×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Automotive Grade Linux Released For Open Source Cars

Soulskill posted about 6 months ago | from the tux-behind-the-wheel dept.

Open Source 88

Mcusanelli writes: The Linux Foundation and its partners have released the first version of Automotive Grade Linux, the open source platform for use inside connected cars. "AGL is building the industry’s only fully open automotive platform, allowing automakers to leverage a growing software stack based on Linux while retaining the ability to create their own branded user experience. Standardizing on a single platform means the industry can rapidly innovate where it counts to create a safe and reliable connected car experience. Open collaboration within the AGL community means support for multi-architectures and features to bolster the in-vehicle infotainment (IVI) experience." Further details and source code are available from the official website.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Is that (0, Offtopic)

funwithBSD (245349) | about 6 months ago | (#47362937)

5w-30?

Dino or synth?

Re:Is that (3, Funny)

bobbied (2522392) | about 6 months ago | (#47363247)

High detergent due to it's extensive use of SOAP...

Re:Is that (1)

davester666 (731373) | about 6 months ago | (#47369857)

more bugs than regular software.

Automotive grade? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47362953)

Judging by the Toyota firmware design review, any Linux distribution would be better the safer choice..

No voice control? (2)

backslashdot (95548) | about 6 months ago | (#47362955)

Without usable voice control, this thing is useless. And the only way to make voice control work non-annoyingly is if someone like Google open sources their Google Now speech to text stuff and put the needed patents into the public domain.

OK, Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47363057)

Open-source yourself.

OK, Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364201)

You don't want his voice control. It seems not to respond to the command most of the time, but if you repeat the command too many times, it responds angrily with "I heard you the first time!"

Re:OK, Google (1)

amalcolm (1838434) | about 6 months ago | (#47367213)

Sounds like my missus

Re:No voice control? (2)

i.r.id10t (595143) | about 6 months ago | (#47363093)

Or google will grab the source and spin off a new version of Android just for the car makers, including the voice recognition bits, mapping, etc.

Re:No voice control? (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about 6 months ago | (#47363275)

Or google will grab the source and spin off a new version of Android just for the car makers, including the voice recognition bits, mapping, etc.

Oh no, they've never done something like that before....

Next you will tell me that they will sue because their reference design car has rounded corners... Never!

Re:No voice control? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47363203)

Or you can spend a few years studying voice recognition technology, write the software and open source it yourself.

Re:No voice control? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364421)

Only if MS or Apple hasn't vaguely patented everything first...

Re:No voice control? (2)

Wootery (1087023) | about 6 months ago | (#47368051)

Step 1: Don't be in America.

Re:No voice control? (1)

aitikin (909209) | about 6 months ago | (#47363227)

Or someone pays for a license for speech to text implementations. Just because it's Linux, doesn't mean there can't be commercial software on it, commercial licenses available, etc. The kernel should not have non-open source code in it (although, there's ways around this ala nVidia drivers), but other than that, why would it matter that Linux doesn't have open sourced speech to text and patents aren't in the public domain?

Re:No voice control? (2)

zwede (1478355) | about 6 months ago | (#47364383)

Or someone pays for a license for speech to text implementations. Just because it's Linux, doesn't mean there can't be commercial software on it, commercial licenses available, etc.

This is what Tesla did. They run Linux (although it's their own, Debian based, flavor) and they licensed voice recognition (Googles, I think). It works really, really well. I have a slight accent and it still gets it right every time.

useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47363329)

Without usable voice control, this thing is useless.

(I know you often hear the captain saying, "Computer, do blah blah," but have you ever looked at those other peoples' fingers?)

"Useless." Wow. Just.. wow. I have got to see a video of you driving a car. It should be absolutely hilarious. "Car, ten degrees right! TWENTY DEGREES RIGHT!!! THIRTY .. oh, shit. Car, call 911. Nine. One. One. No, I mean one again, that's not a dupe. Nine one one. Thank you."

And the only way to make voice control work non-annoyingly is if someone like Google open sources their Google Now speech to text stuff and put the needed patents into the public domain.

Now I know you're joking. Have you ever used Google's (or Apple's) speech-to-text? And you're calling a non-speech interface useless? This tech is still a decade or two away from being ready. By the time it is, the patents you're talking about will be expired (but the new stuff that makes it actually work, will likely be still patented, since it hasn't been invented yet as of 2014).

Re:useless (1)

John.Banister (1291556) | about 6 months ago | (#47363519)

Just call these guys [type-thing.com] with your voice commands and pipe their output back into your car's computer.

