This is the mail archive of the ecos-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the eCos project. See the eCos home page for more information.
| Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
|---|---|---|
| Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
> >Is Xinu a zero copy stack (i.e. only passes pointers)? This is important > >because an RTOS often runs on wimpy hardware. > XINU is not a zero copy stack. There are two copies on the way up and on the way down. > isn't zero copy, but it is fairly easy to change. I designed a stack based I would differ with you on this. Getting it right would not be a trivial task. > The way I see it is that Xinu/TCP is a fairly close fit which more or less > works and provides a fairly clean base architecture to work on, and would > provide a quick way to get something working. (In comparison to other stacks > I know of such as FreeBSD, Linux, KA9Q, WATTCP et al). This could then be > developed to revise the architecture and implement better performance etc. > All of these stacks are quite stable and work well. The *BSD stack is by far the highest performance platform and arguably the best documented in Wright and Stevens books. The others are all comparable since they do similar copying. KA9Q has probably the smallest footprint. You will probably want to look at the FreeBSD TCP port to RTEMS. A lot of the issues in moving that stack to an RTOS are addressed there. Later, FM -- Frank W. Miller Cornfed Systems Inc www.cornfed.com