Automotive Grade Linux Launches New Expert Group Led by Toyota

https://www.automotivelinux.org/announcements/ospo_eg/

by teleforce • 2 years ago

74 54 2 years ago

dgfitz2• 2 years ago

Is this like the Linux nvidia driver package? Totally open source, except for the interesting parts?

The AGL distribution is more like an SDK, as it's a fork of Yocto embedded Linux which focusses on building/cross-compiling to a specified target architecture and creating the firmware images.

I guess the difference of AGL is that they implemented kernel mods so that they can guarantee ASIL-A/B/C/D spec compliant behavior which was the deal breaker when vendors were considering an RT Linux kernel over e.g. QNX (which focusses heavily on ISO 26262 compliance).

dgfitz2• 2 years ago

I am quite familiar with yocto, I did not realize that it was the toolchain used. Thank you for the information.

I should write a blog about yocto sometime, I have many thoughts.

metalliqaz• 2 years ago

Am I the only one who hears "Software Defined Vehicles" and thinks, "wow, these companies really have entirely lost touch with what everyday people need and/or want" ?

Glyptodon• 2 years ago

I'm half convinced the right company could make a decent hybrid small or tiny vehicle (like Fiat 500 size or Mini size at most) for under $15k given Ford apparently was or is fine making hybrid Mavericks for like $26k and only raised the price because dealers and lack of competitive forces. Though the prices of three wheelers (often more than a Maverick) suggest maybe I'm wrong.

jillesvangurp• 2 years ago

Where's the fun in that when consumers happily pay twice as much? There's no question you can make decent cars under 10K$. There are lots of those on the market in China. Most of them are pure electric of course because they are good enough, super simple to build, and inherently cheaper to make than anything hybrid. If you are competing on price, cutting cost like that is what you do.

nickserv2• 2 years ago

Fiat 500 and Mini Cooper are certainly not tiny. I mean the originals from the 70's yeah but the new ones are huge and bloated in comparison.

Anyway such tiny vehicles do exist in Europe and Asia. The Citroën Ami (the new EV one) comes to mind in Europe, where it's had some success, but is still kinda expensive for what it is.

gessha• 2 years ago

Those cars already exist, look at all the cars produced for the Indian market.

Dalewyn• 2 years ago

Considering Windows and then iOS were smashing surprise success stories, vehicles defined by software probably is barking up the right tree.

The problem is whether the barking is effective.

cyberax• 2 years ago

No, people actually want feature-rich vehicles. Pretty much nobody outside of corporate actors is buying "bare" cars.

And software doesn't actually cost that much. Just look at the Chinese market.

bboygravity2• 2 years ago

I don't think that's necesairily true for HN people?

I regularly get mind-blown by the number of anti-features of modern cars v.s. my 32 y/o Camry.

Some that come to mind: no physical buttons, no right/possibility to repair the car yourself, can't replace the car stereo by something else, extremely slow unusable navigation systems even in 2024 models (I just use my smartphone and put it where the screen would be in a modern car), beeping when not wearing seatbelt even at 5 km/hr on a parking lot, data plans/simcards to enable car spyware, extremely expensive tires with (broken) pressure sensors in them, headlights made of plastic instead of glass that get ugly after a couple of years, use of rusting materials instead of aluminum for body, active suspension systems that are extremely expensive to service, tons of unnecessary electronics that will break as the car gets slightly older and extremely expensive to service. I could go on and on.

HdS842• 2 years ago

I am mostly concerned by the ongoing maintenance cost of software. Cars live 20,30 years - how to keep the software running and in good condition? Foss is no solution, especially due to regulations (totally warranted, I want your car to have working braking systems...) and that this also involves systems at the producers.

silisili• 2 years ago

I don't believe this at all. I followed the Maverick for a while when it came out, not for me, but interesting strategy.

The vast majority wanted the baseline, barebones. However, Ford produced the least of these, and gave people 1 year lag times.

Most people who bought higher models did so begrudgingly. Yet Ford will claim higher sales on these upper models, so obviously "what the consumer wanted."

toast0• 2 years ago

Sure, nobody buys bare cars. But you can't buy them when nobody sells them.

Selling them through fleet programs only doesn't really count.

I recently purchased an 1981 Vanagon, and it's made me happier than any car I purchased new. It's not without a computer... it does have electronic fuel injection, but I think that's mostly a lookup table of pulse length given airflow and temperature. There's an aftermarket replacement if it goes bad (but let's hope it doesn't).

globular-toast• 2 years ago

What people want is to not drive at all. People detest driving, they're just not able to see any alternative. If people really wanted feature rich vehicles then they'd relish traffic jams as they'd get to spend more time in their car. But instead it's torturous and drives people insane.

