Re:The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat
by carlmr on Monday April 17, 2023 @05:55AM
(#35598677)
This is exactly my point. Also, even if there is a workaround, more often than not the complexity of the mountain of workarounds just creates the next set of certified bugs.
It's a valid point, but the solution is not obvious. It's a trade-off in a big design space. (Of course with software it seems "trivial" to make sure the certification can be done quickly and cheaply. Just automate it! Unfortunately we're not there yet. :/ )
See also this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35589690
Re:The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat
by bregma on Monday April 17, 2023 @02:01PM
(#35604239)
There is no safety-certified Linux. As far as I know there was no safety-certified QNX 6 either (QOS 1.0 was based on QNX 6.5 SP1, which is not the same as QNX 6 despite the numbers looking eerily similar).
With a safety-certified system, you do not receive a patch because it violates the safety certification. Of course, you can get a patch and use it but then you're responsible for safety-certifying the entire stack including the closed-source vendor code, and best of luck.
Re:The Red Hat model only worked for Red Hat
by murdoze on Wednesday April 19, 2023 @06:38AM
(#35626523)
Without this patch QNX was simply not usable, since it had a random race condition in the kernel, which just broke everything.
They have incorporated the patch into some QNX 6.5 version, but we had to deliver the product long before they did this.
It took me 9 months talking to them about this problem until I managed to reproduce it on just two nodes and half a page of code, and record kernel logs that clearly showed a race condition.
We have received a patched kernel in a few days, and it worked like that for a while. This fix was merged into the official release after almost two years.
After that - only Linux, where we can see and fix stuff. No proprietary code and bureaucracy, no "fast, robust and reliable" operating systems.