FreeRTOS Support Archive
The FreeRTOS support forum is used to obtain active support directly from Real
Time Engineers Ltd. In return for using our top quality software and services for
free, we request you play fair and do your bit to help others too! Sign up
to receive notifications of new support topics then help where you can.
This is a read only archive of threads posted to the FreeRTOS support forum.
The archive is updated every week, so will not always contain the very latest posts.
Use these archive pages to search previous posts. Use the Live FreeRTOS Forum
link to reply to a post, or start a new support thread.
[FreeRTOS Home] [Live FreeRTOS Forum] [FAQ] [Archive Top] [February 2013 Threads] generalise the stack checking functions Posted by Friedrich Lobenstock on February 9, 2013 Hi Richard! I've just posted the patch generalise the stack checking functions on the Feature Requests tracker. This patch enables ports of FreeRTOS to architectures which use/need more than one stack. To support the stack overflow checking functionality on such a port for the additional stack(s), we need to have general (inline) functions where the stack and such is not hard-coded. Tested on a real hw with configCHECK_FOR_STACK_OVERFLOW == 2 and portSTACK_GROWTH == -1. Just compile tested for portSTACK_GROWTH == +1. Would be nice if you could mainline this. Regards Friedl
RE: generalise the stack checking functions Posted by Richard on February 11, 2013 I have not done more than glance at this one yet. I understand the desire to generalise the stack checking, but the patch is not there yet because it uses inline functions (remember FreeRTOS officially compiles with 18 different compilers so avoids using inline as different standards treat it differently [if at all]). Also, the checking has to be very fast, hence the macros that are expanded inline rather than function calls. I'm not sure (because I don't use them often) if the compiler will always perform a direct substitution for an inline function without any parameter overhead. I suspect most compilers will as soon as you turn any kind of optimisation on.
I will look at what you are trying to achieve to see if there is an alternative that does not use the inlines.
Regards.
RE: generalise the stack checking functions Posted by Richard on February 11, 2013 Only partially related - I would be interested to know what you are porting to.
Regards.
RE: generalise the stack checking functions Posted by Friedrich Lobenstock on February 11, 2013 “ I will look at what you are trying to achieve to see if there is an alternative that does not use the inlines. ” I used the inline to get type checking while using defines. Because the inlines are in a .h file the compiler has to put the code where the define goes. Am I wrong? Regards Friedl
RE: generalise the stack checking functions Posted by Friedrich Lobenstock on February 11, 2013 “ I would be interested to know what you are porting to. ” It's not 8051 :-) Regards Friedl
Copyright (C) Amazon Web Services, Inc. or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
|