CELF Project Proposal - Feasibility analisys of Android introduction in a completely tested industrial device


Benjamin Zores <ben@...>
 

Raffaele Recalcati a écrit :
2009/12/28 Benjamin Zores <ben@...>:
Raffaele Recalcati a écrit :

Looking at

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux%2Fkernel%2Fgit%2Ftorvalds%2Flinux-2.6.git&a=search&h=HEAD&st=commit&s=android

my idea seems to be ... not very good at all !!

What do you think?
I'm not a kernel mainline developer so I don't understand the real meaning.
Basically, Android is a so hacked-up version of Linux it is hard to
maintain. Google has done some drivers and refused to maintain them or
make them follow upstream kernel so devs get frustrated, which is
legitimate imho.

Also, they have modified so many things in Linux (kernel + legacy
runtime environment), I'm surprised this OS received such a fame.

Ben
Thx Ben,
my original idea about Android was similar to yours.
But yours, I guess, is based to direct experience.
That's mostly what I've read on LWN.
I have no direct experience with Android so far.

Ben


recalcati
 

2009/12/28 Benjamin Zores <ben@...>:
Raffaele Recalcati a écrit :

Looking at

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux%2Fkernel%2Fgit%2Ftorvalds%2Flinux-2.6.git&a=search&h=HEAD&st=commit&s=android

my idea seems to be ... not very good at all !!

What do you think?
I'm not a kernel mainline developer so I don't understand the real meaning.
Basically, Android is a so hacked-up version of Linux it is hard to
maintain. Google has done some drivers and refused to maintain them or
make them follow upstream kernel so devs get frustrated, which is
legitimate imho.

Also, they have modified so many things in Linux (kernel + legacy
runtime environment), I'm surprised this OS received such a fame.

Ben
Thx Ben,
my original idea about Android was similar to yours.
But yours, I guess, is based to direct experience.
Anyway I think that Android's development environment is really nice,
so I'd like to know Tim opinion about my proposal.
I need to understand which is the best way to go on.
I could try to investigate Android introduction in a fully tested
industrial device, but I'm afraid to waste my precious time, and so I
could convert this work into an analisys of tools easy to use in order
to allow a normal developer to work on an embedded system.


_______________________________________________
Celinux-dev mailing list
Celinux-dev@...
http://tree.celinuxforum.org/mailman/listinfo/celinux-dev


--
www.opensurf.it


Benjamin Zores <ben@...>
 

Raffaele Recalcati a écrit :

Looking at
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux%2Fkernel%2Fgit%2Ftorvalds%2Flinux-2.6.git&a=search&h=HEAD&st=commit&s=android
my idea seems to be ... not very good at all !!
What do you think?
I'm not a kernel mainline developer so I don't understand the real meaning.
Basically, Android is a so hacked-up version of Linux it is hard to maintain. Google has done some drivers and refused to maintain them or
make them follow upstream kernel so devs get frustrated, which is legitimate imho.

Also, they have modified so many things in Linux (kernel + legacy runtime environment), I'm surprised this OS received such a fame.

Ben


recalcati
 

Raffaele Recalcati wrote:
2009/12/18 Raffaele Recalcati <lamiaposta71@...>:
Summary: Feasibility analisys of Android introduction in a completely
tested industrial device.

Description: By now Android has been ported to 600Mhz Cortex A8 cpu or similar.
The declared Android requirements are instead lower, about 200Mhz Arm9
cpu with 100Mhz Ram bus.
So I think the growing interest in this O.S. lacks some porting to
less powerful cpus.
The reasons to do this porting are commercial because of Google market
power, but are also technnical, because Android debugging environment
is very nice for not embedded developers.
This could help the diffusion of opensource embedded Linux.
This is interesting. Can you let me know if the focus of this work
is to experiment with the lower bounds of Android scalability, or
whether the focus is on Android use in industrial devices?

If the latter, than it would be good to hear more about what might
be needed to extend (or reduce :-) ) Android to fit this market.

I'll add a proposal for this, but I'd like to hear more to clarify
the proposal.

Thanks,
-- Tim

=============================
Tim Bird
Architecture Group Chair, CE Linux Forum
Senior Staff Engineer, Sony Corporation of America
=============================

Looking at

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux%2Fkernel%2Fgit%2Ftorvalds%2Flinux-2.6.git&a=search&h=HEAD&st=commit&s=android

my idea seems to be ... not very good at all !!

