Cart (Loading....) | Create Account
Close category search window
 

The performance and energy consumption of embedded real-time operating systems

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

8 Author(s)

We present the modelling of embedded systems with SimBed, an execution-driven simulation testbed that measures the execution behavior and power consumption of embedded applications and RTOSs by executing them on an accurate architectural model of a microcontroller with simulated real-time stimuli. We briefly describe the simulation environment and present a study that compares three RTOSs: μC/OS-II, a popular public-domain embedded real-time operating system; Echidna, a sophisticated, industrial-strength (commercial) RTOS; and NOS, a bare-bones multirate task scheduler reminiscent of typical "roll-your-own" RTOSs found in many commercial embedded systems. The microcontroller simulated in this study is the Motorola M-CORE processor: a low-power, 32-bit CPU core with 16-bit instructions, running at 20MHz. Our simulations show what happens when RTOSs are pushed beyond their limits and they depict situations in which unexpected interrupts or unaccounted-for task invocations disrupt timing, even when the CPU is lightly loaded. In general, there appears no clear winner in timing accuracy between preemptive systems and cooperative systems. The power-consumption measurements show that RTOS overhead is a factor of two to four higher than it needs to be, compared to the energy consumption of the minimal scheduler. In addition, poorly designed idle loops can cause the system to double its energy consumption-energy that could be saved by a simple hardware sleep mechanism.

Published in:

Computers, IEEE Transactions on  (Volume:52 ,  Issue: 11 )

Date of Publication:

Nov. 2003

Need Help?


IEEE Advancing Technology for Humanity About IEEE Xplore | Contact | Help | Terms of Use | Nondiscrimination Policy | Site Map | Privacy & Opting Out of Cookies

A not-for-profit organization, IEEE is the world's largest professional association for the advancement of technology.
© Copyright 2014 IEEE - All rights reserved. Use of this web site signifies your agreement to the terms and conditions.