Re:No voice control? (2)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 6 months ago | (#47363533)

So because an operating system doesn't have voice control, it's useless?
What part of retaining the ability to create their own branded user experience and Standardizing on a single platform means did you not understand?

Voice control is at the user experience layer. Unless you expect the Linux community to implement voice control software for every language in the world?
Cars aren't just sold in English speaking countries, btw.

Now.. if only I could put Linux on my Japanese import car's navigation system...

wharrrgarrrrblll (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364301)

What part of retaining the ability to create their own branded user experience and Standardizing on a single platform means did you not understand?

What part did I understand? NONE OF IT! That whole TFS is nothing but marketspeak gobblydegook and doesn't mean anything at all except "We're somehow making money off of this so just butt out." Your attempt at being a douche is pathetic.

Re:No voice control? (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about 6 months ago | (#47363873)

Without usable voice control, this thing is useless. And the only way to make voice control work non-annoyingly is if someone like Google open sources their Google Now speech to text stuff and put the needed patents into the public domain.

Then scratch the itch and add the missing piece yourself. Open source should not be about us passively waiting for someone else to always do the hard work so we can just grab the source and run away with it. I see this kind of mentality a lot these days. Suddenly we are not part of the open source community ourselves, but the community is some external creature, a code mill from which we can demand various things. Learn C or C++. Learn how speech recognition works. Begin coding and contributing.

Re:No voice control? (0)

DeathElk (883654) | about 6 months ago | (#47364247)

I was wondering when that old chestnut would pop-up. Not everyone has the mindset to be a programmer, let alone the time. You're inviting a lot of half assed code to be rejected from the base line if you expect people to just "learn c or c++" then start contributing to a project that probably at least requires knowledge at CS level. This would create an extra burden on any project.

Believe it or not, some people (actually, most people) just want to buy their device.

Re:No voice control? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364307)

I don't want voice control for anything. Too much room for misunderstanding. Voice systems don't understand context. I might say: "computer, turn the volume up!" and expect it to happen. Or I might say: "Kids, to adjust the volume, you have to say 'computer, turn the volume up!' But not now, we don't want to wake the baby..." And in the latter case, I certainly don't want the volume adjusted!

A human hired to adjust the volume, would not have a problem, for humans are very good at context. But I have yet to see a voice system that copes. Or for that matter, a voice system who knows not to react when a commercial demo for the voice system plays on radio / TV. Or someone in another car commanding their own voice system.

Re:No voice control? (1)

backslashdot (95548) | about 5 months ago | (#47405705)

It would be trivial for a computer to realize something is being said mid-sentence by measuring the time between your previous word and when you say "computer, adjust the volume".. AS for a demo playing in the background .. yeah that is an issue but i try not to play demos of voice UI interaction in the car. If I did, I would make sure the trigger word to activate a voice command is not "computer" but some name that is rarely used like "Cthulu of the Netherworld".

at least I can compile my own updates as after 1 y (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 6 months ago | (#47362967)

at least I can compile my own updates as after 1 year the car maker has moved on next years cars and the old one software is left to rot.

Re:at least I can compile my own updates as after (1)

i.r.id10t (595143) | about 6 months ago | (#47363109)

I'd bet any automaker would end up wtih binary blobs, much like NVidia and their non-open drivers. Which means that yes, you may be able to recompile the kernel, but getting the binary blobs to work may not be so doable...

Of course, then you have to get your kernel onto the device and get it to boot... sorta like the Tivo issue.

Automotive-grade? (1)

allquixotic (1659805) | about 6 months ago | (#47362969)

If their idea of "Automotive-grade" software is anything like Honda's concept of it, the infotainment system will randomly crash; exhibit severe bugs; lack obvious options like removing a paired bluetooth phone without resetting the whole damn thing to its factory defaults; and break several standards along the way for minimal to no compatibility with anything but a few "blessed" bluetooth devices. No idea if Honda's HandsFree Link uses Linux at its core, but the untested dreck auto manufacturers have been putting out for the past few years makes me wonder if they're hiring Charlie the dealership manager's son ("he's a whiz kid with computers!!") to code up these programs. The one exception appears to be Tesla, though I've never been inside of one.

Re:Automotive-grade? (3, Interesting)

Pentium100 (1240090) | about 6 months ago | (#47363395)

Every time I read news like his, I start liking my car that does not have computers even more. Everything's simple, no software to mess up and I can change a headlamp lightbulb in it in 5 minutes or less. The carb needs new seals though, but rebuilding a carburetor is easier than understanding modern cars.

