Automate-it app using c for operating systems project - linux

I am doing a project on OS. I am trying similar to AUTOMATE-IT app in android.
It's an app which automatically dims brightness, turn off WiFi when battery is low etc.
So I am trying something similar in Linux environment. I thought of using C language and thought of implementing the ideas as that app. Like reducing the brightness, turning off WiFi. But i just want to know whether it is possible to carry out in Linux operating system.
Like, are there any system calls or any other way to change the brightness or turn off WiFi using C program . Does Linux allows it?
I tried surfing over the web, but i couldn't get a proper idea, so I thought of asking here.
If it can be carried out, to what extent I can do in Linux ?

Related

How to fix tearing in Qt Quick app with Qt 5.9.1?

My app is having tearing problems when I scroll fast horizontally. Normally I'd just enable vsync, but I don't know how to do that in Qt. The tearing is occurring on my dev PC which runs Linux with a X-server, but it will also need to work well on the target system which is either Android or Linux+EGLFS.
One google result was from the Qt4 era and said that the tearing will be gone in Qt 5. But apparently it isn't.
Many google results are about env vars for embedded linux systems, such as QT_QPA_EGLFS_FORCEVSYNC, but I'd prefer the solution to work for my dev PC as well.
One google result said that vsync being enabled/disabled depends on the renderloop in use. I don't override the renderloop, so, since I'm on linux, I think I'm using the threaded renderloop.
Here's a bugreport about nvidia binary drivers causing this.
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-45480
I too am using those drivers, so this may be it - just a driver bug. If so, at least it's unlikely to happen on my target hardware (I still haven't tested there), so that's good.

How to simulate ThreadX application on Windows OS

I have an application using ThreadX 5.1 as the kernel.
The Image is flashed on to a hardware running an ARM 9 processor.
I'm trying to build a Simulator for the application that can be run on Windows (say XP, 32-bit).
Is there any way I can make it run on Windows, without modifying the entire source code to start calling win32 system calls?
You can build a Simulator for the application that can be run on Windows with "ThreadX for Win32".
"ThreadX for Win32"'s specification is hear.
http://rtos.com/products/threadx/Win32
Yes you can if you are willing to put in the work.
First observe that each threadx system call has an equivalent posix call except for events.
So your threadx program can run as a single process using posix threads, mutexes, etc.
Events can be handled by an external library (there are a few out there).
If you find this difficult in windows then the simplest thing to do is set up a linux vm. I use an ubuntu vm running on Virtual Box. It is very easy to set up. All you will need is the cdt version of eclipse.
Next you need to stub out all of your low level system calls.
This is also easier than you might think. For example, if you have a SPI driver to read and write to flash, you can replace your flash with a big array which is quite easy to work with at this level.
Having said all this, you may get more mileage if your threadx application is modular. Then you can test each module on it's own and you don't need to mess with threads, etc.
As a first approximation this may give you what you need without going the distance to port the whole thing to run under posix.
I have done this successfully in the past and developed a full set of unit tests for a module that allowed me to develop and test it (on my mac) before going to the target. Development is much faster and reliable this way.
Another option you may want to consider is to find a qemu project that supports your microprocessor. With some work you can develop a complete simulator for your platform and then run the real firmware under the emulator.
Good luck.

Balanced processor/SOC (?) for small embedded system running linux

So, I know Linux kernel is quite "heavy" when considering lower scale embedded systems, but currently but we're a 2 man team trying to see how to create our own embedded system.
I'm the one in charge of all software (the other guy is a HW guy), and thus I would like to re-use existing libraries and frameworks as much as possible, and I would like to bounce off some ideas with gurus around here.
I am fairly comfortable in Linux, but the booting and initialization process is new to me, and I need to dive in to that soon enough. Any book recommendations are welcome as well!
I haven't designed any embedded systems before.. Only own some ARM dev boards (beagleboard and raspberry pi).
Current I have prototype of the software running on beagleboard already, and now we're thinking how to minimize the cost, and to create something our own..
It's a system connected to the internet, and I need to run a tiny web server with some scripting support. Performance wise I don't think it needs to be too powerful.
I would like to minimize all bootloader etc work, since I'm a one man SW team, and just concentrate on the application itself.
Of course I understand that I need to configure our kernel for this, but this is indeed why I thought selecting some SoC would be good, since they usually have some linux and bootloaders ready..
First I thought that Cirrus EP9301 would be perfect, since it seems to be a good package, and not very expensive.. But it seems that it's already in end-of-life, and also support for this is very bad (people on the cirrus forums constantly complain about it).
Are there some good choices for this kind of project, which would enable us "easily" to get linux kernel up and running, with still maintaining some kind of decent BOM (hopefully 20USD or so) ?
Your hardware guy should already know this, but go with an existing reference design. Take the raspberry pi, the beagleboard/bone, open-rd, or any number of other existing systems and clone the part you need. As a result the linux porting will be a matter of removing what you are not using from the reference design instead of adding new stuff and hoping it works. If you go with flat pack parts you can do the work in your garage, if you go with bgas you need the equipment for that or pay someone to do it. (can you tell yet that I hate bgas?).
Is linux a requirement, if not that opens the door to a lot more devices using freertos or chibios or a number of other solutions. the stm32f4 discovery board for example is $20, uses what can barely be called a microcontroller for all the features it has (cortex-m4). Supposedly possible to run uclinux on a cortex-m, but definitely possible to run any number of rtoses and have an ip stack, etc. stellaris (ti.com) has a number of eval boards, one/some with ethernet already (use as a reference design). You can also take the wiznet approach (or a spi ethernet) and use any microcontroller (puts you into the avr/msp430 level and price range). Bang for buck the cortex-m's are good, arm based so comfortable to work with, etc.
Using linux if you are already not an experienced at porting to an embedded platform, and dont want to learn that on this go around, I would definitely go with a clone of an existing design, leverage as much as you can from a project with folks that are experienced at porting linux to a platform. If need be take an existing board (beagle/raspi/openrd) and go through the motions of porting to the platform with the cheat sheet of having access to an existing port, see if you cant get uboot ported and linux booting, etc. (dont really need uboot at all, that is possibly an unnecessary complication, just get dram up and pass the atags, etc to linux and just branch to it, pretty easy to launch linux from bare metal).
You could probably do worse than taking the Broadcom BCM2835 - used on the Raspberry Pi - as your starting point - especially if you want to avoid kernel and boot-loader work and a source of reference schematics. If this proves too expensive, check out other devices in the Broadcom range.
A few bits of advice
You probably want some flash rather than a MMC card interface for production use. eMMC is an option. NAND flash is a nightmare due to rapid component obsolescence and the need to get own and dirty with the MTD drivers.
USB Ethernet will be easier to integrate than a controller hanging off a general purpose bus, but won't perform as well. SmSC seems to be popular source for either
You could also have a look at the work that Olimex is doing with their linux boards. Perhaps even order a som and then combine it with other external components.

