Embedded C Programming

Outline
Operations in C Variables and storages in C Multithreading

Vu.HoangAnh@vn.bosch.com

Embedded vs Desktop Programming

Main characteristics of embedded programming environments: Cost sensitive Limited ROM, RAM, stack space Limited power Limited computing capability Event-driven by multiple events Real-time responses and controls critical timing (interrupt service routines, tasks, ) Reliability Hardware-oriented programming

Embedded vs Desktop Programming

Successful embedded C programs must keep the code small and tight. In order to write efficient C code, there has to be good knowledge about: Architecture characteristics Tools for programming/debugging Data types native support Standard libraries Difference between simple code vs. efficient code

Embedded Programming
Basically, optimize the use of resources: Execution time Memory Energy/power Development/maintenance time Time-critical sections of program should run fast Processor and memory-sensitive instructions may be written in assembly Most of the codes are written in a high level language (HLL): C, C++, or Java

Use of an HLL
Short development cycle Can use modular building blocks for code reusability Can use standard library functions, e.g. delay( ), wait( ), sleep( ) Support for basic data types, control structures, conditions Support for type checking: Type checking during compilation makes the program less prone to errors e.g. type checking on a char does not permit subtraction, multiplication, division

Arithmetic
Integer arithmetic Fastest Floating-point arithmetic in hardware Slower Floating-point arithmetic in software Very slow +, sqrt, sin, log, etc.

slower

Arithmetic Lessons
Try to use integer addition/subtraction Avoid multiplication unless you have hardware Avoid division Avoid floating-point, unless you have hardware Really avoid math library functions

Bit Manipulation
C has many bit-manipulation operators: & Bit-wise AND | Bit-wise OR ^ Bit-wise XOR ~ Negate (ones complement) >> Right-shift << Left-shift Plus assignment versions of each Used often in embedded systems

Faking Multiplication
Addition, subtraction, and shifting are fast Can sometimes supplant multiplication Like floating-point, not all processors have a dedicated hardware multiplier Multiplication by addition and subtraction: 101011 1101 = 43 + 43 << 2 + 43 << 3 = 559 101011 10101100 + 101011000 1000101111

Faking Multiplication
Even more clever if you include subtraction: 101011 1110 = 43 << 1 + 43 << 2 + 43 << 3 1010110 = 43 << 4 - 43 << 2 10101100 = 602 + 101011000 1001011010 Only useful for multiplication by a constant for simple multiplicands when hardware multiplier not available

Faking Division
Division is a much more complicated algorithm that generally involves decisions But, division by a power of two is just a shift: a / 2 = a >> 1 a / 4 = a >> 2 No general shift-and-add replacement for division, but sometimes can use multiplication: a / 1.33333333 = a * 0.75 = a * 0.5 + a * 0.25 = a >> 1 + a >> 2

Lazy Logical Operators

Short circuit tests save time if (a == 3 && b == 4 && c == 5) { ... } equivalent to if (a == 3) { if (b ==4) { if (c == 5) { ... } Strict left-to-right evaluation order provides safety if ( i <= SIZE && a[i] == 0 ) { ... }

Multi-way branches
if (a == 1) foo(); else if (a == bar(); else if (a == baz(); else if (a == qux(); else if (a == quux(); else if (a == corge(); 2) 3) switch (a) { case 1: foo(); break; case 2: bar(); break; case 3: baz(); break; case 4: qux(); break; case 5: quux(); break; case 6: corge(); break; }

4)
5)

6)

Which one is faster? Shorter?

Code for if-then-else

ldw cmpnei bne call br .L2: ldw cmpnei bne call br .L4: ... r2, 0(fp) # Fetch a from stack r2, r2, 1 # Compare with 1 r2, zero, .L2 # not 1, jump to L2 foo # Call foo() .L3 # branch out r2, 0(fp) # a from stack again r2, r2, 2 # Compare with 2 r2, zero, .L4 # not 1, jump to L4 bar # Call bar() .L3 # branch out

