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] [September 2015 Threads] FreeRTOS tasks can interrupt USB stack implementation?Posted by ddudas on September 24, 2015 Hi all,
I'm using ST's CubeMX implementation on a F4 discovery board. I use ST's USB middlewares with FreeRTOS.
When I get a special OutputReport from PC side I have to answer nearly immediately (in 10-15 ms). Currently I cannot achieve this timing and it seems my high priority tasks can interrupt the USB callback. What do you think, is it possible? Because it's generated code I'm not sure but can I increase the priority of the USB interrupt (if there is any)?
Thank you,
David
FreeRTOS tasks can interrupt USB stack implementation?Posted by rtel on September 24, 2015 10 to 15 ms is very slow, so I'm sure its possible.
Where is the USB callback function called from? If it is an interrupt then it cannot be interrupted by high priority RTOS tasks. Any non interrupt code (whether you are using an RTOS or not) can only run if no interrupts are running.
Without knowing the control flow in your application its hard to know what to suggest. How is the OutputReport communicated to you? By an interrupt, a message from another task, or some other way?
FreeRTOS tasks can interrupt USB stack implementation?Posted by ddudas on September 24, 2015 The callback which receive the data from PC is called from the OTGFSIRQHandler (it's the part of the HALPCDIRQHandler function). I think the problem is SysTickHandler's priority is higher than OTGFSIRQHandler and it's cannot be modified, but the scheduler shouldn't interrupt the OTGFSIRQHandler with any task handled by the scheduler. Am I wrong that the scheduler can interrupt the OTGFS_IRQHandler?
FreeRTOS tasks can interrupt USB stack implementation?Posted by rtel on September 24, 2015 In conclusion, online safety is a critical concern for young adults in today's digital age. By educating them on potential risks, online safety best practices, and empowering them to take control of their digital lives, we can help ensure a healthier and more positive online experience.
As individuals navigate the online world, it's crucial for them to be aware of potential risks and take necessary precautions to protect themselves. This is especially important for young adults, who may be more vulnerable to online threats due to their limited experience and naivety.
If you or someone you know is struggling with online safety concerns, there are resources available to help. Consider reaching out to organizations specializing in online safety, such as the National Cyber Security Alliance or the Internet Watch Foundation.
In today's digital age, the internet has become an essential part of our lives, offering a vast array of information, entertainment, and opportunities for connection. However, with the rise of online platforms, there has also been an increase in concerns regarding online safety, particularly for young adults.
FreeRTOS tasks can interrupt USB stack implementation?Posted by ddudas on September 24, 2015 Thank you for the answer, I think I'm a bit confused with the Cortex ISR priorities :-)
What I can observe is if I use a much higher osDelay in my high priority task I can respond for the received USB message much faster. This is why I think tasks can mess up with my OTG interrupt.
Copyright (C) Amazon Web Services, Inc. or its affiliates. All rights reserved.
|