Looking for a super tiny linux distro that's sole purpose is running an AIR application?

I'm looking for a really really small linux distribution or process of making my own that's sole purpose is to get an air application to launch full screen and stay there; Essentially I'm building a home kitchen computer that runs entirely as an AIR app.
I have looked into using windows xp; and windows xp embedded but they pose so many issues I figured I'd try modern linux.
I have also seen TinyCore Linux which looks interestingly small but not sure what issues that poses in regards to running AIR and "hardware" accelerated display. I've also thought about stripping down an Ubuntu installation but I'm sure somebody must have done this already; google is just failing me right now...
I'm also interested in running an "embedded" version of say android and running the air app on some arm-based hardware again; with just the AIR runtimes only - although this is less preferred as it's more complex.
I'm also hooking this up to a touch screen monitor (not yet arrived) so I'll need to hunt down or write some drivers for translating the touch events into something AIR can understand... (this was my main intention for using windows in that all the drivers will just work).
What I'm after
Minified Linux kernel with JUST the drivers for the box I need
X Display with accelerated graphics support (Doesn't have to be X if AIR can run on a frame buffer?)
Running a Full screen AIR application (simple enough)
Ability to write back to the filesystem (enough support for AIR)
SSH Access for remote control
Samba for updating the filesystem (easier to maintain the system)
Touch screen support (3M Ex III I think...)
Audio support
Don't need
Don't need any window manager or any other GUI tools unless required by AIR
Don't need any toolbars or file managers or anything; The AIR app is the "OS"
Don't need any package managers or repos
Don't need multi user or logging in; everything can just run as an unprivileged account
Don't need to
I don't mind hand crafting the filesystem and configs if that makes it easier; I'm mainly looking for a "filesystem" that is as tiny as possible that I can just plop my AIR app into and write some scripts to get it to start when the X server starts
Thanks,
Chris
Try an embedded Linux build system such as Buildroot. It can build an entire system from source, and be very lightweight. The basic system is less than 1 MB in size.
Ended up going with Tiny Core. Very tiny and quick to boot up. You can also write extensions for it and you don't have a persistent drive which allows you to just switch the thing off without worry that it's going to break something -- exactly what you need in a kitchen :-D.
My current plan is to:
Just set up a working version using Ubuntu as this is mostly supported by Adobe
Slowly strip it back and try and get as little things to start as possible on boot
Try building my own distro/package from source and selecting only the packages I need
Compile my own kernel with nearly everything turned off and just leave on the things I need

How to simulate Touch event in Linux/Mac/Windows?

I wanna to simulate touch event in Windows / Mac OS X or Linux (OS is not critical).
Under Windows Vista and Windows 7, the Multi-Touch Vista drivers let you use 2 mice to simulate multi-touch gestures. It should degrade nicely to the "normal" touch experience. In my experience, it can be fairly tricky, but it works.
It really kind of depends on what you're working on and what the goal is. If you can separate the response from the action in your application, that will make it a lot easier to test something like this without going through a lot of hassle.
If you wind up needing a touch device, Wikipedia has a nice list of multi-touch devices.
A lot of time passed since this question, however, maybe someone will google for similar question and find that there is another option:
If you have android device, you can use your device as touch screen for windows.
Maybe there are other software to do this, but I used following one:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.tnksoft.winmultitouchfree
This program from some japanese guy coupled with desktop app does the trick.
You can get desktop app from his site http://www.tnksoft.com/ .
Unluckily it is japanese site, but it's not hard to find necessary program there(it has easily recognisible icon)>
Alternatively you can get link once you install android app.

Resources