What is the best way to create a timer with Microblaze which would allow me to have it work more similarly to a function like delay_ms() or sleep() in more conventional scripts?
Easily, I can create a stupid function like this:
void delay_ms(int i) {
//mind that I am doing this on the top of my head
for(delays=0; delay<(i*((1/frequency of the device)/2)); delays++) {
}
}
... but that would only have processor process nothing until it finishes, while in reality I need it to have the function allow me to do stop one process for a certain period of time while another one continues working.
Such thing is possible, no doubt about that, but what would the simplest solution to this problem be?
(I am using Spartan-3A, but I believe the solution would work for different kits, FPGAs as well.)
TL;DR
Use a micro OS, like FreeRTOS.
Bad answer
Well, if you have no OS, no task commutation but have an external timer, you can
use the following approach:
Enable interruption for your hardware timer, and manage a counter driven by this interrution:
You should have something like
/**timer.c**/
/* The internal counters
* each task have its counter
*/
static int s_timers[NUMBER_OF_TASKS] = {0,0};
/* on each time tick, decrease timers */
void timer_interrupt()
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < NUMBER_OF_TASKS; ++i)
{
if (s_timer[i] > 0)
{
s_timer[i]--;
}
}
}
/* set wait counter:
* each task says how tick it want to wait
*/
void timer_set_wait(int task_num, int tick_to_wait)
{
s_timer[task_num] = tick_to_wait;
}
/**
* each task can ask if its time went out
*/
int timer_timeout(int task_num)
{
return (0 == s_timer[task_num]);
}
Once you have something like a timer (the code above is easily perfectible),
program your tasks:
/**task-1.c**/
/*TASK IDÂ must be valid and unique in s_timer */
#define TASK_1_ID 0
void task_1()
{
if (timer_timeout(TASK_1_ID))
{
/* task has wait long enough, it can run again */
/* DO TASK 1 STUFF */
printf("hello from task 1\n");
/* Ask to wait for 150 ticks */
timer_set_wait(TASK_1_ID, 150);
}
}
/**task-2.c**/
/*TASK IDÂ must be valid and unique in s_timer */
#define TASK_2_ID 1
void task_2()
{
if (timer_timeout(TASK_2_ID))
{
/* task has wait long enough, it can run again */
/* DO TASK 2 STUFF */
printf("hello from task 2\n");
/* Ask to wait for 250 ticks */
timer_set_wait(TASK_2_ID, 250);
}
}
And schedule (a big word here) the tasks:
/** main.c **/
int main()
{
/* init the program, like set up the timer interruption */
init()
/* do tasks, for ever*/
while(1)
{
task_1();
task_2();
}
return 0;
}
I think what I have described is a lame solution that should not be seriously used.
The code I gave is full of problems, like what happens if a task become to slow to execute...
Instead, you --could-- should use some RT Os, like FreeRTOS which is very helpful in this kind of problems.
Related
i have to write a function that, by calling it only a single time, have to:
turn on an output pin
the pin stays high for 200mS
at the end of the timer the pin need to be low again.
the pin stays low for 200mS
at the end of the timer the function can be called again.
to turn on and off an output pin I already have wrote and tested the funcions:
outOn(pin_id);
outOff(pin_id);
now, i am trying to write the function that does the above mentioned actions and this is what l've come out with so far:
void outOnT02(enum e_outs ou){
outOn(ou);
gu_RegTim.BTime[BTIM_FUNCT].Timer = O_SEC01*2;
if(gu_RegTim.BTime[BTIM_FUNCT].b.Stato == O_EndTimer) {
outOff(ou);
}
}
the function is named outOnT02 because:
it is an output;
after calling it, the pin became high;
T02 because the pin stays high for 0.2 Seconds.
outOn(ou); makes the pin go high,
outOff(ou); makes the pin go low,
gu_RegTim.BTime[BTIM_FUNCT].Timer = O_SEC01*2;
starts a 200mS timer,
and gu_RegTim.BTime[BTIM_FUNCT].b.Stato == O_EndTimer is true when the timer has run out.
it works but, as you can tell, I have to put it in a cycle otherwise gu_RegTim.BTime[BTIM_FUNCT].b.Stato == O_EndTimer will never be true and so,the pin will stay high forever.
this is where i am stuck. i can't use a SLEEP(200); because i can't interrupt the execution of the code.
the language is C, the ide is MPLAB X IDE v6.00, the compiler is XC8 v2.31 and the cpu is a PIC16F15355.
