AW: [En-Nut-Discussion] reliability of message queues

[Ernst Stippl]

Hi!

I seem to remember that until recently there was a link to the message queue
software, but I can't find it anymore.

Is the SW still avail? I am interested in trying it.

regards
Ernst
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: en-nut-discussion-bounces at egnite.de
[mailto:en-nut-discussion-bounces at egnite.de] Im Auftrag von Ralph Mason
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 23. Februar 2005 18:44
An: Ethernut User Chat (English)
Betreff: Re: [En-Nut-Discussion] reliability of message queues

The reason I wrote the message que is two fold.

1. I needed to wait on multiple events.  I looked at implementing it and
thought about it over quite a while but decided that there was no really
elegant way to do it that keep the core event system simple and fast.  
Basically I didn't think the overhead was worth the few places I needed to
do it.

2. Message que are a nice way to make some application structures (state
machines etc)

As for the reliability, I used them extensively in my code. It's running on
thousands of boxes 24/7.

The really nice thing with them is you can have worker threads waiting on
them, each que can time one on wait so the worker can do something.  
Other threads can post to a que to ge that worker to do something.  And you
can broadcast to all workers.  All these things make each worker more like
an individual application with the message que providing the input.

I have never used then from an interrupt handler.

But then of course I would like them.

Ralph

> Ole,
>
> At 12:43 23.02.2005 +0100, you wrote:
>
>> I just thought to do so. Perhaps I'd better write something like a 
>> NutEventWaitMultiple(array of event queues).
>>
>> I'd like to have something like this:
>>
>> Start thread
>> do something
>> wait until connect event or error event (e.g. close down) while not 
>> error {
>>   wait until data availabe event or error event
>>   do something
>> }
>>
>> Any idea how to implement this? My first thought was to write the 
>> above mentioned function. Message queues would do the job too but 
>> with a lot of overhead.
>
>
> Another possibility is to use two thread, each waiting on the specific 
> event and let them post to a third event queue. For sure this creates 
> the maximum overhead you can get. :-)
>
> NutEventWaitMultiple() seems to be the best solution.
> Not sure about its implementation. To speak with Mathias' voice: Under 
> all circumstances we must avoid blowing up any critical sections.
>
> Harald
>
> _______________________________________________
> En-Nut-Discussion mailing list
> En-Nut-Discussion at egnite.de
> http://www.egnite.de/mailman/listinfo.cgi/en-nut-discussion
>

_______________________________________________
En-Nut-Discussion mailing list
En-Nut-Discussion at egnite.de
http://www.egnite.de/mailman/listinfo.cgi/en-nut-discussion