Re:Automotive-grade? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364319)

Says the guy still loving his Pentium100! It would be nice if we could change our usernames. If we could, I'd suggest you change yours to Luddite2014!

Re:Automotive-grade? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364355)

What care do you have? All the cars since the 80s have engines that require ECUs just to idle.

Re:Automotive-grade? (1)

Pentium100 (1240090) | about 6 months ago | (#47365811)

1982 Mercedes W123. It has a carburetor and does not have an ECU. Ignition is electronic, but not a computer, other circuits are analog (I have seen two versions of the turning signal relay - one uses two transistors and a bunch of passives and the other uses a 555 chip).

The tape deck (much newer than the car, but still plays tapes) has a couple of MCUs, so it is more complicated than the car.

Re:Automotive-grade? (2)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 6 months ago | (#47363555)

I have a Honda, it's infotainment system is rock solid.
It's completely in Japanese though, and I don't understand a word of it.

Never crashes no matter how many buttons I randomly press trying to figure out how to do things, and it can pair and un-pair Bluetooth phones fine.

They seem to have very good software in their Japanese cars, perhaps not so much in their English market versions?

Re:Automotive-grade? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 6 months ago | (#47367371)

I've noticed this too. The Japanese versions often allow you to do stuff like watch TV while driving, that the western versions don't. It's dumb to do so of course, but you can.

Japanese sat-nav seems to have had street level 3D navigation for years now... I remember seeing it back in 2004 at least. Basically you get a "through the windsheild" view with buildings and landmarks displayed as you drive around cities. Their traffic/accident/road works data seems to be far, far in advance of what the west has too.

Re:Automotive-grade? (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 6 months ago | (#47371329)

Yep, my car has all of that, except the map only include Japan and the TV is not digital and my country has switched off all analog transmission.
Their traffic information is pretty cool, it's a system calls VICS and is transmitted by IR signals through street lights (and microwave in places too)

All awesome, all completely useless outside of Japan.

Re:Automotive-grade? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47382157)

2004? I had colour 3D satnav in my JDM 1999 Subaru Legacy GT, imported from Japan. Also had a TV tuner too, all factory fitted. It was entirely useless outside of Japan as the entire interface was in Japanese and the maps only covered Japan. It was to play with at least.

Re:Automotive-grade? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364197)

I am working for the company which invented the motor carriage. They generally try to hire the cheapest software engineers they can possibly get. And they can't tell a good one from a mediocre one.
Maybe the ESP and the motor controls are kind of OK, but sure as hell the entertainment system is FULL OF SCHEISSE.

I also had interviews at Google and they know their shit.

I wasn't texting, officer... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47362971)

I was editing a config file with VI.

I wasn't texting, officer... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364227)

Hah! You won't escape that easily, citizen!

Re:I wasn't texting, officer... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47365579)

Too bad the cop uses Emacs....

I don't want a "branded user experience" (5, Interesting)

fastgriz (1052034) | about 6 months ago | (#47362999)

I want an open source platform that doesn't have to be "jail broken" to make it work the way I desire and get rid of the bullshit that marketing snakes decided to inflict upon me.

Re:I don't want a "branded user experience" (1)

allquixotic (1659805) | about 6 months ago | (#47363049)

Try installing a tablet or laptop running your favorite (customizable) OS on a movable arm or swivel that's mounted to the dashboard. Mounted electronics that don't interfere with your field of view are legal in many jurisdictions.

Re:I don't want a "branded user experience" (1)

Joe Gillian (3683399) | about 6 months ago | (#47363241)

The only problem I can see with that is an overzealous police officer stopping you in a state with laws that ban cell phones while driving and giving you a ticket under the cell phone ban. While most jurisdictions that have cell phone bans only ban cell phones, some have laws that cover other devices that are not completely hands-free, and I'm sure the police could claim that you were not using the device hands-free, even if there's no actual proof.

Re:I don't want a "branded user experience" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364359)

Your "problem" is easily fixed by mounting that tablet actually in the dash where the radio goes. 2 seconds of google will show you hundreds of installations exactly like that. There's even kits if you're too cheap and lazy to have a craftsman make a custom one for you. Your paranoia is cute btw.

Re:I don't want a "branded user experience" (2)

Selur (2745445) | about 6 months ago | (#47363075)

needs to be branded and at least partially closed otherwise where should all the code from the NSA go?

