Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:55:58 -0700 From: Brad Walker <bwalker@musings.com> To: John Clark <jeclark2006@aim.com> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com>, "freebsd-embedded@freebsd.org" <freebsd-embedded@freebsd.org>, Ian Lepore <ian@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ? about kernel size.. Message-ID: <CAPKZHbX0Ozc_2U%2BvZd=nR1P=4XO3egSDq0wTn8reCzR24MdUWQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <A40E6CF0-62D5-4956-A2BB-AAD7BFF60A6B@aim.com> References: <CAPKZHbVyPji-bZwDzM77TN6qybjRcf%2BZe5r6WZmbG98LkhT-rg@mail.gmail.com> <CANCZdfriqr24Lh9ZuptaC0gEm6gAV6LN9XHcVAJtbyaBejEgNg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPKZHbW%2BG7WnSU__yeYBVPqs8MPmFm-5q_wM4sm9FxHhEEgPDg@mail.gmail.com> <1457473674.1406.46.camel@freebsd.org> <CAPKZHbX8BXKC_=8PPvtasqE%2BRj96_mPQkqdRt=hqU6fazxpPfA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-Vmo=yW0=VHkjed8NYxRmE7dqtd8=bN8KLmav9-bBEZ-U1YQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPKZHbV1D5hTXCCRAYy6XkkcqJEizHH8ymK5dgsCsvXEeRd5jQ@mail.gmail.com> <A40E6CF0-62D5-4956-A2BB-AAD7BFF60A6B@aim.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
By God John, you have pretty much summed up the current state of my engineering life! I encountered these problems when I worked at a company called Xetawave. They install these RF modems all over the place. A big market is the oil/gas industry. If something breaks, they have to send out a technician and that costs $100s of dollars. Managers start to get really anxious when that happens. My current embedded client is about the same thing. Once the device is installed getting it fixed/changed can be a real hassle. Don't even get me started on the TCP/IP or memory issues dealing with uTasker. I can't believe companies actually fall for this stuff, but they do. They make real products out of them. But, it can be such a hassle. -brad w. On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 6:42 PM, John Clark <jeclark2006@aim.com> wrote: > > On Mar 8, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Brad Walker <bwalker@musings.com> wrote: > > For example, we have a requirement to implement SSL/TLS, BTLE, and ftp on= a > microkernel. By the time this is done, it will be worthwhile to look at > alternatives. Not to mention, the needs just keep coming. > > -brad w. > > > At which point I become very vociferous in arguing against using a proces= s > so limited that it can=E2=80=99t run a BSD/Linux derivative. > > This sort of happened with the recent brush with the 8051=E2=80=A6 The Bo= ss wanted > to have the 8051 do some TCP/IP with some sort of > Ethernet interface that was available from the company that made the 8051= =E2=80=A6 > > At which point I found a $15 AP based on MIPS/Atheros SoC, and provided > not only TCP/IP but also a local hotspot for control/monitoring, ethernet > hub, mini http server, etc. > > If someone wanted to reduce cost from $15 they could have gotten the Eval > package and gotten the design to a manufacturing house for much less as > well=E2=80=A6 > Of course they would talking about volumes many times greater than 100s= =E2=80=A6 > > The 8051 controller was still in there, but the =E2=80=98fancy=E2=80=99 s= tuff was on a > board that could handle =E2=80=98fancy=E2=80=99 stuff without making the = project 2-3 years > worth of development on a minimal > processor platform. > > Another aspect of the =E2=80=98minimal system=E2=80=99 that is required t= o do =E2=80=98fancy=E2=80=99 > stuff, is that often the TCP/IP implementation is sort of =E2=80=98half-b= aked=E2=80=99 and > can introduce problems which go > far beyond just not accessing the device=E2=80=A6 it could cause problems= for the > entire network, and require much debugging to solve=E2=80=A6 or even unde= rstand > what=E2=80=99s going on=E2=80=A6 > > This may be ok if the devices are located in conveniently accessible > locations=E2=80=A6 but if one has to go to a remote location via helicopt= er or pack > in equipment with mules=E2=80=A6 > such issues become bigger than the cost savings of some minimal solution. > > John Clark. > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAPKZHbX0Ozc_2U%2BvZd=nR1P=4XO3egSDq0wTn8reCzR24MdUWQ>