this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2023
21 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

1259 readers
63 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/368257

Thoughts?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fermuch@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The only real "problem" would be the lack of certifications, which are quite hard to get.

Real Time Operating Systems (RTOS) are normally used for these tasks, but, AFAIK there are already projects using linux with patches to make it run a RTOS kernel.

In my opinion, I think it all depends on what part of the plane it is running. If it is a core sensor, providing real time data, it makes a lot of sense to use a RTOS. It needs to prove it can run its tasks on time, and the scheduler needs to be understandable. There's also a lot of overhead with running a full OS with processes, which don't make sense for a sensor which only function is to provide data over a CAN/LIN bus.

But, for other things, like dashboard visualizations, music for the aircraft, entertainment, and those non-critical-realtime needs, then it makes a lot of sense to run linux. After all, you'd get access to a lot of already built software and a working dev environment.

And don't get me wrong, this is clearly BS from boeing to keep selling their closed source software. There are already open source RTOS systems, like FreeRTOS. I do not mean to keep those real time systems closed, but to use a full OS where it makes sense and a RTOS where that makes more sense. Both open source!

[–] Atarian@vlemmy.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Isn't hard real time in the kernel now?

[–] fermuch@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I remember there were talks about merging the patches and making it an option when building. I don't know the current status of that.

On real time operating systems, like freertos, not only the kernel is real time but everything else is too. Like: you can guarantee your call on the I2C and SPI won't take more than 5ms, for example, even with hardware issues. The whole environment is built around the hardware realtime concept.

[–] nrabulinski 2 points 1 year ago

You don’t even necessarily need patches, just compile the kernel with real time option

[–] solidsnail@programming.dev 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That makes sense, and yeah I imagine the problem isn't the entertainment system.

I just don't get the the last paragraph. I don't know if using Linux affects their code being OS or not. If they're just running it on top of Linux and not modifying it, it probably won't be a GPL violation to keep it closed.

[–] fermuch@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Boeing has their own RTOS, which they might be using on more than "real time critical" software. What I mean is: embrace open source, be it Linux or some other OS more specific for that task, but open source all the things!