Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Should I Take Toyota's Software Update?

Posted by kdawson on from the no-brakes-on-the-rolling-dice dept.

kiehlster writes "I'm a software developer, and I know that most software has bugs, but how much trust can we put in the many lines of code found in our automobiles? I have a 2009 Camry that is involved in both of the recent Toyota recalls. As part of the floor-mat issue, they're offering to install a software update that would cause 'the brake pedal to take precedence over the gas pedal if both were pressed,' or, as their latest notice states, 'would cut power to the engine if both pedals were pressed.' In the computer world, we're all taught to install firmware updates only if there is a real problem because a large percentage of firmware updates actually brick the hardware or cause other unforeseen consequences. On a base of 100 million lines of code, can I really trust a software update to work safely when it is delivered in a three-month development cycle? My driving habits don't cause the floor mat to slide much, so I see the update as overkill. What do you think? If it doesn't void the warranty, should I tell them to skip the update?"

10 of 750 comments (clear)

  1. You're looking at it wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You already took the 100 million lines of code when you bought the car.

    Now do you want the bug fixes, or would you rather find out what a "fatal exception" means in more physical terms?

    1. Re:You're looking at it wrong. by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's like using the LOC count of a disassembled program written in C to express the size of the original code.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    2. Re:You're looking at it wrong. by schlesinm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The dealer is doing the firmware update as part of the recall. If they brick your car because the firmware modification goes wrong, then they replace the bricked part. There is no risk on that side. So the big question is do you want a fix for a known bug or do you want to keep the buggy firmware. And as the parent says, if you don't do the upgrade, then if the bug happens to you the insurance company and manufacturer will deny your claim because you refused to fix the bug.

      --
      My company home page
    3. Re:You're looking at it wrong. by DerekLyons · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So he's using it wrong because he optimizes it and actually evaluates the running code, and you're using it correctly because you treat it as a black box?

      Interesting.

    4. Re:You're looking at it wrong. by cgenman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would add that the "floor mat" excuse always sounded like BS to me. I'm guessing there is a firmware bug in there somewhere that they can't find that just registers the gas pedal as down. They'd never admit to that, as it would reduce the public perception of security of drive-by-wire systems, and might introduce expensive public testing procedures.

      In that case, your only chance is the brake overriding the gas (a process which should have been true from the beginning anyway). Of course, it might be something else and you might still be screwed... unknown computer bugs are like that.

      --
      The ______ Agenda
    5. Re:You're looking at it wrong. by RotsiserMho · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or the first guy is using it wrong and taking the chance of introducing even MORE bugs (more cooks in the kitchen) while the second guy is relying on code that has been tested time and time again, not only by the Mathworks, but by all of their customers as well. Tell me, when writing code for Linux do you re-evaluate every line of the kernel or treat it as a black box? One of our largest customers (a Fortune 100 heavy equipment manufacturer) relies on generated code to control their engines. And these are big engines. The Mathworks produces very solid code allowing developers to create control systems very quickly that are time-tested to be reliable. That being said, that doesn't mean Toyota simply didn't connect the blocks wrong in this case. A human is still responsible for the logic.

  2. Umm... yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Unpatched PCs are bad enough. If I can't go outside because of morons with unpatched cars, I will be very unhappy.

  3. Take the update by FrYGuY101 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If it bricks, the Dealer's going to be the one who has to replace it. As far as I look at it, it's zero risk, financially.

    Safety wise, it fixes a known bug.

    Take the update.

    --
    "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."

    - Seneca
    1. Re:Take the update by Goobermunch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A bug that you know about. If, by chance, you find yourself in an accident, and get sued, I doubt a jury is going to look kindly on the "I passed up on the fix for the known bug because I thought it might brick my car" defense. If you pass on the deal, you are essentially taking full responsibility for Toyota's bad code.

      That's not a good choice.

      --AC

  4. Re:yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Uh - if the dealership "bricks" your car by applying the update they will fix it for free. This question is just plain stupid - get the damn update. If something ever happens and you crash your car the first thing they will say is that you declined to apply their update and so they are not liable.