4 ms·
For the parts of such systems that you would need an RTOS for this isn't really a likely replacement because the OS is way too complex. The sort of thing it co
by ska 3y ago
For the parts of such systems that you would need an RTOS for this isn't really a likely replacement because the OS is way too complex.
The sort of thing it could help with is servicing hardware that does run hard realtime. For example, you have an RTOS doing direct control of a robot or medical device or whatever, and you have a UI pendant or the like that a user is interacting with. If linux on that pendant can make some realtime latency guarantees, you may be able to simplify communication between the two without risking dropping bits on the floor.
Conversely, for the common user it could improve things like audio/video streaming, in theory but I haven't looked into details or how much trouble there is currently.
- elcritch 3y agoIt depends on the field. I know of one robots control software company planning to switch to a RT Linux stack. Their current one is a *BSD derived rtos that runs, kid you not, alongside windows. RT Linux might not pass on some certifications, but there’s likely many systems where it would be sufficient.
- ska 3y agoWith robots a lot depends on the scope of movement and speed, and whether or not it interacts with environment/people. For some applications the controller is already dedicated hardware on the joint module anyway with some sophistication, connected to an CAN (or etherCAT) bus or something like that - so no OS is the tightest loop - I could see the high level control working on a RT linux or whatever if you wanted too, lots of tradeoffs. Mainly though it's the same argument, you probably don't want a complex OS involved in the lowest level/finest time tick updates. Hell some of the encoders are spewing enough data you probably end up with the first thing it hits being an ASIC anyway, then a MCU dealing with control updates/fusion etc., then a higher level system for planning.