RTEMS time overflow problem

[Nasim Zehra]

thomas
  there is still time overflow problem.I applied priority according to period length.And if i apply periods of less ticks then there will be a problem of limit of upper bound of processor utilization factor.It will icrease of its limit for 4 tasks.what i gonna do?
nasim
________________________________________
From: Thomas Doerfler [Thomas.Doerfler at embedded-brains.de]
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 9:04 PM
To: Nasim Zehra
Cc: rtems-users at rtems.org
Subject: Re: RTEMS time overflow problem

Nasim,

you are aware that a lower number means a higher (more important)
priority? So the longest-running task should have a lower priority
(higher "number") than a task with a shorter repeat interval.

wkr,
Thomas.

Nasim Zehra wrote:
> i did not get your questions , but as far as i understood.the answers are
> i took priorities like 2,3 ,4 5,take less priority for the task having higher execution time.Because the shorter the period,higher the priority.Actually there are many problems causing confusion so i want a full fledge example.
> Like the number of ticks i told for each task is actually not their period,but equal to their execution time so i assigned priority according to their execution time although i should appply priority according to their periods.But i am selecting random periods for each task just to fullfill the requirement of upper bound situation on processor utilization factor.
> like for 4 tasks........U =( should be ) 75%
> so i selected period like that.....
> 246/2000 + 88/5000 + 848/3000 + 2202/8000 = 69% < 75% that must be and it is.
> above frcation is execution time ticks and below is period selected.
> would you like to send me some example so that i may understand.
> regards
> --------
> nasim
> ________________________________________
> From: Thomas Doerfler [Thomas.Doerfler at embedded-brains.de]
> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 8:35 PM
> To: Nasim Zehra; RTEMS Users Mailing List
> Subject: Re: RTEMS time overflow problem
>
> Hi,
>
> which priorities did you take?
>
> Please note: in general, rate monotonic works like a charm, so it would
> help to give more information, otherwise we will not be able to help you.
>
> And which tick period did you select?
>
> Any other tasks running?
>
> wkr,
> Thomas.
>
>
> Nasim Zehra wrote:
>> thomas
>>    yes i did .The mode of the tasks are preemptable and also i know that priorities  does not change in rate monotonic and i applied different priority to different task according to their execution time which was the criteria of rate monotonic.
>>
>> regards
>> ---
>> nasim zahra
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Thomas Dörfler [Thomas.Doerfler at embedded-brains.de]
>> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 6:32 PM
>> To: Nasim Zehra
>> Cc: rtems-users at rtems.org
>> Subject: Re: RTEMS time overflow problem
>>
>> Masim,
>>
>> unfortunately you did not mention how you created the tasks. did you
>> apply the scheduling priorities properly (Note: The rate monotonic
>> manager does NOT change task priorities. In just makes the tasks "ready"
>> at the proper time.).
>>
>> Did you make the tasks preemptable?
>>
>> wkr,
>> Thomas.
>>
>> Nasim Zehra wrote:
>>> dear users
>>>    also tell me that if i select periods of tasks such that when they are executed ,they are in running condition and before they are deleted ,time over flow error is occurred.Is there any solution for that.
>>> i am having four tasks
>>> 1st--------executed in 2202 ticks
>>> 2nd-------// //            848
>>> 3rd-----------------------246
>>> 4th--------------------88
>>>  above mentioned ticks are equal to execution time of respective tasks.
>>> now i am selecting periods for them randomly so that upper bound condition for 4 tasks should be met according to rule of rate monotonic schedualing.like that
>>>  1st---------8000 period in terms of ticks
>>> 2nd---------3000
>>> 3rd---------2000
>>> 4th---------5000
>>>
>>> using these periods my U = 69.85%
>>> while theoritical U= 4(2(1/4) - 1)= 75.682%
>>>  so 69 %<75%
>>> => tasks are scheduable.
>>> but implementing it causes ime oveflow error on T simulator for leon3 processor.
>>>
>>> kindly help out.
>>>
>>> regards
>>> --------
>>> nasim
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtems-users mailing list
>>> rtems-users at rtems.org
>>> http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-users
>>
>> --
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> Embedded Brains GmbH
>> Thomas Doerfler        Obere Lagerstrasse 30
>> D-82178 Puchheim       Germany
>> email: Thomas.Doerfler at embedded-brains.de
>> Phone: +49-89-18908079-2
>> Fax:   +49-89-18908079-9
>
>
> --
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Embedded Brains GmbH
> Thomas Doerfler        Obere Lagerstrasse 30
> D-82178 Puchheim       Germany
> email: Thomas.Doerfler at embedded-brains.de
> Phone: +49-89-18908079-2
> Fax:   +49-89-18908079-9


--

--------------------------------------------
Embedded Brains GmbH
Thomas Doerfler        Obere Lagerstrasse 30
D-82178 Puchheim       Germany
email: Thomas.Doerfler at embedded-brains.de
Phone: +49-89-18908079-2
Fax:   +49-89-18908079-9