Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ELC Releases Embedded Linux Standard v1.0

Posted by michael on from the nice-and-hefty dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The Embedded Linux Consortium (ELC) formally announced its release of the ELC Platform Specification (ELCPS) version 1.0 this week. This LinuxDevices.com Special Report includes the full text of the ELC's announcement, a whitepaper about the ELCPS standard, a newly updated "frequently asked questions" document, a roundup of news coverage, a poll, a discussion thread, and the spec itself."

5 of 49 comments (clear)

  1. embedded Linux of limited usefulness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Embedded Linux vendors are making the same mistake that Sun made with embedded Java: many embedded devices are either very inexpensive or have to meet hard real time deadlines. Both of those factors make embedded Linux impractical.

    Really cheap devices go for small, older, cheaper processors and memories that can't support the relatively high processing capabilities required for Linux systems. For a hundred dollar VCR, Linux is great, but not for a twenty dollar mixmaster.

    Many industrial facilities use great numbers of embedded devices. Linux just can not meet the hard real time deadlines required. Even with the low latency and kernel preemtibility patches, Linux doesn't have the granularity necessary to ensure that hard deadlines are met. There are a couple of kludges around that allow Linux to be used on such devices, such as running virtual machines with Linux and a true real time OS and making them communicate via sockets. Sadly proprietary solutions currently fare much better. Mobile telephones also fit in this category; although expensive ones may eventually run Linux and something else, they won't run only Linux.

    With all the difficulties facing them, I can't help but wonder why the embedded Linux people bother. They would be better off writing a new OS that had lighter requirements and a design to allow it to meet hard real time deadlines. That would be a big step forward for putting the GPL in embedded platforms.

    1. Re:embedded Linux of limited usefulness by dreamchaser · · Score: 3, Interesting

      While you have some very good points, one must keep in mind the still staggering rate of performance increases in lightweight and embedded processors. No, you probably won't be able to build a $20 device that can run Embedded Linux on it effectively today, but what about next year? Or the year after that? Wouldn't it be better to have an established standard when such devices start becoming ubiquitous?

    2. Re:embedded Linux of limited usefulness by macshit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You seem to be making the mistake of thinking that there's just one sort of embedded application.

      Sure there are embedded applications and devices for which linux is probably inappropriate, but so what? Linux won't get used there. However, the word `embedded' covers a lot of ground, and there are many embedded applications and devices for which linux is a perfectly fine solution -- and that's where linux will be (and is) used.

      [Morever, as another post pointed out, the hardware used for embedded devices is continually getting more powerful, for any given application, making linux more and more practical.]

      --
      We live, as we dream -- alone....
  2. A chance to compete in an emerging market by LordMazza · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Although I have some doubts about the suitability of Linux for certain types of embedded applications (where real-time OSes would probably be more appropriate), I think this is a good thing. Anything the Linux community can do to push Linux into new markets not already dominated by one company's product alone can only be beneficial. Unlike the PC market, there is no pre-existing "applications barrier to entry" into the embedded application market. The more Linux and other open software is used in any market, IMO the more it will be used in every market. Anything the community can do to foster the adoption of Linux on as many platforms as we can think of is beneficial.

  3. This spec is a good thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The ELC did good work here. They have
    produced a simple range of embedded subsets of the
    LSB, and carefully avoided inventing anything
    of their own beyond a way to query for what
    features are available. As a developer of
    embedded Linux systems, I think the ELC's
    standard is very good work -- suprisingly,
    this is an example of a vendor consortium
    that did exactly the right thing, engineering-wise.
    - Dan Kegel
    www.kegel.com