On 2021-03-14 19:27, Gregory Nutt wrote:
Of course. But it will not be easy to do if you want to watch multiple
threads. Because the hardware watchdog is very binary. If any thread
were to kick the watchdog, it will not do a reset. So if one thread is
hung, but others still run, your hardware
Of course. But it will not be easy to do if you want to watch multiple
threads. Because the hardware watchdog is very binary. If any thread
were to kick the watchdog, it will not do a reset. So if one thread is
hung, but others still run, your hardware watchdog will not do what
you want, pos
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 9:40 AM Johnny Billquist wrote:
> On 2021-03-14 17:36, Xiang Xiao wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:27 AM Fotis Panagiotopoulos <
> f.j.pa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>> Why not to use the hardware watchdog timer which is more reliable and
> >>> simple than the pure
> If you want to catch some task/thread in an infinite loop, the hardware
> watchdog monitor in nuttx can do it for you.
If the hardware watchdog is fed from multiple sources, all of them need to
fail. Not just one of them.
Do you have anything else in mind?
> You don't need a special timer here,
On 2021-03-14 17:36, Xiang Xiao wrote:
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:27 AM Fotis Panagiotopoulos
wrote:
Why not to use the hardware watchdog timer which is more reliable and
simple than the pure software solution?
I do use it, but a hardware watchdog can monitor only one thing (in my case
the ke
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 8:27 AM Fotis Panagiotopoulos
wrote:
> > Why not to use the hardware watchdog timer which is more reliable and
> > simple than the pure software solution?
>
> I do use it, but a hardware watchdog can monitor only one thing (in my case
> the kernel itself).
>
>
If you want
> Why not to use the hardware watchdog timer which is more reliable and
> simple than the pure software solution?
I do use it, but a hardware watchdog can monitor only one thing (in my case
the kernel itself).
I would like to monitor multiple things independently, the system's tasks.
Στις Κυρ,
Why not to use the hardware watchdog timer which is more reliable and
simple than the pure software solution?
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 5:49 AM Fotis Panagiotopoulos
wrote:
> Hi everybody!
>
> I am in need of per-task software watchdog timers.
> I would like to somehow monitor my tasks, and ensure
Which I think is insufficient. Probably some of the support was removed?
No.. It is just that there was no support for loadable modules for those
older Cygwin toolchains. The underscore has not been used with Cygwin
since around 2015 so I think would be safe to just remove the
CONFIG_SIM_CYG
No, it seem that mksymtab forget to handle the case you described.
This was handled in the past, but I forget where the logic was. Let me
look around a bit.
... after a bit ...
Googling, I find that there was some handling in the simulator for
Cygwin. Some older tool toolchains did prepe
Hi everybody!
I am in need of per-task software watchdog timers.
I would like to somehow monitor my tasks, and ensure that they are running
as they should.
(For example, not stuck in an infinite loop).
For this purpose, I usually use software implementations of watchdog timers.
Note that by this,
> -Original Message-
> From: Byron Ellacott
> Sent: Friday, March 12, 2021 9:02 PM
> To: dev@nuttx.apache.org
> Subject: Symbol tables, ELF binaries, and mksymtab
>
> Hi,
>
> I've been working on ELF binary loading for the eZ80. I'm compiling with
> CONFIG_SYSTEM_NSH=m to produce a s
12 matches
Mail list logo