Is windows spying on me? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364375)

Is that what that 100MB partition I have no access to in Windows Vista and newer is for?

Re:I don't want a "branded user experience" (2)

westlake (615356) | about 6 months ago | (#47363479)

I want an open source platform that doesn't have to be "jail broken" to make it work the way I desire

Inspections.

Insurance.

Civil and criminal liability.

The worst that can happen with a jail broken phone is that you will brick it.

Re:I don't want a "branded user experience" (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 6 months ago | (#47363613)

The worst thing that can happen to an infotainment system is it can mess with the CAN bus...
If it's a malfunction, all that's going to happen is the car goes in to 'limp home' mode because the other systems can't communicate on the bus.

If it's malicious, that's another story... [google.co.nz]

Re:I don't want a "branded user experience" (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 6 months ago | (#47367379)

This seems to be aimed at infotainment (god I hate that word) systems, rather than the embedded systems that are safety critical.

Re:I don't want a "branded user experience" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47363767)

Then blame Linus Torvalds for not having the brain power to license Linux under GPL with the "at your option and future version" clause in tact. It's his fucking fault.

I don't want a (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364381)

THIS^ my current cars ECU has a cryptographically locked boot loader. :(

But is it... (1)

rockmuelle (575982) | about 6 months ago | (#47363021)

Professional Grade [gmc.com] ???

Re:But is it... (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | about 6 months ago | (#47363197)

Yup. Them with the "incredible thinking" and the "incredible ideas". You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Disclaimer (2)

Tea-Bone of Brooklyn (828337) | about 6 months ago | (#47363151)

YMMV

How to turn if off? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47363163)

If that linus character starts up like a woman on the rag while I am driving it?

Noooo! (4, Funny)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 6 months ago | (#47363215)

yum install Brakes-1.10.1-1.1.i386.rpm
Setting up Install Process
Parsing package install arguments
Examining Brakes-1.10.1-1.1.i386.rpm: Brakes-1.10.1-1.1.i386
Marking Brakes-1.10.1-1.1.i386.rpm to be installed
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package Brakes.i386 0:1.10.1-1.1 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: Brake_fluid for package: Brakes
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
Brakes-1.10.1-1.1.i386 from Brakes-1.10.1-1.1.i386.rpm has depsolving problems
--> Missing Dependency: Brake_fluid is needed by package Brakes-1.10.1-1.1.i386 (Brakes-1.10.1-1.1.i386.rpm)

yum install Brake_fluid-1.0.2-5.el5_6.1.i386.rpm
Setting up Install Process
Parsing package install arguments
Examining Brake_fluid-1.0.2-5.el5_6.1.i386.rpm: 1:Brake_fluid-1.0.2-5.el5_6.1.i386
Marking Brake_fluid-1.0.2-5.el5_6.1.i386.rpm to be installed
Resolving Dependencies
--> Running transaction check
---> Package Brake_fluid.i386 1:1.0.2-5.el5_6.1 set to be updated
--> Processing Dependency: /usr/sbin/GM_ASEP_CERT for package: Brake_fluid
--> Finished Dependency Resolution
1:Brake_fluid-1.0.2-5.el5_6.1.i386 from Brake_fluid-1.0.2-5.el5_6.1.i386.rpm has depsolving problems
--> Missing Dependency: /usr/sbin/GM_ASEP_CERT is needed by package 1:Brake_fluid-1.0.2-5.el5_6.1.i386 (Brake_fluid-1.0.2-5.el5_6.1.i386.rpm)

Re:Noooo! (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#47363281)

Should have used Debian.

Re:Noooo! (1)

i.r.id10t (595143) | about 6 months ago | (#47363339)

Ah, but Debian has old software not that bleeding edge new versions of stuff so no disc brakes, only drums

# apt-get install disc-brakes
E: Unable to locate package

# apt-cache search brakes
drum-brakes - A working automotive brake system although may experience fade as it heats up, recommended for advanced users only
drum-brakes-resurface - A utility to resurface the drums in an automotive brake system :)

Re:Noooo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47363831)

Stable is not bleeding edge, Debian testing or unstable provide more bleeding edge AFAIK.

Thanks Sheldon Cooper! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364445)

whaa whaaaa whaaaaa WHoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooSH!

Re:Noooo! (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#47368613)

Ah, but Debian has old software not that bleeding edge new versions of stuff so no disc brakes, only drums

Disc brakes are far from 'bleeding edge,' my 1979 Malibu had them.

