Bernd Petrovitsch wrote: > If you "develop" an embedded system (which is partly system integration > of existing apps) to be installed in the field, you don't have that many > conceivable work loads compared to a desktop/server system. And you have > a fixed list of drivers and applications. Hah! Not in my line of embedded device. 32MB no-MMU ARM boards which people run new things and attach new devices to rather often - without making new hardware. Volume's too low per individual application to get new hardware designed and made. I'm seriously thinking of forwarding porting the 4 year old firmware from 2.4.26 to 2.6.current, just to get new drivers and capabilities. Backporting is tedious, so's feeling wretchedly far from the mainline world. > A usual approach is to run stress tests on several (or all) > subsystems/services/... in parallel and if the device survives it > functioning correctly, it is at least good enough. Per application. Some little devices run hundreds of different applications and customers expect to customise, script themselves, and attach different devices (over USB). The next customer in the chain expects the bits you supplied to work in a variety of unexpected situations, even when you advise that it probably won't do that. Much like desktop/server Linux, but on a small device where silly little things like 'create a process' are a stress for the dear little thing. (My biggest lesson: insist on an MMU next time!) -- Jamie -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
