Slashdot Mirror


Realtime OS Jaluna

rkgmd writes "Jaluna-1, a software component suite based on the respected chorus realtime os is now available in opensource (MPL-derived license) form. Jaluna, the company behind this, is a spin-off from sun to promote and develop chorus, and consists of many developers from the original chorus team before it was acquired by Sun. Chorus developed one of the earliest successful microkernel-based rtos's (could even run parallel, distributed unix in realtime on inkos transputers in 1992). Lots of good research papers here, and a link to the original newsgroup announcement."

15 of 87 comments (clear)

  1. QNX by reitoei1971 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How does this compare with QNX?

    1. Re:QNX by wfmcwalter · · Score: 5, Informative
      At least as far as the kernels are concerned, ChorusOS and QNX-neutrino are quite similar - both are realtime, microkernel based, protected-mode embeddable OSes, available for a number of microprocessors and embedded boards. Most of this (with the exception of the micrkernel part) is also true for Windriver's VxWorks AE RTOS.

      VxWorks' and QNX's advantage over ChorusOS was a combination of wider BSP support and very mature toolchains. ChorusOS big advantage was that it was specifically targetted at distributed applications - this is a issue for applications that combine real-time performance with data-centre-like reliablility (particularly telco).

      --
      ## W.Finlay McWalter ## http://www.mcwalter.org ##
  2. Sounds fascinating... by carl67lp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But it's really too bad that my university doesn't teach this stuff.

    It's something I realized the other day; we have so many advances in the field of computer science, such as Jaluna, and yet our centers of learning don't touch it. In fact, Java isn't even a core requirement in my plan of work!

    When is it that we'll finally be able to have a good environment for learning all of these spectacular technologies?

  3. Cool by captainclever · · Score: 3, Informative

    Another notch for opensource, sounds like a useful thing to have lying around for all your real-time os needs. "Jaluna-1 supports POSIX Real-Time standard applications, and includes state of the art tools for developing, deploying, configuring, and managing embedded systems. Jaluna-1 is being offered as open source, royalty-free software. Jaluna complements its open source software offering with technology and services enabling customers to easily migrate from proprietary Real-Time Operating System (RTOS) based projects to royalty-free Jaluna-1"

    --
    Last.fm - join the social music revolution
  4. Inkos? by 91degrees · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Who are they?

    Don't you mean Inmos?

    1. Re:Inkos? by PD · · Score: 3, Informative

      Whoever marked the parent as a troll is obviously ignorant, and I hope it gets fixed in meta.

      91degrees is correct. Inmos was a British company that released the transputer around 1985, and was specifically designed to be used in a network of interconnected processors. These chips were 32 bits and were programmed in the Occam programming language. Data transfer between nearest neighbors was over a 10-20 megabit serial connection. Each processor had 2K of memory onboard, and the entire transputer array was meant to be controlled from another computer. Typically that meant that a transputer array was implemented as a daughter card that fit into a computer such as a PC.

      Don't mod me up, mod the parent post up.

  5. Open Source? by Hayzeus · · Score: 3, Informative

    It should probably be mentioned that LOT's of commercial RTOS's provide source. For a lot of applications this is pretty much a requirement. The real distinction here is the royalty-free license, although RT-Linux (which I know almost nothing about) obviously doesn't require royalties.

  6. When you go to the right University by MosesJones · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know it sounds harsh but the reality is that most courses worry about Java, C++, Jaluna and people become concerned about the technologies rather than the theories.

    The person who knows Knuth will be able to code in any language, the person who doesn't is limited in what they can do. Did your course teach you how to dope a transistor, build an Op-Amp ? An AND Gate ? A Compiler for a processor you design ? An OS for that Processor ?

    And did it do all of these by starting with theory or was the first lesson "Print hello world" ?

    The problem with practical courses is that they teach people to be the bricklayers of the Software Engineering world. The theory course teach you to be the engineer and how to apply theory to practicality.

    It isn't about being taught "cool" technologies, its about being taught the theory behind them. RTOS is great in that it teaches you about Thread-death, dead-lock, live-lock, IO blocking, race conditions in a very immediate environment, so when you build a bigger system you automatically avoid those issues because you understand what is the right way to work.

    Some Universities do teach the cool theory stuff, but most people don't choose to do that as its harder. It also makes you less marketable in the first year after graduation as you don't have the buzzwords... 12 months on however you'll be roasting everyone.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
    1. Re:When you go to the right University by carl67lp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree that without a solid theoretical foundation it is difficult to grasp what is actually going on "behind the scenes."