Code for Switch (1/2)

ldw r2, 0(fp) # Fetch a cmpgeui r2, r2, 7 # Compare with 7 bne r2, zero, .L2 # Branch if greater or equal ldw r2, 0(fp) # Fetch a muli r3, r2, 4 # Multiply by 4 movhi r2, %hiadj(.L9) # Load address .L9 addi r2, r2, %lo(.L9) add r2, r3, r2 # = a * 4 + .L9 ldw r2, 0(r2) # Fetch from jump table jmp r2 # Jump to label .section .rodata .align 2 .L9: .long .L2 # Branch table .long .L3 .long .L4 .long .L5 .long .L6 .long .L7 .long .L8

Code for Switch (2/2)

.section .text .L3: call foo br .L2 .L4: call bar br .L2 .L5: call baz br .L2 .L6: call qux br .L2 .L7: call quux br .L2 .L8: call corge .L2:

Interesting Switch Code

Sparse labels tested sequentially if (e == 1) goto L1; else if (e == 10) goto L10; else if (e == 100) goto L100; Dense cases uses a jump table: /* uses gcc extensions */ static void *table[] = {&&L1, &&L2, &&Default, &&L4, &&L5}; if (e >= 1 && e <= 5) goto *table[e];

Computing Discrete Functions

There are many ways to compute a random function of one variable, especially for sparse domain: if (a == 0) x else if (a == else if (a == else if (a == else if (a == else if (a == = 0; 1) x 2) x 3) x 4) x 5) x

= = = = =

4; 7; 2; 8; 9;

Computing Discrete Functions

Better for large, dense domains switch (a) { case 0: x = 0; break; case 1: x = 4; break; case 2: x = 7; break; case 3: x = 2; break; case 4: x = 8; break; case 5: x = 9; break; } Best: constant time lookup table int f[] = {0, 4, 7, 2, 8, 9}; x = f[a]; /* assumes 0 <= a <= 5 */

Strength Reduction
Why multiply when you can add? struct { struct { int a; int a; char b; char b; int c; int c; } *fp, *fe, foo[10]; } foo[10]; fe = foo + 10; for (fp=foo; fp != fe; ++fp){ int i; fp ->a = 77; for(i=0; i<10; ++i){ fp ->b = 88; foo[i].a = 77; fp ->c = 99; foo[i].b = 88; } foo[i].c = 99; }

Good optimizing compilers do this automatically

Function Calls
Modern processors, especially RISC, strive to make this cheap Arguments passed through registers Still has noticeable overhead in calling, entering, and returning: int foo(int a, int b) { int c = bar(b, a); return c; }

Code for foo() (Unoptimized)

foo: addi stw stw mov stw stw ldw ldw call stw ldw ldw ldw addi ret sp, ra, fp, fp, r4, r5, r4, r5, bar r2, r2, ra, fp, sp, sp, -20 # Allocate stack 16(sp) # Store return address 12(sp) # Store frame pointer sp # Frame ptr is new SP 0(fp) # Save a on stack 4(fp) # Save b on stack 4(fp) # Fetch b 0(fp) # Fetch a # Call bar() 8(fp) # Store result in c 8(fp) # Return value in r2=c 16(sp) # Restore return address 12(sp) # Restore frame pointer sp, 20 # Release stack space # Return

Code for foo() (Optimized)

foo: addi stw mov mov mov call ldw addi ret

sp, ra, r2, r4, r5, bar ra, sp,

sp, -4# 0(sp) # r4 # r5 # r2 # 0(sp) # sp, 4 #

Allocate stack space Store return address Swap arguments r4,r5 using r2 as temporary
Call (return in r2) Restore return addr Release stack space

Macro
A named collection of codes A function is compiled only once. On calling that function, the processor has to save the context, and on return restore the context Preprocessor puts macro code at every place where the macroname appears. The compiler compiles the codes at every place where they appear. Function versus macro: Time: use function when Toverheads << Texec, and macro when Toverheads ~= or > Texec, where Toverheads is function overheads (context saving and return) and Texec is execution time of codes within a function Space: similar argument

Features in Increasing Cost

1. Integer arithmetic 2. Pointer access 3. Simple conditionals and loops 4. Static and automatic variable access 5. Array access 6. Floating-point with hardware support 7. Switch statements 8. Function calls 9. Floating-point emulation in software 10. Malloc() and free() 11. Library functions (sin, log, printf, etc.) 12. Operating system calls (open, sbrk, etc.)

