Hi experts, I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run Linux. I want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of doing all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: * Embedded RTOS * 16 Gb RAB * 10 Gbps LAN * 8 cores * USB interface Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that will behave better on this. -- Brad _____________________________ Posted through www.DSPRelated.com
High speed system
Started by ●August 21, 2013
Reply by ●August 21, 20132013-08-21
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:54:32 -0500, bradsdr wrote:> Hi experts, > > I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run Linux. I > want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of > doing all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: > > * Embedded RTOS * 16 Gb RAB * 10 Gbps LAN * 8 cores * USB interface > > Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that will > behave better on this.Texas Instruments' new "Keystone" series comes to mind. http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/arm/keystone/products.page The bigger parts have four ARM Cortex A15 cores, a C66x DSP core, a "packet accelerator" which can get data in and out of the several ports of GbE and two ports of 10GbE without needing much software interaction, and a security accelerator that seems to integrate well with the packet accelerator. Disclaimer: I am not an expert. Regards, Allan
Reply by ●August 21, 20132013-08-21
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:09:09 +0000, Allan Herriman wrote:> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:54:32 -0500, bradsdr wrote: > >> Hi experts, >> >> I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run Linux. >> I want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of >> doing all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: >> >> * Embedded RTOS * 16 Gb RAB * 10 Gbps LAN * 8 cores * USB interface >> >> Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that >> will behave better on this. > > > Texas Instruments' new "Keystone" series comes to mind. > > http://www.ti.com/lsds/ti/arm/keystone/products.page > > The bigger parts have four ARM Cortex A15 cores, a C66x DSP core, a > "packet accelerator" which can get data in and out of the several ports > of GbE and two ports of 10GbE without needing much software interaction, > and a security accelerator that seems to integrate well with the packet > accelerator.BTW, those parts don't have USB, but that is trivial to add (on a device with PCIe).
Reply by ●August 21, 20132013-08-21
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:54:32 -0500, bradsdr wrote:> Hi experts, > > I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run Linux. I > want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of > doing all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: > > * Embedded RTOS * 16 Gb RAB * 10 Gbps LAN * 8 cores * USB interface > > Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that will > behave better on this.First, I assume you mean "RTOS embedded processor that can run Linux", not "... predecessor ..." (#@$% spell checkers!). Second, if you do mean that, it makes no sense. The "OS" in "RTOS" stands for "operating system". Linux is an operating system. It's not the processor that makes it "RTOS" -- it's the OS. And Linux, by itself, ain't real-time. Do a web search on "real time Linux", and look for recent articles. There are various Linuxes (Linii?) with various grades of "real- timishness". What grade you need, or whether you really need real-time performance, depends on your problem. -- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com
Reply by ●August 21, 20132013-08-21
Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> writes:> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:54:32 -0500, bradsdr wrote: > >> Hi experts, >> >> I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run Linux. I >> want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of >> doing all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: >> >> * Embedded RTOS * 16 Gb RAB * 10 Gbps LAN * 8 cores * USB interface >> >> Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that will >> behave better on this. > > First, I assume you mean "RTOS embedded processor that can run Linux", > not "... predecessor ..." (#@$% spell checkers!). > > Second, if you do mean that, it makes no sense. The "OS" in "RTOS" > stands for "operating system". Linux is an operating system. It's not > the processor that makes it "RTOS" -- it's the OS. And Linux, by itself, > ain't real-time. > > Do a web search on "real time Linux", and look for recent articles. > There are various Linuxes (Linii?) with various grades of "real- > timishness". What grade you need, or whether you really need real-time > performance, depends on your problem.Agreed. I'm not an expert on linux, but if you need true real-time and you're pushing your resources, I'd go with something like TI's SYSBIOS (formerly DSPBIOS). Also, I found out much of linux's base OS functions are not very well-organized, as opposed to something like SYSBIOS which was put together from the ground up. -- Randy Yates Digital Signal Labs http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●August 21, 20132013-08-21
On Thursday, August 22, 2013 5:45:52 AM UTC+12, Tim Wescott wrote:> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:54:32 -0500, bradsdr wrote: > > > > > Hi experts, > > > > > > I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run Linux. I > > > want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of > > > doing all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: > > > > > > * Embedded RTOS * 16 Gb RAB * 10 Gbps LAN * 8 cores * USB interface > > > > > > Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that will > > > behave better on this. > > > > First, I assume you mean "RTOS embedded processor that can run Linux", > > not "... predecessor ..." (#@$% spell checkers!). > > > > Second, if you do mean that, it makes no sense. The "OS" in "RTOS" > > stands for "operating system". Linux is an operating system. It's not > > the processor that makes it "RTOS" -- it's the OS. And Linux, by itself, > > ain't real-time. > > > > Do a web search on "real time Linux", and look for recent articles. > > There are various Linuxes (Linii?) with various grades of "real- > > timishness". What grade you need, or whether you really need real-time > > performance, depends on your problem. > > > > -- > > > > Tim Wescott > > Wescott Design Services > > http://www.wescottdesign.comA long time ago I used to use a Masscomp mini computer and it had real-time Unix .