Re:Noooo! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47363417)

I think it's been a decade since I've seen an rpmhell joke here. To be fair, the Yellowdog Updater fixed most of those problems.

Re:Noooo! (1)

bobbied (2522392) | about 6 months ago | (#47363423)

You failed to mention the other dependencies...

Rotors, Calipers, pads, axle, lugs, peddle, Master Cylinder, fluid reservoir, brake lines (both hard and flexible), brake-lights (that includes the light holders, bulbs, wiring and switch), ABS (which has it's own dependency tree that includes: Basic Brakes, sensors, sensor wiring, sensor interface, pump, pump wiring, pump interface, device drivers for sensor interface and pump interface and ABS software package)

Ok.. I'll stop now.... That I have a modern bake system...

Compatability (1)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | about 6 months ago | (#47369965)

Just be sure you don't install the Lockheed fluid package into your Girling brakes app; it will lock-up. Literally.

In-vehicle Infotainment? (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | about 6 months ago | (#47363231)

Please, people have enough of a time merely DRIVING their car, you can't expect them to recompile it as they hurtle down the highway at 75mph.

Re:In-vehicle Infotainment? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47367127)

I can just see the bumper sticker, Bash on board.

Infotainment? Don't Care. (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#47363303)

Yawn.

I don't really care who supplies the back end to the 'infotainment system' in my vehicle, so long as it works as I expect it to.

What I really want to see is someone create an open source OS for the vehicle itself, which would be rather useful in many off-road and kit car situations.

Wake me when someone comes up with a Linux based ECU that lets users manage functions like fuel curves and TPS voltages.

Re:Infotainment? Don't Care. (1)

Dega704 (1454673) | about 6 months ago | (#47363669)

The problem was with everyone developing their own proprietary system, by the time they get the vehicles to market it looks horrendously outdated compared to iOS and Android, to say nothing of trying to get developers interested. Standardizing around the same open platform will allow them to get their infotainment systems up to par and keep pace with the rest of the technology world. Not that it matters much for me and my car right now. I never imagined having a six-disc CD changer would seem so behind the times.

Re:Infotainment? Don't Care. (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 6 months ago | (#47363691)

Why does your ECU need to run Linux? What's wrong with the dozens of already available aftermarket ECU's?
Or even software from companies like Hondata that flash new programmable software on OEM ECU's

Re:Infotainment? Don't Care. (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 6 months ago | (#47363773)

Why does your ECU need to run Linux?

Well, it doesn't need to, it would just be neat. Open source and all that jazz.

What's wrong with the dozens of already available aftermarket ECU's?

Such as? The only one I've ever heard about was the MegaSquirt, and from what I can tell development stagnated a few years back. Are there others? Can you reference them?

Or even software from companies like Hondata that flash new programmable software on OEM ECU's,

Power programmers most definitely do not meet the criteria.

Now, if you look at Hondata's website, the K-series Programmable ECU seems to be close to what I'm talking about... except the fact that it's not street legal and only works on Hondas.

Re:Infotainment? Don't Care. (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 6 months ago | (#47363957)

Link, Motec, Haltech, Microtech, Chrome, Spoon, Gizzmo, AEM... Sorry, off the top of my head that's only another 8, not 12.

No aftermarket ECU is going to be legal in places with strict emissions laws. I doubt even modified OEM ECU's would be legal.

Of course Hondata only works with Honda's, its only programming hardware and software that runs on Honda ECU's.

Re:Infotainment? Don't Care. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364043)

I don't really care who supplies the back end to the 'infotainment system' in my vehicle, so long as it works as I expect it to.

No computer-related company or car-related company wants you to get the an "infotainment system" that does what you expect it to do. People who want things that do what they expect, are the enemy. All the development is based on exploiting you. That's why companies like Google, Apple, etc are involved in this stuff: to recoup their tech investment plus a tidy profit, from you the user. And it's no different if the company is Ford or Honda, because they have "partners" (e.g. shitbags like Google and Apple and Microsoft) plus they want to mark up the cost of a personal computer by a factor of twenty, and your little Atom or ARM -based computer somehow turns into a $1000 option.

So it's up to the amateur community. You're not going to get anything decent from anywhere else.

Seriously. "Infortainment" might seem shallow and unimportant but you're going to be spending many hours in that car and the last thing you want is another iOS or Android or Windows, where you're a profit center to receive ads or be sold "apps."

As for the non-infotainment aspect, WTF are you some kind of nerd? What site is this? Oh. Oh, never mind.

