Contents

Talk:OSEK

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Germany Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Automobiles Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

OS[edit]

OSEK itself is not an OS, as the first sentence states. OSEK is more like a standard specification. Please correct me if I am wrong or else, correct the article.

Hi, firstly try using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signatures. Secondly, OSEK is a list of specifications indeed, but also a RTOS. The information provided on Wikipedia is enough to go deeper with the mentioned links. Try Trampoline for example. --𝔏92934923525 (talk) 07:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, within the main article I found this: "Comment - Two of the above claims are contradictory: 1. "Only static priorities are allowed for tasks." 2. It uses priority ceiling, which states: "The protocol works by temporarily raising the priorities of tasks in certain situations, thus it requires a scheduler that supports dynamic priority scheduling." IMO words are difficult to explain the concepts, better rely on flow-charts etc. see the PDF by NXP which I added to Further reading. If the part is still contractionary, please clean and I suggest by re-writting. --17387349L8764 (talk) 21:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]