From owner-freebsd-embedded@freebsd.org Wed Mar 9 01:56:00 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-embedded@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24E3FAC82CE for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 01:56:00 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brad2000@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vk0-x235.google.com (mail-vk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0123C7E; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 01:55:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brad2000@gmail.com) Received: by mail-vk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id e185so39691659vkb.1; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 17:55:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=RfIJYq1nEO8vx4JqzaWuBrbosxFsarFnvxehZw1lQlM=; b=asiXtWC4eR55ZJbOXwwN3V6B1QmNoU2rhJOWbpPLg2RqeoM2hDjzmrcfb+snWyxG4Q 8g+2DnPcHFJdXHKPxQ7WE/9H49wuYmS25ie/0NARjHuWKKMJlmVTObyJs1upXwJ9EbGu KGYWAsHfmwDxwEJFNJyBVIivVszDH0RWFVSaXH6x6hTyQvGYzuHjwRa8eBR367NfoLrr EB68nUl8QAeAKMk2jZ4YGAe0Y9PsJFvIDPFOiJo+y/fQu8CVOhLywguBkvrQ5BOP2bPV vcv55E7eRrxsjPylIb6OXmfdkbDkHidA7daD05ngu7rlfVpbly91ZfbpmT3NZ/P2Hcxn OqRg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=RfIJYq1nEO8vx4JqzaWuBrbosxFsarFnvxehZw1lQlM=; b=TS6rNfbVIZoJ7UTlzQGPYRqeLCSso43qOq2pDRRQZ6S2JoaL358Y0xOqmWwl1Yrw3y 31cexZWv3Lifx8bTTDr+IxqrpPjLTextlAMcaEVewknLSSUKmwXlVB0u5Ofk+FWe7R2b tpwamPSAwWJQ9wKuV++1bZu/VHGIxPHtKDpUqjIdeIdRoWZ09Bd2CnIbpcGOJY/I6OZx RGKVoUySEVQhVse0XTe+4org9tjgCkk1OP6CzZQFl2064vYaWDwoxTciH/TRn2TesRGL CU5fm2P487GGYL4e7PkXR73VLjmMcgMvtBnKCaY1gov3TvrK4Ero6VRDsgYNGSxtb9lu YQPQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIEMuT2S8jD0D+5c+2qbeJpT7p72jTyq6K6f3fX2eGjkFYQTqXMD97x47YiGq710Ms+kQcL2Uq7oIEGnQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.31.139.132 with SMTP id n126mr29141808vkd.78.1457488558883; Tue, 08 Mar 2016 17:55:58 -0800 (PST) Sender: brad2000@gmail.com Received: by 10.31.163.18 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Mar 2016 17:55:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <1457473674.1406.46.camel@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 18:55:58 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ULoLitqCQZVPYBJ2GZBv7f5QiPg Message-ID: Subject: Re: ? about kernel size.. From: Brad Walker To: John Clark Cc: Adrian Chadd , "freebsd-embedded@freebsd.org" , Ian Lepore Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.21 X-BeenThere: freebsd-embedded@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 01:56:00 -0000 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 wrote: > > On Mar 8, 2016, at 5:20 PM, Brad Walker 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. > >