Re:Infotainment? Don't Care. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364255)

Irrespective of your concerns, all new cars will be wired to FtMeade, NSA headquarters. So that General Douglas McSmartbomb can find you any time, any where. I know, because I work for a car maker.

Welcome to the Better Matrix(TM), driver.

Thank god BSD isn't dead yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47363699)

What a fucking nightmare this will be. Glad I drive an old car.

Re:Thank god BSD isn't dead yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47366341)

But Netcraft.... ah, never mind.

Halfway there (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 6 months ago | (#47364145)

As any Linux user can tell you, the problem's with the drivers.

Will it improve my grep on the road? (1)

CheeseTroll (696413) | about 6 months ago | (#47364579)

Yup, I went there

Re:Will it improve my grep on the road? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47367627)

just avoid the man and cat, please.

Automotive Grade Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47364897)

There's got to be a joke about crashing and drunk computing in there...

Finally... (1)

SpankiMonki (3493987) | about 6 months ago | (#47365519)

The year of Linux on the dash-top is at hand.

As long as my ECU is not encrypted, I am good... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47365587)

Flashing my ECU is easy these days, I can set every variable my car has.

No, please.. (0)

aaronb1138 (2035478) | about 6 months ago | (#47365847)

Linux is just as crashy as Windows. Sure that means about a 100x decrease in frequency from the 90's, but it's still absurdly buggy and subject to the constant patch cycle bullshit. That said, it's fine as an isolated from the ECU / BCM as an infotainment system. Heck, it can even control the A/C for all I care as long as it never hooks as software into the ECU (a hotline to tell the ECU to engage the A/C clutch is fine).

Let's keep automotive ECU systems in the stone age with assembly or occasionally QNX. I suppose I could get behind a BSD variant if the code was stripped down enough and custom tested against fixed hardware enough.

Re:No, please.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47366247)

Well I have no idea what language an ECU normally runs, but vxWorks, while absurdly expensive and annoying at times, is still around for a reason. You want a true real time OS for the core engine/transmission management, ideally on dedicated ruggedized hardware. The low priority stuff can run linux. Of course you could arguably strip linux down enough to run a real time core, but then you will still run the absolute minimum setup so that your real time stuff was truly real time. The non critical applications would be elsewhere. Of course one of my nitpics on vxWorks is most stuff still runs right in kernel mode, although they do have real time processes now that do offer some memory protection. If your going to run anything kernel mode it better all be rock solid, lest some unimportant bit causes the engine to dump gas in at the precise wrong time then fire to make matters worse. I wonder how a real time linux would compare to vxWorks if say both had equally talented teams that worked on a project for say a year.

At any rate, things that control critical systems need to be as simple as possible, with the exception of critical paths. There you may introduce redundancy or additional apparent uneeded parts to insure that the critical path has no obvious failure modes that are very bad. For instance, one over simplified example might be to have two paths to feed power to the fuel injectors. The minor path provides a minimal amount of power by sending pulses with a low duty cycle to a circult that filters them. This runs all the time. This would provide enough power to turn the injectors on at a bit more than an idle level. The second path only works when the brakes are not depressed and provides enough power to run the injectors at high volume. I.E. just because you can code lots of protections in code, doesn't mean you shouldn't have something really simple that just works to insure the injectors never run at full throttle when the brake is applied...

Carrier-grade Linux, automotive-grade Linux. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47366159)

Why can't we have one, good Linux.
Not-invented-here (NIH) syndrome fragments Linux.

Branded User Experience (1)

cmurf (2833651) | about 6 months ago | (#47366199)

The manufacturers have universally produced garbage UI/UX thus far, this sounds like it'll just be perpetuated.

Open Automotive Research Platform (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47366441)

One day, the traffic is managed with the help of a connected car. Roads become like the internet is today.

Nope. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47367535)

GM still hasn't figured out reliable mechanical engineering. I can't even imagine what they'll do with this.

XenServer on ARM (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47371797)

I thought the real way forward in something like automotive Linux was to use XenServer or another Hypervisor and keep the OS that runs the engine management, the thermal control etc in s separate domain to the entirely different OS that runs the ICE etc.

So an MP3 player crashing or even an ALSA module blowing up doesn't kill the AC or even the valve lift and timing.

XenServer on ARM is a no-brainer for this.

Yay! (1)

OKC_PI (3731041) | about 6 months ago | (#47378873)

Excuse me while I recompile the kernel for an additional 50 horsepower!

Automotive Grade Windows Released For Cars (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#47380271)

BSOD
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?