This post is a little old but it is worth to answer since it is both a good question and a common problem. Now this problem is very common in embedded world when we develop applications that has to run on only one CPU. Hence there is no real parallelism in the workflow. Also since the application will not run on top of any OS, there will be no scheduler, no timers, no threads etc. Especially in small scaled microcontrollers there is no way to run many of the true RTOSs.
But this shouldn't be an obstacle for developing applications that runs tasks concurrently. We can develop an application using some tricks so that it runs the tasks concurrently and behave as a small OS. Running concurrently means that no task blocks the CPU using busy waiting checks or something alike but we block a task that needs to wait some event to occur.
When we block a task, the specific data and the next execution point on that task must be preserved so that it can continue from where it should in the next execution. Knowing what we need to preserve helps us to create a thread-like structures that executes until it has to wait some event to occur (eg. time delay). When it has to wait (means that it will be blocked) the next state of it must be preserved and it exits to give the control to the CPU so that it executes other tasks.
When we need to deal with periodic tasks as in the question, it is relatively easier to implement without blocking the CPU execution and meanwhile handle other tasks. Moreover no interrupt usage needed for this type of tasks unless the tasks are extremely time sensitive.
Well, enough with the story part, let's get into it. I will base the examples on the OP's output flashing problem. However the same techniques can be applied for other situations like I/O events, hardware events etc.
Let's sum up the requirement briefly, we have a task that runs atomically. That is, when it is called it must run to completion so that it can be called again (this is what I understand from the OP's requirement):
Turns on an output pin for 200ms
Then turns off the pin for 200ms
Once turned off and 200ms time has elapsed it can be executed again.
Note Some functions in this example are not implemented since they can be application or microcontroller specific.
Task-like Functions
Let's assume we want to schedule the following two task-like functions each of which keeps track of its execution continuation points.
The static cp variables are declared in each function so that they remember where to continue whenever they are called. The content of cp variable will not be destroyed by the compiler when the function returns since we declare it as static. The cp needs to be updated upon the expected events occur in order to proceed to the next step whenever it is called.
Note that in outputTask, the call source must be known to control its atomic behaviour. Since the requirement for this task is that once it triggered or called, it must run to completion. So we have to know where the task is called from, in order it to decide what to do on each call. If it has been triggered from another task, it can't be triggered anymore until it completes its flashing prosess. If it is called from the scheduler (main loop) it knows it is a periodic call and will keep track of the time. This control is achieved using a parameter called periodic. When it is called from the scheduler this parameter must be set to 1, and 0 for the calls other than the scheduler.
/*
* This task-like function performs what the OP wants to achieve
*/
void outputTask(unsigned char periodic) {
static unsigned char cp = 0; // Continuation Point holder
static unsigned char currentMillis;
/*
* Check whether it is a periodic call or a new output signal call.
* If it is a periodic call and signalling has been initialized,
* proceed for time keeping.
* If it is a new signalling call and the task hasn't completed yet,
* simply ignore and return.
*/
if(!periodic && cp != 0) {
return;
}
switch(cp) {
case 0:
outOn(pin_id); // Turn on the output
cp = 1; // Next execution point
currentMillis = 200; // Load the 200ms counter for time keeping
break;
case 1:
currentMillis--;
if(currentMillis == 0) {
// 200ms time for output high has elapsed, proceed to next step
outOff(pin_id); // Turn off the output
currentMillis = 200; // Reload the counter value
cp = 2; // Proceed to the next step
}
break;
case 2:
currentMillis--;
if(currentMillis == 0) {
// 200ms time for output low has elapsed, proceed to next step
cp = 0; // Last step is done, reset the state for new calls
}
break;
default:
// For anything else, reset the task state to the initials
cp = 0 // Reset the task state to zero so that it accepts new calls
}
}
/*
* Let's say this task will wait for a button press event and will
* trigger the outputTask upon the event occurs
*/
void outputTriggerTask() {
static unsigned char cp = 0;
static unsigned char currentMillis;
switch(cp) {
case 0:
if(isButtonPressed()) { // Platform specific function
// A button press has been detected, debounce first
currentMillis = 50;
cp = 1; // Next step, check for the elapsed time
}
else {
break;
}
case 1:
currentMillis--;
if(currentMillis == 0) {
// Check whether the button press is consistent
if(isButtonPressed()) {
// Yes still consistent, handle the button press by triggering the output task
outputTask(0); // Not a periodic call
cp = 2; // Next step is to check whether button is released
}
else {
cp = 0; // Reset the task state
}
}
break;
case 2:
if(isButtonReleased()) { // Platform specific function
currentMillis = 50; // Reload the time counter
cp = 3;
}
else {
break;
}
case 3:
currentMillis--;
if(currentMillis == 0) {
// Check whether the button release is consistent
if(isButtonReleased()) {
// Yes still consistent, handle the button release if needed
cp = 0; // Reset the task to its initial state
}
}
break;
default:
cp = 0; // Reset to initials
}
}
Scheduling Approches
The following approches are for non RTOS small embedded systems. They are suitable for wide range of 8-bit microcontrollers.
Approach 1 - Create Delay Based Timebase to Schedule Tasks
Scheduling using CPU blocking delay is suitable for hobby and educational purposes while it is not suitable for real projects. This example uses a platform specific delay_ms function (or can be a macro) to create a 1ms heartbeat for the application so that the tasks can keep track of time.
void main(void) {
systemInit(); // Platform specific function
// maybe some more init functions go here
// Application's infinite scheduler loop
while(1) {
// The first thing we do is to create a 1ms timebase using delay.
// This is the heartbeat for the application
delay_ms(1000); // Platform specific function
// 1ms has elapsed check the tasks
outputTriggerTask(); // Check whether any button press event has occured
outputTask(1); // It is a periodic call for the output task
// Maybe more tasks go here...
}
}
Approach 2 - Create Hardware Timer Based Timebase
void main(void) {
systemInit(); // Platform specific function
// Setup a hardware timer for 1ms overflow without interrupt
initTimerForOneMs(); // Platform specific function
// maybe some more init functions go here
// Application's infinite scheduler loop
while(1) {
// Wait for the timer to overflow
while(!isTimerOverflow()) // Platform specific function
;
// Timer has overflowed, reload and check tasks
reloadTimer(); // Platform specific function
// 1ms has elapsed check the tasks
outputTriggerTask(); // Check whether any button press event has occured
outputTask(1); // It is a periodic call for the output task
// Maybe more tasks go here...
}
}
Approach 3 Put the Processor to Sleep for 1ms Timebase
void main(void) {
systemInit(); // Platform specific function
// maybe some more init functions go here
// Application's infinite scheduler loop
while(1) {
// Put the Processor to sleep along with a watchdog timer to wake it up
clearWatchdogTimer(); // Platform specific function
sleep(); // Platform specific function
// CPU slept for 1ms and woke up, handle the periodic tasks
outputTriggerTask(); // Check whether any button press event has occured
clearWatchdogTimer(); // Platform specific function
outputTask(1); // It is a periodic call for the output task
clearWatchdogTimer(); // Platform specific function
// Maybe more tasks go here...
}
}
And Last But not Least Time Checking Approach
In this approach the tasks will be keeping the time by checking better say comparing the elapsed time to the desired time to delay tasks without blocking the CPU. For this, we will need to use a free running timer. This will be like the millis function of the Arduino API.
Rewriting the Tasks for the Time Checking Approach
/*
* This task-like function performs what the OP wants to achieve
*/
void outputTask(unsigned char periodic) {
static unsigned char cp = 0; // Continuation Point holder
static unsigned short currentMillis; // 16 bit millisecond holder
/*
* Check whether it is a periodic call or a new output signal call.
* If it is a periodic call and signalling has been initialized,
* proceed for time keeping.
* If it is a new signalling call and the task hasn't completed yet,
* simply ignore and return.
*/
if(!periodic && cp != 0) {
return;
}
switch(cp) {
case 0:
outOn(pin_id); // Turn on the output
cp = 1; // Next execution point
currentMillis = getCurrentMillis(); // Platform specific function
break;
case 1:
if(getCurrentMillis() - currentMillis >= 200) {
// 200ms time for output high has elapsed, proceed to next step
outOff(pin_id); // Turn off the output
currentMillis = getCurrentMillis(); // Reload the counter value
cp = 2; // Proceed to the next step
}
break;
case 2:
if(getCurrentMillis() - currentMillis >= 200) {
// 200ms time for output low has elapsed, proceed to next step
cp = 0; // Last step is done, reset the state for new calls
}
break;
default:
// For anything else, reset the task state to the initials
cp = 0 // Reset the task state to zero so that it accepts new calls
}
}
/*
* Let's say this task will wait for a button press event and will
* trigger the outputTask upon the event occurs
*/
void outputTriggerTask() {
static unsigned char cp = 0;
static unsigned short currentMillis;
switch(cp) {
case 0:
if(isButtonPressed()) { // Platform specific function
// A button press has been detected, debounce first
currentMillis = getCurrentMillis(); // Platform specific function
cp = 1; // Next step, check for the elapsed time
}
else {
break;
}
case 1:
if(getCurrentMillis() - currentMillis >= 50) {
// Check whether the button press is consistent
if(isButtonPressed()) {
// Yes still consistent, handle the button press by triggering the output task
outputTask(0); // Not a periodic call
cp = 2; // Next step is to check whether button is released
}
else {
cp = 0; // Reset the task state
}
}
break;
case 2:
if(isButtonReleased()) { // Platform specific function
currentMillis = getCurrentMillis();
cp = 3;
}
else {
break;
}
case 3:
if(getCurrentMillis() - currentMillis >= 50) {
// Check whether the button release is consistent
if(isButtonReleased()) {
// Yes still consistent, handle the button release if needed
cp = 0; // Reset the task to its initial state
}
}
break;
default:
cp = 0; // Reset to initials
}
}
Scheduler for Time Checking Approach
void main(void) {
systemInit(); // Platform specific function
initMillisTimerWithInterrupt(); // Platform specific function
// maybe some more init functions go here
// Application's infinite scheduler loop
while(1) {
// Now that we use a free running millis timer no need to block the CPU to create a timebase
// Just call tasks sequentially. Each task will know what to do individually
outputTriggerTask(); // Check whether any button press event has occured
outputTask(1); // It is a periodic call for the output task
// Maybe more tasks go here...
}
}
Currently I'm polling the register to get the expected value and now I want reduce the CPU usage and increase the performance.
So, I think, if we do polling for particular time (Say for 10ms) and if we didn't get expected value then wait for some time (like udelay(10*1000) or usleep(10*1000) delay/sleep in ms) then continue to do polling for more more extra time (Say 100ms) and still if you didn't get the expected value then do sleep/delay for 100ms.....vice versa... need to do till it reach to maximum timeout value.
Please let me know if anything.
This is the old code:
#include <sys/time.h> /* for setitimer */
#include <unistd.h> /* for pause */
#include <signal.h> /* for signal */
#define INTERVAL 500 //timeout in ms
static int timedout = 0;
struct itimerval it_val; /* for setting itimer */
char temp_reg[2];
int main(void)
{
/* Upon SIGALRM, call DoStuff().
* Set interval timer. We want frequency in ms,
* but the setitimer call needs seconds and useconds. */
if (signal(SIGALRM, (void (*)(int)) DoStuff) == SIG_ERR)
{
perror("Unable to catch SIGALRM");
exit(1);
}
it_val.it_value.tv_sec = INTERVAL/1000;
it_val.it_value.tv_usec = (INTERVAL*1000) % 1000000;
it_val.it_interval = it_val.it_value;
if (setitimer(ITIMER_REAL, &it_val, NULL) == -1)
{
perror("error calling setitimer()");
exit(1);
}
do
{
temp_reg[0] = read_reg();
//Read the register here and copy the value into char array (temp_reg
if (timedout == 1 )
return -1;//Timedout
} while (temp_reg[0] != 0 );//Check the value and if not try to read the register again (poll)
}
/*
* DoStuff
*/
void DoStuff(void)
{
timedout = 1;
printf("Timer went off.\n");
}
Now I want to optimize and reduce the CPU usage and want to improve the performance.
Can any one help me on this issue ?
Thanks for your help on this.
Currently I'm polling the register to get the expected value [...]
wow wow wow, hold on a moment here, there is a huge story hidden behind this sentence; what is "the register"? what is "the expected value"? What does read_reg() do? are you polling some external hardware? Well then, it all depends on how your hardware behaves.
There are two possibilities:
Your hardware buffers the values that it produces. This means that the hardware will keep each value available until you read it; it will detect when you have read the value, and then it will provide the next value.
Your hardware does not buffer values. This means that values are being made available in real time, for an unknown length of time each, and they are replaced by new values at a rate that only your hardware knows.
If your hardware is buffering, then you do not need to be afraid that some values might be lost, so there is no need to poll at all: just try reading the next value once and only once, and if it is not what you expect, sleep for a while. Each value will be there when you get around to reading it.
If your hardware is not buffering, then there is no strategy of polling and sleeping that will work for you. Your hardware must provide an interrupt, and you must write an interrupt-handling routine that will read every single new value as quickly as possible from the moment that it has been made available.
Here are some pseudo code that might help:
do
{
// Pseudo code
start_time = get_current_time();
do
{
temp_reg[0] = read_reg();
//Read the register here and copy the value into char array (temp_reg
if (timedout == 1 )
return -1;//Timedout
// Pseudo code
stop_time = get_current_time();
if (stop_time - start_time > some_limit) break;
} while (temp_reg[0] != 0 );
if (temp_reg[0] != 0)
{
usleep(some_time);
start_time = get_current_time();
}
} while (temp_reg[0] != 0 );
To turn the pseudo code into real code, see https://stackoverflow.com/a/2150334/4386427
I'm producing a game in C on a microprocessor. The score is controlled by how long you can survive; the score increases by 1 every 3 seconds. The score is an integer which is declared globally, but displayed from a function.
int score = 0;//globally declared
void draw_score(int score_d)
{
char score_draw[99];
sprintf(score_draw,"%d", score_d);
draw_string(score_draw, 9, 0);
}
I was thinking of a function which just increases the score by one with a delay on it, however that has not worked.
void score_increaser(int score)
{
score++;
_delay_ms( 3000 );
}
Does it need to be in a while loop? the function itself would go into a while loop in the main anyway.
C is pass by value.
score_increaser() as shown in your question increases just a copy of what is passed in.
To fix this there are (mainly) two options:
As score is defined globally, do not pass in anything:
void score_increaser(void) {
score++;
_delay_ms( 3000 );
}
This modifes the globale score directly.
Pass in the address of score and de-reference it inside the function
void score_increaser(int * pscore) {
(*pscore)++;
_delay_ms( 3000 );
}
Call it like this
...
score_increaser(&score);
...
A 3rd, a bit more complex, approach (which assumes signals are supported on the target platform) would
setup a signal and a referring handler, then
setup a timer to fire a signal every N seconds.
This signal then is handled by the handler, which in turn
increases the global score and
starts the timer again.
This might look like:
#include <signal.h> /* for signal() and sig_atomic_t */
#include <unistd.h> /* for alarm() */
#define DURATION (3) /* Increase score every 3 seconds. */
sig_atomic_t score = 0;
void set_alarm(unsigned);
void handler_alarm(int sig)
{
++score;
set_alarm(DURATION);
}
void set_alarm(unsigned duration)
{
signal(SIGALRM, handler_alarm);
alarm(duration);
}
int main(void)
{
set_alarm(DURATION);
... /* The game's codes here. */
}
This latter approach has the advantage that your game's code does not need to take care about increasing score. score is just increased every 3 seconds as long as the program runs.
I'd recommend using a timer interrupt. Configure the timer to 3 seconds.
volatile int score = 0; //global
void Intr_Init(peripheral_t per)
{
//Initialize the timer interrupt
}
void draw_score(int score_d)
{
char score_draw[99];
sprintf(score_draw,"%d", score_d);
draw_string(score_draw, 9, 0);
}
int main(void)
{
Intr_Init(TIMER);
while(1)
{
//Code that makes your game run
draw_score(score);
}
}
ISR (TIMER1_COMPA_vect)
{
//clear disable interrupt
score++;
//enable interrupt
}
In embedded, you should rely on Timers for better time critical tasks and accuracy. The way Delay routines are implemented is usually a loop or a up/down counter. Whereas a timer is usually based on counting SysTicks.
Another major advantage of Interrupts is that you let processor do its tasks all the while instead of making it block in a delay loop.
score is global value then do not need to pass it in function if that function has access to that global space
void score_increaser() {
score++;
_delay_ms( 3000 );
}
here is a good method for handling the score.
in the 'start game' function,
clear 'score' to 0
setup a timer:
--to expire once each 3 seconds
--enable the automatic reload feature,
--enable the timer interrupt
--enable the timer counter
in the timer interrupt handler function
--increment 'score'
--clear the timer interrupt pending flag
in the 'end game' function
disable the timer counter
disable the timer interrupt
display the 'score' value
You dont need parameter for the score since it's declared globally..
//global
int score = 0;
void score_increaser()
{
_delay_ms(3000);
score++;
}
calling is like: score_increaser(); should do the work..
i suggest you check for score in any other line/function.. maybe you have redeclared it or accidentally changed the value..
hope this helped..
How would I output text one letter at a time like it's typing without using Sleep() for every character?
Sleep is the best option, since it doesn't waste CPU cycles.
The other option is busy waiting, meaning you spin constantly executing NoOps. You can do that with any loop structure that does absolutely nothing. I'm not sure what this is for, but it seems like you might also want to randomize the time you wait between characters to give it a natural feel.
I would have a Tick() method that would loop through the letters and only progress if a random number was smaller than a threshold I set.
some psuedocode may look like
int escapeIndex = 0;
int escapeMax = 1000000;
boolean exportCharacter = false;
int letterIndex = 0;
float someThresh = 0.000001;
String typedText = "somethingOrOther...";
int letterMax = typedText.length();
while (letterIndex < letterMax){
escapeIndex++;
if(random(1.0) < someThresh){
exportCharacter = true;
}
if(escapeIndex > escapeMax) {
exportCharacter = true;
}
if(exportCharacter) {
cout << typedText.charAt(letterIndex);
escapeIndex = 0;
exportCharacter = false;
letterIndex++;
}
}
If I were doing this in a video game lets say to simulate a player typing text into a terminal, this is how I would do it. It's going to be different every time, and it's escape mechanism provides a maximum time limit for the operation.
Sleeping is the best way to do what you're describing, as the alternative, busy waiting, is just going to waste CPU cycles. From the comments, it sounds like you've been trying to manually hard-code every single character you want printed with a sleep call, instead of using loops...
Since there's been no indication that this is homework after ~20 minutes, I thought I'd post this code. It uses usleep from <unistd.h>, which sleeps for X amount of microseconds, if you're using Windows try Sleep().
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
void type_text(char *s, unsigned ms_delay)
{
unsigned usecs = ms_delay * 1000; /* 1000 microseconds per ms */
for (; *s; s++) {
putchar(*s);
fflush(stdout); /* alternatively, do once: setbuf(stdout, NULL); */
usleep(usecs);
}
}
int main(void)
{
type_text("hello world\n", 100);
return 0;
}
Since stdout is buffered, you're going to have to either flush it after printing each character (fflush(stdout)), or set it to not buffer the output at all by running setbuf(stdout, NULL) once.
The above code will print "hello world\n" with a delay of 100ms between each character; extremely basic.
gcc (GCC) 4.6.0 20110419 (Red Hat 4.6.0-5)
I am trying to get the time of start and end time. And get the difference between them.
The function I have is for creating a API for our existing hardware.
The API wait_events take one argument that is time in milli-seconds. So what I am trying to get the start before the while loop. And using time to get the number of seconds. Then after 1 iteration of the loop get the time difference and then compare that difference with the time out.
Many thanks for any suggestions,
/* Wait for an event up to a specified time out.
* If an event occurs before the time out return 0
* If an event timeouts out before an event return -1 */
int wait_events(int timeout_ms)
{
time_t start = 0;
time_t end = 0;
double time_diff = 0;
/* convert to seconds */
int timeout = timeout_ms / 100;
/* Get the initial time */
start = time(NULL);
while(TRUE) {
if(open_device_flag == TRUE) {
device_evt.event_id = EVENT_DEV_OPEN;
return TRUE;
}
/* Get the end time after each iteration */
end = time(NULL);
/* Get the difference between times */
time_diff = difftime(start, end);
if(time_diff > timeout) {
/* timed out before getting an event */
return FALSE;
}
}
}
The function that will call will be like this.
int main(void)
{
#define TIMEOUT 500 /* 1/2 sec */
while(TRUE) {
if(wait_events(TIMEOUT) != 0) {
/* Process incoming event */
printf("Event fired\n");
}
else {
printf("Event timed out\n");
}
}
return 0;
}
=============== EDIT with updated results ==================
1) With no sleep -> 99.7% - 100% CPU
2) Setting usleep(10) -> 25% CPU
3) Setting usleep(100) -> 13% CPU
3) Setting usleep(1000) -> 2.6% CPU
4) Setting usleep(10000) -> 0.3 - 0.7% CPU
You're overcomplicating it - simplified:
time_t start = time();
for (;;) {
// try something
if (time() > start + 5) {
printf("5s timeout!\n");
break;
}
}
time_t should in general just be an int or long int depending on your platform counting the number of seconds since January 1st 1970.
Side note:
int timeout = timeout_ms / 1000;
One second consists of 1000 milliseconds.
Edit - another note:
You'll most likely have to ensure that the other thread(s) and/or event handling can happen, so include some kind of thread inactivity (using sleep(), nanosleep() or whatever).
Without calling a Sleep() function this a really bad design : your loop will use 100% of the CPU. Even if you are using threads, your other threads won't have much time to run as this thread will use many CPU cycles.
You should design something like that:
while(true) {
Sleep(100); // lets say you want a precision of 100 ms
// Do the compare time stuff here
}
If you need precision of the timing and are using different threads/processes, use Mutexes (semaphores with a increment/decrement of 1) or Critical Sections to make sure the time compare of your function is not interrupted by another process/thread of your own.
I believe your Red Hat is a System V so you can sync using IPC