Reply by ●August 21, 20132013-08-21
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:47:36 -0700, gyansorova wrote:> On Thursday, August 22, 2013 5:45:52 AM UTC+12, Tim Wescott wrote: >> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:54:32 -0500, bradsdr wrote: >> >> >> >> > Hi experts, >> >> >> > >> > I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run >> > Linux. I >> >> > want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of >> >> > doing all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: >> >> >> > >> > * Embedded RTOS * 16 Gb RAB * 10 Gbps LAN * 8 cores * USB interface >> >> >> > >> > Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that >> > will >> >> > behave better on this. >> >> >> >> First, I assume you mean "RTOS embedded processor that can run Linux", >> >> not "... predecessor ..." (#@$% spell checkers!). >> >> >> >> Second, if you do mean that, it makes no sense. The "OS" in "RTOS" >> >> stands for "operating system". Linux is an operating system. It's not >> >> the processor that makes it "RTOS" -- it's the OS. And Linux, by >> itself, >> >> ain't real-time. >> >> >> >> Do a web search on "real time Linux", and look for recent articles. >> >> There are various Linuxes (Linii?) with various grades of "real- >> >> timishness". What grade you need, or whether you really need real-time >> >> performance, depends on your problem. >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> Tim Wescott >> >> Wescott Design Services >> >> http://www.wescottdesign.com > > A long time ago I used to use a Masscomp mini computer and it had > real-time Unix .There are various flavors of real-time Linux -- you just need to know what you're doing and what they are. I sorta know the first part, and all I know about the second part is that they're out there, and that whatever you decide on this year will be obsolete next year. -- Tim Wescott Control system and signal processing consulting www.wescottdesign.com
Reply by ●August 21, 20132013-08-21
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 14:08:46 -0400, Randy Yates wrote:> Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> writes: > >> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:54:32 -0500, bradsdr wrote: >> >>> Hi experts, >>> >>> I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run Linux. >>> I want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of >>> doing all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: >>> >>> * Embedded RTOS * 16 Gb RAB * 10 Gbps LAN * 8 cores * USB interface >>> >>> Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that >>> will behave better on this. >> >> First, I assume you mean "RTOS embedded processor that can run Linux", >> not "... predecessor ..." (#@$% spell checkers!). >> >> Second, if you do mean that, it makes no sense. The "OS" in "RTOS" >> stands for "operating system". Linux is an operating system. It's not >> the processor that makes it "RTOS" -- it's the OS. And Linux, by >> itself, >> ain't real-time. >> >> Do a web search on "real time Linux", and look for recent articles. >> There are various Linuxes (Linii?) with various grades of "real- >> timishness". What grade you need, or whether you really need real-time >> performance, depends on your problem. > > Agreed. I'm not an expert on linux, but if you need true real-time and > you're pushing your resources, I'd go with something like TI's SYSBIOS > (formerly DSPBIOS). > > Also, I found out much of linux's base OS functions are not very > well-organized, as opposed to something like SYSBIOS which was put > together from the ground up.The last time I really paid attention to this was about five years ago. At that point, the most successful implementations of really hard real- time Linux put the Linux kernel running as a task of a real-time OS. That meant that all the real-time stuff had to be written for the real- time OS, and you had to accept that any communications to the Linux side weren't really real time. This worked OK, because most times when you have a processor doing "real time", there's very little that's actually hard real time, and it's generally not data intensive. -- Tim Wescott Control system and signal processing consulting www.wescottdesign.com
Reply by ●August 21, 20132013-08-21
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:54:32 -0500, "bradsdr" <95105@dsprelated> wrote:>Hi experts, > >I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run Linux. I >want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of doing >all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: > >* Embedded RTOS >* 16 Gb RAB >* 10 Gbps LAN >* 8 cores >* USB interface > >Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that will >behave better on this.A high-end PC running something like FreeRTOS meets all of your stated requirements. If you mean something else, then you need to clarify your requirements. Eric Jacobsen Anchor Hill Communications http://www.anchorhill.com
Reply by ●August 21, 20132013-08-21
Tim Wescott wrote:> On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 14:08:46 -0400, Randy Yates wrote: > >> Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> writes: >> >>> On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:54:32 -0500, bradsdr wrote: >>> >>>> Hi experts, >>>> >>>> I am in search of a good RTOS embedded predecessor that can run Linux. >>>> I want to use it for my communication system. It should be capable of >>>> doing all DSP/communication tasks. Specs could be like or better: >>>> >>>> * Embedded RTOS * 16 Gb RAB * 10 Gbps LAN * 8 cores * USB interface >>>> >>>> Please share the devices you think are best match. Or anything that >>>> will behave better on this. >>> >>> First, I assume you mean "RTOS embedded processor that can run Linux", >>> not "... predecessor ..." (#@$% spell checkers!). >>> >>> Second, if you do mean that, it makes no sense. The "OS" in "RTOS" >>> stands for "operating system". Linux is an operating system. It's not >>> the processor that makes it "RTOS" -- it's the OS. And Linux, by >>> itself, >>> ain't real-time. >>> >>> Do a web search on "real time Linux", and look for recent articles. >>> There are various Linuxes (Linii?) with various grades of "real- >>> timishness". What grade you need, or whether you really need real-time >>> performance, depends on your problem. >> >> Agreed. I'm not an expert on linux, but if you need true real-time and >> you're pushing your resources, I'd go with something like TI's SYSBIOS >> (formerly DSPBIOS). >> >> Also, I found out much of linux's base OS functions are not very >> well-organized, as opposed to something like SYSBIOS which was put >> together from the ground up. > > The last time I really paid attention to this was about five years ago. > At that point, the most successful implementations of really hard real- > time Linux put the Linux kernel running as a task of a real-time OS. > > That meant that all the real-time stuff had to be written for the real- > time OS, and you had to accept that any communications to the Linux side > weren't really real time. > > This worked OK, because most times when you have a processor doing "real > time", there's very little that's actually hard real time, and it's > generally not data intensive. >I've found pthreads and hardware timers useful. This may need a driver; you call an ioctl() to block and return when the timer fires. -- Les Cargill