Outline
Operations in C Variables and storages in C Multithreading

Variables
The type of a variable determines what kinds of values it may take on The greatest savings in code size and execution time can be made by choosing the most appropriate data type for variables, e.g., Natural data size for an 8-bit MCU is an 8-bit variable While C preferred data type is int, in 16-bit and 32-bit architectures, there are needs to address either 8- or 16-bits data efficiently Double precision and floating point should be avoided wherever efficiency is important

Data Type Selection

Mind the architecture Same C source code could be efficient or inefficient Should keep in mind the architectures typical instruction size and choose the appropriate data type accordingly 3 rules for data type selection: Use the smallest possible type to get the job done Use unsigned type if possible Use casts within expressions to reduce data types to the minimum required Use typedefs to get fixed size Change according to compiler and system Code is invariant across machines

Storage Classes in C
/* fixed address: visible to other files */ int global_static; /* fixed address: visible within file */ static int file_static; /* parameters always stacked */ int foo(int auto_param) { /* fixed address: only visible to func */ static int func_static; /* stacked: only visible to function */ int auto_i, auto_a[10]; /* array explicitly allocated on heap */ double *auto_d=malloc(sizeof(double)*5); /* return value in register or stacked */ return auto_i; }

Static Variables
When applied to variables, static means: A variable declared static within body of a function maintains its value between function invocations A variable declared static within a module, but outside the body of a function, is accessible by all functions within that module For embedded systems: Encapsulation of persistent data Modular coding (data hiding) Hiding of internal processing in each module Note that static variables are stored globally, and not on the stack

Volatile Variables
A volatile variable is one whose value may be change outside the normal program flow In embedded systems, there are two ways this can happen: Via an interrupt service routine As a consequence of hardware action It is considered to be very good practice to declare all peripheral registers in embedded devices as volatile Volatile variables are never optimized

Struct Bit Fields

Aggressively packs data to save memory struct { unsigned int baud : 5; unsigned int div2 : 1; unsigned int use_clock : 1; } flags; Compiler will pack these fields into words Implementation-dependent packing, ordering, ... Usually not very efficient in terms of execution time: requires masking, shifting, read-modify-write a tradeoff between space and time!

C Unions
Like structs, but shares the same storage space and only stores the most-recently-written field union { int ival; float fval; char *sval; } u; Useful for arrays of dissimilar objects to save space Potentially very dangerous: not type-safe Good example of Cs philosophy: provide powerful mechanisms that can be abused

Layout of Storage
Modern processors have byte-addressable memory But, many data types (integers, addresses, floatingpoint) are wider than a byte Modern memory systems read data in 32-, 64-, or 128bit chunks Reading an aligned 32-bit value is fast: a single operation

Layout of Storage
Slower to read unaligned value: 2 reads plus shift Most languages pad layout of records for alignment restrictions struct padded { int x; /* 4 bytes */ char z; /* 1 byte */ short y; /* 2 bytes */ char w; /* 1 byte */ };

Memory Alignment

Memory alignment can be simplified by declaring first 32-bit variables, then 16-bit, then 8-bit. Porting this to a 32-bit architecture ensures that there is no misaligned access to variables, thereby saving processor time. Organizing structures like this means that we are less dependent upon tools that may do this automatically and may actually help these tools.

malloc() and free()

Flexible than (stacked) automatic variables More costly in time and space Use non-constant-time algorithms Two-word overhead for each allocated block: Pointer to next empty block Size of this block Common source of errors: Using uninitialized memory Using freed memory Not allocating enough Indexing past block Neglecting to free disused blocks (memory leaks) Good or bad for embedded applications?

malloc() and free() Variants

Memory pools: differently-managed heap areas Stack-based pool: only free whole pool at once
Nice for build-once data structures

Single-size-object pool:
Fit, allocation, etc. much faster Good for object-oriented programs
38

Fragmentation and Handles

Standard CS solution: add another layer of indirection Always reference memory through handles

Storage Classes Compared

On most processors, access to automatic (stacked) data and globals is equally fast Automatic usually preferable since the memory is reused when function terminates Danger of exhausting stack space with recursive algorithms. Not used in most embedded systems. The heap (malloc) should be avoided if possible: Allocation/deallocation is unpredictably slow Danger of exhausting memory Danger of fragmentation Best used sparingly in embedded systems

