HP3000-L Archives

January 2001, Week 2

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Gavin Scott <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Gavin Scott <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:30:41 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
Dave replies:
> 1) How does one (or where does one find info to) mark a program
> as resident?

If you have to ask then you don't need to do it :-)

> 2) Is it correct that MPE or HP3000s do not make good real-time machines
> because all serial connections are polled rather than hardware interrupt
> driven?

Serial connections are not polled.

> Perhaps the designers had imagined some specialty I/O cards that
> would handle hardware interrupts?  IIRC someone once told me that neither
> the OS nor the hardware were set up to handle hardware interrupts (except
> maybe internal hardware, possibly the IEEE488, er... I mean HPIB).

Completely untrue.  Both Classic and PA-RISC 3000s are fully interrupt
driven.

Having a real-time OS basically means being able to guarantee worst-case
latencies on interrupt handling.  The problem in doing this is not that it's
hard to create a process which will have a high enough priority, but that
you have to guarantee that other interrupt-driven processes will never keep
interrupts disabled longer than your worst-case latency requirement.

For small values of "real" and large values of "time" MPE can be made to
look like a reasonably real-time OS in some cases.  The question is not how
to make MPE real-time, it's what do you want to accomplish, and what's the
best way of doing so.

G.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2