From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 27 17:07:48 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A5216ACB3 for ; Sat, 27 May 2006 17:07:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mf.danger@gmail.com) Received: from hu-out-0102.google.com (hu-out-0102.google.com [72.14.214.192]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B2EA43D48 for ; Sat, 27 May 2006 17:07:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mf.danger@gmail.com) Received: by hu-out-0102.google.com with SMTP id 28so209781hug for ; Sat, 27 May 2006 10:07:45 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Q9URyp+yc4f0ynPnsDPkrJTHR3UvfK164POiDpZaG9D7xC50gc2sQjUCAzLFi8yD9pwzjcYvxlqRBusM4GbQ0z5qvs8dnoqD/yRH9SmGuXys+0uwpaF5SdZdjpL7sJ7v3Fd8dBs1aETBMyf2Sj4inpda8CGIs4yP7i0dVmbUGN8= Received: by 10.49.15.13 with SMTP id s13mr448446nfi; Sat, 27 May 2006 10:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.49.17 with HTTP; Sat, 27 May 2006 10:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9f7850090605271000j524d6a35gfa3f6df1f0ed59f5@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 10:00:38 -0700 From: "marty fouts" To: "James Mansion" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <44773FDB.1090901@nortel.com> Cc: Alexander Leidinger , Poul-Henning Kamp , Andrew Atrens , current@freebsd.org, small@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD's embedded agenda X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 17:08:00 -0000 On 5/27/06, James Mansion wrote: > Why? Lets remember we're talking about an embedded system that can be > sensibly implemented with a general purpose OS. I'd put it to you that > normally where this is very desirable, its because the run rate is > quite low so the project overall is very sensitive to ease and cost of > development. But if the run rate is low, then you also need to consider > what hardware will be available in volume at go-live, and CF-to-IDE > is very cheap now in conjunction with system-on-a-chip designs for > set top boxes. For big bulk, we have PIC, Atmel, Rabbit, and assorted > 80186 designs (including one very cute thing I saw built into an > ethernet PHY) As someone who has worked on Linux-based smartphones, I think that, at least in telephony, CF isn't particularly cheap, (and the form factor isn't particularly attractive,) and the run rate can still be high but sensitive to ease and cost of development. The hardware solution in telephony is NAND flash, because that has a reasonable form factor and a good price/megabyte of storage. Experience suggests that wear leveling does matter in this market, but that fairly simple wear leveling can be very effective.