A
SEMINAR REPORT ON
REAL TIME OPERATING SYSTEM
FOR EMBEDDED SYSTEM
Submitted To: Submitted By:
Mr. Shiv Kumar Singh Mohit Kumar Sandilya
Assistant Professor ECE (VI Semester)
ECE Department B.Tech
FET, GKV, Haridwar 226320051
DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRONICS & COMMUNICATION
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
GURUKULA KANGRI (DEEMED TO BE UNVERSITY)
HARIDWAR,UTTARAKHAND,249402
(2022-2026)
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION
Introduction
Why Use an RTOS ?
Core Components of an RTOS
RTOS Comparison Criteria
FreeRTOS
Zephyr
µC/OS-III
Comparative Table
Methodology
Discussion
Use Case Scenarios
Trends & Future of RTOS
Conclusion
INTRODUCTION
What is RTOS?
• AnRTOS is an OS designed to process data in real time, Ensures
timely and deterministic responses
Key Characteristics:
• Predictable task scheduling
• Low latency
• Multitasking capabilities
Types:
• Hard real-time
• Soft real-time
Why Use an RTOS ?
• Designed for time-critical embedded systems.
Benefits over general-purpose OS:
• Low Overhead
• Precise timing control
• Smaller memory footprint
Common applications:
• IoT devices
• Automotive ECUs
Core Components of an RTOS
•Kernel: Manages system resources and scheduling
•Task Management: Creation, deletion, and switching of tasks
•Scheduler: Determines task execution order (e.g., round-robin, priority-bas
•Inter-task Communication: Semaphores, queues, message passing
•Memory Management: Dynamic/static memory handling
•Timers and Interrupt Handling
RTOS Comparison Criteria
• Performance: Task switching time, interrupt latency
• Memory Usage: ROM/RAM footprint
• Licensing: Open-source or proprietary
• Community & Ecosystem: Active development, support
• Portability: Number of supported hardware platforms
• Certification: Support for safety-critical applications
FreeRTOS
• Developed by Real Time Engineers Ltd, maintained by Amazon Web
Services
• Open-source, MIT licensed
• Small and efficient kernel
• Minimal hardware requirements
• Good documentation and wide adoption
• Integration with AWS IoT and other cloud services
• Extensive hardware support (ARM Cortex-M, RISC-V, etc.)
Zephyr
• Project under Linux Foundation
• Modular, scalable RTOS with security in focus
• Apache 2.0 license
• POSIX compatibility for better portability
• Supports Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, USB, file systems, networking
• Excellent documentation and tools
• Active community and growing industry support
µC/OS-III
• Developed by Micrium, now part of Silicon Labs
• Highly deterministic and preemptive kernel
• Designed for safety-critical applications
• Certified for medical (IEC 62304), avionics (DO-178), automotive (ISO
26262)
• Rich feature set: Event flags, mutexes, time management, etc.
• Smaller community, mostly industrial users
• Proprietary license with optional source access
Comparative Table
Feature FreeRTOS Zephyr µC/OS-III
License MIT Apache 2.0 Proprietary
Kernel Size Small Moderate Small
POSIX Support Limited Good Minimal
Safety Cert. Some In progress Full
Community Large Growing Niche
Documentation Good Extensive Good
Use Cases IoT, MCUs IoT, Edge Industrial, Medical
Methodology
Literature Review:
•Studied official documentation, technical manuals, and whitepapers of FreeRT
Zephyr, and µC/OS-III
•Referred to academic journals and industry reports on RTOS performance and
applications
Evaluation Criteria:
•Chosen based on common RTOS selection factors:
•Performance (latency, scheduling efficiency)
•Memory Footprint
•Feature Set
•Licensing & Cost
Methodology
•Hands-on Testing (Optional if applicable):
•Deployed sample applications (e.g., LED blink, task switching demo) on supp
boards (e.g., STM32, ESP32)
•Measured response time and memory usage using RTOS tools
•Use Case Mapping:
•Aligned each RTOS with real-world scenarios based on strengths and limitati
•Comparative Table:
•Compiled key data into a structured table for clear visualization
Methodology
Discussion
FreeRTOS
Strengths:
• Lightweight and simple to use
• Huge adoption in industry and academia
• Wide MCU support (especially ARM Cortex-M)
• Easily integrates with AWS and IoT stacks
Limitations:
•Limited feature set compared to full-scale RTOS
•Not POSIX-compliant
•Advanced features require external add-ons or modifications
Discussion
Zephyr
Strengths:
• Modular architecture, great for building custom systems
• Built-in support for networking (TCP/IP, BLE, etc.)
• POSIX-like API improves portability
Limitations:
•More complex to configure than FreeRTOS
•Slightly larger memory footprint
•Evolving project — stability varies across modules
Discussion
Strengths:
•Excellent determinism and reliability
•Designed for safety-critical applications
•Certified for use in medical, aerospace, automotive
•Rich documentation and proven in industrial use
Limitations:
•Proprietary license (cost barrier for some users)
•Smaller ecosystem and slower community development
•Less flexible for modern IoT/cloud integrations
Use Case Scenarios
FreeRTOS:
• Ideal for ultra-low power MCUs
• Used in smart sensors, wearables
Zephyr:
• Suitable for connected devices with complex stacks
• Gateways, drones, industrial IoT
µC/OS-III:
• Preferred in certified systems
• Used in medical devices, avionics, defense
Trends & Future of RTOS
• Growing integration with cloud platforms
• Increased focus on real-time security
• Support for AI/ML inference at the edge
• Enhanced energy efficiency
• Greater standardization (e.g., POSIX)
• RTOS + virtualization (mixed-criticality systems)
Conclusion
• RTOS is critical for deterministic embedded systems
• FreeRTOS: Lightweight and widely used
• Zephyr: Modular and modern with strong connectivity
• µC/OS-III: Certified and robust for safety-critical use
• Choose based on application needs, certifications, and resources