Lanolderen• 2 years ago

Dacias are popular where I am and they are pretty simple. Cheap, light, durable and with the main extras (AC, backup/multiple cams and Android Auto/Carplay). People want feature- rich cars in the sense that everyone would 1:1 trade their Sandero for a W223 and they probably won't watch YT videos of Sanderos much but price/performance is a large factor.

froh5• 2 years ago

imnsho it's a shiny misnomer for software dependent vehicle. cars today need software as much as they need a drive train and wheels.

broknbottle• 2 years ago

Soon kubernetes will be running on a Toyota Prius near you

toppy• 2 years ago

F-16 aircraft is doing it already: https://thenewstack.io/how-the-u-s-air-force-deployed-kubern...

wiseowise• 2 years ago

The moment where I had to scroll up to see if this was posted on 1st of April.

supriyo-biswas• 2 years ago

We're already doing that: https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/running-containers-cars

fulafel• 2 years ago

That's just Podman.

andrewstuart2• 2 years ago

Honestly you might be surprised how similar to a small homelab a modern/near future day vehicle really is.

Source: currently working at VWAG.

bboygravity2• 2 years ago

What's a small homelab?

jeffreygoesto• 2 years ago

Yipp. It's obviously cool to swap out a 5GB pod to get three more vehicle signals...

Green-Man• 2 years ago

Kollege, I can't agree with that. I feel you are talking about middle to far future :)

Maakuth• 2 years ago

I went through the list of open source licences in my VW ID and was pleasantly surprised that bash-completion is included. So when I gain shell in my car, I should be able to use tab completion! These lists are often quite interesting.

mmooss3• 2 years ago

When does market competitors collaborating on FOSS become anti-competitive, collusion, etc.?

If Apple and Google collaborated on a FOSS smartphone OS that both used, that would seem obviously illegal. What if the collaborated on the kernel only? What about the screen UI only? In a way that seems worse, but engineering-wise it's less significant than the kernel. A security subsystem? Some drivers? Keyboards?

I'm not sure how that applies to these automakers. While none of Apple's or Google's market power, as far as I know, and while an OS is less significant to a car than it is to a smartphone, possibly, I'd be surprised if they all can ship cars with the same OS. Where and how is the line drawn?

lvturner2• 2 years ago

Would it? Especially as it's FOSS - rising ship raises all tides and all that.

If it was behind closed doors, then yes.

(Usual IANAL a lawyer disclaimer, and I don't mean my comment to shoot yours down - think there is merit in further discussion here!)

mmooss3• 2 years ago

Especially as it's FOSS - rising ship raises all tides and all that.

That's anti-competitive, at least in many ways. I doubt Ford could freely give GM some highly profitable technology to help GM's profits; Ford should maximize its advantage. OTOH, there are industry standards - but those could be defined by performance or they could possibly be for (non-competitive?) aspects like safety.

mistercheph• 2 years ago

Competitors collaboratively building industry standard tools in the open and sharing them freely with all marketplace participants new or existing is the opposite of anti competitive collusion where established market players collaborate to prevent new market entrants.

nickserv2• 2 years ago

If it would allow other manufacturers to use the software in their own vehicles, meaning truly open source, it's the opposite of anticompetitive behavior.

I could see some of the newer, much smaller electric vehicle manufacturers taking advantage of the software.

Hilift2• 2 years ago

I think both Microsoft and Redhat can contribute to Linux kernel without it becoming an issue of unfair competition.

jeffwass• 2 years ago

If Apple and Google collaborated on a FOSS smartphone OS that both used, that would seem obviously illegal.

Not sure why this would be “obviously” illegal. For example - Intel, IBM, Compaq, Microsoft and others collaborated to design the USB port standard. It’s an open standard, any of their competitors is free to use it.

unwind• 2 years ago

Well, kinda, there are still fees for things like the right to use the various USB logos and of course to allocate a vendor ID [1] ($3,500 for two years, and $6,000 respectively).

[1] https://www.usb.org/getting-vendor-id

froh5• 2 years ago

the problem never is doing things together. the problem always is hampering markets, hampering others.

How do you envision to hamper third parties with FOSS?

and do you mean FOSS, as in copyleft? or OSS as in OSI compliant?

With either, how do you think you can block third parties?

mmooss3• 2 years ago

the problem never is doing things together. the problem always is hampering markets, hampering others.

As far as I know, market participants, especially large ones, must compete; they can't choose not to compete. Otherwise they hurt consumers and economic growth, and can create a barrier for new market entrants.

p0w3n3d2• 2 years ago

Out of context, I rembember someone creating cloud architecture (kubernetes etc) to emulate 8-bit NES/Atari, or something like that. It was really funny... Especially because CPU ticks were requests

Nextgrid• 2 years ago

Someone needs to make an x86 version of it and then run Kubernetes on it.

p0w3n3d2• 2 years ago

I've found it! https://blog.davetcode.co.uk/post/21st-century-emulator/

In 1974 when the 8080 was released it achieved a staggering 2MHz. Our new modern, containerised, cloud first design doesn’t quite achieve that in it’s initial iteration. As can be seen from the screenshot above, space invaders as deployed onto an AKS cluster runs at ~1KHz which gives us ample time for debugging

I wonder how much does it cost to run a space invaders game on AWS

Hilift2• 2 years ago

Translation: We have a new caste of operating system user. First there were regular users. Then there were mobile users. Now we have automobile users, which are similar to the second case, except due to driving are even more defenseless against advertisements with malware payloads, captive popup dialogs, and drop down lists you don't want that take up 30% of the display.

Automotive Grade Linux Launches New Expert Group Led by Toyota

Related Stories