Drily Lit Raga: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Next in thread: Drily Lit Raga: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Reply: Drily Lit Raga: "Re: Dumb question on embedded Linux - why?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]