6 ms·
I just can't see the Linux kernel ever obtaining ISO 26262 certification at the ASIL-D level. It would take a special kind of masochist to even consider doing t
by bregma 6y ago
I just can't see the Linux kernel ever obtaining ISO 26262 certification at the ASIL-D level. It would take a special kind of masochist to even consider doing that.
- PinguTS 6y agoI just can't see that the HMI requires any ASIL-D. ASIL-D is most likely realized by a central ECU who manages state.
- jeffreygoesto 6y agoAgreed. SIL2LinuxMP generated more questions than answers, which is very good for a start. But is is discontinued and we'll have to see if elisa takes off or just pokes around in some corners. The problem is, a safety system must be fully understood and then all changes need to be reviewed not to destroy the given guarantees any more. Given the pace of Linux development, this would be a gargantuan endeavor or you'd need to stick with an old and stripped down version that does not have any benefits over a traditional rt os.
- thrwyoilarticle 6y agoAre you saying this because you think the people contributing to AGL are unaware of how certification works?
- bregma 6y agoI am saying this because I am very intimate with Linux and very intimate with ISO 26262 certification, but I try to avoid those situations a masochist will seek out for pleasure. Life is too short.
- waiseristy 6y agoThe general industry consensus right now is to validate it for a higher ASIL level (B) and then wrapping it in an ASIL-D compliant layer.
- caniszczyk 6y agoThey are trying their best via the ELISA effort: https://elisa.tech https://elisa.tech