Is Linux Kernel Development Good Enough to Make Your Life Depend on It?
summary
Project OSADL SIL2LinuxMP presents concrete methods and tools to qualify Linux for IEC 61508 SIL2: hazard-driven decomposition yields 12 precise syscall constraints for open, assurance-driven selection favors simple purpose-built daemons over systemd, and CPU shielding isolates safety cores. Empirical analysis uses statistical models on 4.4/4.9 history (23M LOC, ~14k commits/release, ~90 bug fixes/week) and tools like patch impact tester and code minimization to estimate remaining bugs and maintain LTS kernels.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (20)
- 0:00Introduction
- 1:16Linux MP Project
- 3:31Overview
- 4:34Functional Safety
- 8:36System Architecture
- 10:33Notable Facts
- 12:52How can the Linux kernel cause physical injury
- 15:09How to assess an operating system
- 15:53What is HD3
- 18:41Assurance driven selection
- 21:09Software architecture
- 21:49Safety critical applications
- 22:00Analysis of the kernel
- 22:55Source code analysis
- 24:32Statistical Prediction Models
- 26:28Counter Arguments
- 27:11Improving the Linux Kernel
- 29:25Activities for Critical Systems
- 31:11Safety Critical Systems
- 32:44Kernel Analysis
related talks
09mAspects of Dependable Linux Systems
40mNVIDIA's Approach for Achieving ASIL B Qualified Linux
40mFinding the Best Way to Use Linux Kernel - Status Update
53mBridging Safety and Architecture: Zephyr’s Path To IEC 61508 Complian...
24mNVIDIA Approach for Achieving ASIL B Qualified Linux: minimizing expectations from up...
57mPanel Discussion: Super Long Term Kernel Maintenance
42mZephyr Functional Safety BOF
41mBoF: Embedded Linux Ecosystem