      But my largest point of contention with my university is that all of the courses above the C++ programming level are theory--no hands-on practice anymore, unless you take electives (like Java, or XML, or advanced Web design--and only here do you learn a modicum of Perl). It's to the point now where my resume reflects the fact that I self-taught myself Linux, Windows 2000/XP (and server derivatives), Perl, PHP, HTML, and more.

      Universities are supposed to keep pace--not have the attitude of "let's worry about all that new-fangled stuff later." If it means refreshing their curriculum every two years, then so be it.

      Of course, I wish I knew then what I know now--I wouldn't have chosen this university at all.

    2. Re:When you go to the right University by Rasta+Prefect · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Universities are supposed to keep pace--not have the attitude of "let's worry about all that new-fangled stuff later." If it means refreshing their curriculum every two years, then so be it.

      Why? I'm a senior at the University of North Dakota. I keep hearing similar complaints from a number of people. The only really fundamental programming change in the last 25 years has been the introduction of objects. Stacks, Queues, Lists, Trees, networking fundamentals, storage and database fundamentals - the specific technology changes, but the fundamental computer science principles remain the same. Why should you get an education in whatever the technology of the moment is when it's probably going to be dead in five years anyway? A better education in the math and engineering principles behind these(and whatever the new technology is and whatever the old technology is) will serve you far better in the long run.

      --
      Why?
  7. College isn't for technical training. by BoomerSooner · · Score: 5, Insightful

    College is to give you a foundation of understanding so no matter where the technology goes you will have the ability to learn it due to your broad base.

    If you want tech training go to DeVry/University of Phoenix (what a crock name). This is why a degree is worth more than certifications.

    Plus, no one is stopping you from learning about RTOSes. I'm going through the Minix Computer OS Design book by Tanenbaum right now. You can either be spoon fed like most university students, or you can get up off your ass, show some motivation and learn it on your own. This is why I never have a problem finding a job and others cant get an interview. People want to hire motivated workers not someone who'll just tow the line.

  8. Realtime OS... by TrollBridge · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...as opposed to TimeDelay OS?

    --
    There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
    1. Re:Realtime OS... by mrm677 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually Windows 3.1 is closer to an RTOS than you think. In most RTOS's, a task can starve any other task running at the same priority (or lower). Same as the cooperative multitasking model in Windows 3.1.

    2. Re:Realtime OS... by j3110 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know what you are talking about. How could one starve another in a RTOS? Hard deadlines are set. Most of the time, the process with the closest deadline is selected (some have time estimates and do other optimizations). If a task doesn't complete by it's deadline, it can get preempted because completing the task was just not possible. In effect, you overloaded the system therefore it is unresponsive. AFAIK, any system that is that overloaded will be unresponsive and concentrate on the higher priority tasks. You make this out to be a bad thing (or at least to a casual observer), when in all actuallity it's a great thing. If delivering the next frame to the GPU is more important to you than compiling the kernel, the kernel will get starved. In Linux and other non-RTOS's, you will run out of time slices because they are being "fair".

      This reminds me of the whole VM issue. If you don't have enough memory to complete a job, no VM you have is gonna help you. Likewise, if you don't have enough CPU to complete the job, no schedular is going to help. Where the new VM and RTOS's help is when you are playing your FPS game, you can schedule regular intervals to fill the audio buffer and calculate the next frame as well as do physics calculations. If you don't have enough CPU to do them all, pick the ones that matter most. Linux can pick them in the wrong order and miss a more important calculation getting done on time. No one has actually tested if linux can do more overall because of this, but most of us have a select few tasks actively interacting with us that we would really like to not be interrupted. RTOS can guarantee this at the sake of other processes, but that's a good thing. Win3.1 on the other hand, one unimportant process can not relenquish the CPU.

      --
      Karma Clown
  9. Don't agree... by MosesJones · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I left Uni with one programming language (Ada) (Okay and LISP, M68k, Prolog and other really useful languages!) one OS (AIX) but I understood however thing worked.

    However the answer to the question "do you know X" is always "yes" the advantage to theory is that it makes the lie true. How long to learn a new language ? If you understand the theory then the only thing that matters is syntax, 2 days ? 3 more days to learn the libraries ?

    You resume should say that at University you learnt the following, not "I taught myself" because employers will look for the former wording not the later.

    Jesus though "Advanced web design" where you do Perl. What has the planet come to ? Sorry to sound like an old fart but "Advanced Web Design" doesn't sound like something in a degree, it sounds like a Dummies book. XML as a course ? Its a bloody markup language, what is there to learn ? XSLT ?!

    Learning extra languages or technologies is simple if you just understand the principles. Then you can claim to have known them for years, even though it was only last week when you found out this interview required it. As long as you can understand the theory then everything else makes sense.... except VB.

    --
    An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi