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 The song has been performed by various artists, each bringing a slightly different emotional weight:
: It mirrors broader Romanian literary and philosophical themes regarding the "passing of time" and the idea that man is a traveler through a world defined by constant change. Cultural Impact
: Contemporary versions, such as those by Deyu Music or Florin Salam , modernize the sound while maintaining the core message about life's fleeting nature and the pursuit of inner peace over external riches.
: The song suggests that if humans could truly foresee the hardships they would face, they might lack the courage to even begin their journey.
Are you interested in the of this specific piece?
💡 This piece is frequently played at gatherings where emotional storytelling is central, resonating with anyone who has faced "life's storms" and come out the other side. If you'd like to explore this further:
: In its folk form, it often leans into the "doina" style—a soulful, melancholic melody that captures the deep longing ( dor ) and sorrow characteristic of Romanian heritage.
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.
|