Memory-Mapped I/O
Magical memory locations that, when written or read, send or receive data from hardware Hardware that looks like memory to the processor, i.e., addressable, bidirectional data transfer, read and write operations. Does not always behave like memory: Act of reading or writing can be a trigger (data irrelevant) Often read- or write-only Read data often different than last written Latency of operations

Outline
Operations in C Variables and storages in C Multithreading

Thread/Task Safety
Since every thread/task has access to virtually all the memory of every other thread/task, flow of control and sequence of accesses to data often do not match what would be expected by looking at the program Need to establish the correspondence between the actual flow of control and the program text To make the collective behavior of threads/tasks deterministic or at least more disciplined

43

Races: Two Simultaneous Writes

Thread 1 count = 3 Thread 2 count = 2

At the end, does count contain 2 or 3?

44

Races: A Read and a Write

Thread 1 if (count == 2) return TRUE; else return FALSE; Thread 2 count = 2

If count was 3 before these run, does Thread 1 return TRUE or FALSE?

45

Read-modify-write: Even Worse

Consider two threads trying to execute count += 1 and count += 2 simultaneously Thread 1 Thread 2 tmp1 = count tmp2 = count tmp1 = tmp1 + 1 tmp2 = tmp2 + 2 count = tmp1 count = tmp2 If count is initially 1, what outcomes are possible? Must consider all possible interleaving

46

Interleaving 1
Thread 1 tmp1 = count (=1) Thread 2 tmp2 = count (=1) tmp2 = tmp2 + 2 (=3) count = tmp2 (=3) tmp1 = tmp1 + 1 (=2) count = tmp1 (=2)

47

Interleaving 2
Thread 1 tmp1 = count (=1) tmp1 = tmp1 + 1 (=2) count = tmp1 (=2) tmp2 = tmp2 + 2 (=3) count = tmp2 (=3)
48

Thread 2 tmp2 = count (=1)

Interleaving 3
Thread 1 Thread 2 tmp1 = count (=1) tmp1 = tmp1 + 1 (=2) count = tmp1 (=2) tmp2 = count (=2) tmp2 = tmp2 + 2 (=4) count = tmp2 (=4)
49

Thread Safety
A piece of code is thread-safe if it functions correctly during simultaneous execution by multiple threads Must satisfy the need for multiple threads to access the same shared data Must satisfy the need for a shared piece of data to be accessed by only one thread at any given time Potential thread unsafe code: Accessing global variables or the heap Allocating/freeing resources that have global limits (files, sub-processes, etc.) Indirect accesses through handles or pointers
50

Achieving Thread Safety

Re-entrance: A piece of code that can be interrupted, reentered under another task, and then resumed on its original task Usually precludes saving of state information, such as by using static or global variables A subroutine is reentrant if it only uses variables from the stack, depends only on the arguments passed in, and only calls other subroutines with similar properties a "pure function"
51

Achieving Thread Safety

Mutual exclusion: Access to shared data is serialized by ensuring only one thread is accessing the shared data at any time Need to care about race conditions, deadlocks, livelocks, starvation, etc. Thread-local storage: Variables are localized so that each thread has its own private copy

52

Achieving Thread Safety

Atomic operations: Operations that cannot be interrupted by other threads Usually requires special machine instructions Since the operations are atomic, the protected shared data are always kept in a valid state, no matter what order that the threads access it Manual pages usually indicate whether a function is thread-safe

53

Critical Section
For ensuring only one task/thread accessing a particular resource at a time Make sections of code involving the resource as critical sections The first thread to reach the critical section enters and executes its section of code The thread prevents all other threads from their critical sections for the same resource, even after it is context-switched! Once the thread finished, another thread is allowed to enter a critical section for the resource This mechanism is called mutual exclusion
54

Mutex Strategy
Lock strategy may affect the performance Each mutex lock and unlock takes a small amount of time If the function is frequently called, the overhead may take more CPU time than the tasks in critical section

55

Lock Strategy A
Put mutex outside the loop If plenty of code involving the shared data If execution time in critical section is short
thread_function() { pthread_mutex_lock(); while(condition is true) { access shared_data; //code strongly associated with shared data //or the execution time in loop is short } pthread_mutex_unlock(); }
56

Lock Strategy B
Put mutex in loop If code loop too fat If code involving shared variable too few
thread_function() { while(condition is true) { tasks that does not involve the shared data pthread_mutex_lock(); access shared_data; pthread_mutex_unlock(); } }
57