What do you think?
I'm not a kernel mainline developer so I don't understand the real meaning.
Below there is my new proposal, but before accepting it please hear
this new idea, that could be better and possible to be used also in
2.6.33 kernel:
"Adding to Maemo or Debian or Gentoo embedded systems a debugging
environment similar to Android: I mean the possibility to connect to a
single debugging "server" and, in a graphical very easy (Eclipse or QT
Creator) way, connecting the gdb to the desired process, or, see
rootfs, or tracing cpu usage, ..."
What I really like of Android is the fantastique environment, with the
emulator that can do step by step debugging....


---------------------------------------------------------
Summary: Feasibility analisys of Android introduction in a completely
tested industrial device.

Description: Android is a new important graphic interface and a java
virtual machine optimized for
embedded devices.
The Android breaking feature in respect of traditional GNU Linux
embedded operating systems has
discouraged the possibility to enhance an already existing GNU Linux
embedded industrial device
with at least the Android's graphic interface.

By now Android has been fully ported to Cortex A8 cpus starting new
mobile phone projects from
scratch.
The reasons to do this work are commercial because of Google market
power, but are also technical,
because Android debugging environment is very nice for not embedded developers.
This could help the diffusion of opensource embedded GNU Linux in a
wider point of view.

The work should be maybe against the 2.6.31 kernel.
The idea is to preserve industrial tested development but adding
Android graphical interface and
debugging features.
The cpu dependency of the porting will be as small as possible.
The most important kernel interfaces will be investigated, at least
framebuffer for tft lcd,
touchscreen, audio ac97 interface, usb host for usb pen.

Related work:
* Android Porting - http://www.kandroid.org/<wbr></wbr>android_pdk/
* Android Pxa270 - http://android-pxa270.sourceforge.net/

Scope:
This should take more than 1 month for feasibility analysis.
------------------------------------------------------

--
www.opensurf.it


Tim Bird <tim.bird@...>
 

Raffaele Recalcati wrote:
2009/12/18 Raffaele Recalcati <lamiaposta71@...>:
Summary: Feasibility analisys of Android introduction in a completely
tested industrial device.

Description: By now Android has been ported to 600Mhz Cortex A8 cpu or similar.
The declared Android requirements are instead lower, about 200Mhz Arm9
cpu with 100Mhz Ram bus.
So I think the growing interest in this O.S. lacks some porting to
less powerful cpus.
The reasons to do this porting are commercial because of Google market
power, but are also technnical, because Android debugging environment
is very nice for not embedded developers.
This could help the diffusion of opensource embedded Linux.
This is interesting. Can you let me know if the focus of this work
is to experiment with the lower bounds of Android scalability, or
whether the focus is on Android use in industrial devices?

If the latter, than it would be good to hear more about what might
be needed to extend (or reduce :-) ) Android to fit this market.

I'll add a proposal for this, but I'd like to hear more to clarify
the proposal.

Thanks,
-- Tim

=============================
Tim Bird
Architecture Group Chair, CE Linux Forum
Senior Staff Engineer, Sony Corporation of America
=============================


alucero@...
 

I'm more interested in the debugging part based on QEMU than in Android but I can see the importance Android is going to have in the future.

I have been using QEMU for some embedded projects and for linux embedded teaching. Having a wider micro/cpu coverage plus devices with QEMU would be a great thing.

At this point I'm working in a QEMU port and I'd like to contribute in the general effort to have QEMU as a main tool for embedded Linux.

Raffaele Recalcati <lamiaposta71@...> ha escrito:

2009/12/18 Raffaele Recalcati <lamiaposta71@...>:
Summary: Feasibility analisys of Android introduction in a completely
tested industrial device.

Description: By now Android has been ported to 600Mhz Cortex A8 cpu or similar.
The declared Android requirements are instead lower, about 200Mhz Arm9
cpu with 100Mhz Ram bus.
So I think the growing interest in this O.S. lacks some porting to
less powerful cpus.
The reasons to do this porting are commercial because of Google market
power, but are also technnical, because Android debugging environment
is very nice for not embedded developers.
This could help the diffusion of opensource embedded Linux.

The porting will be maybe against the 2.6.31 kernel for pxa270.
The idea is to preserve industrial tested development but adding
Android graphical interface.

The cpu dependency of the porting will be as small as possible.

Related work:
 * Android Porting - http://www.kandroid.org/<wbr></wbr>android_pdk/
 * Android Pxa270 - http://android-pxa270.sourceforge.net/

Scope:
This should take more than 1 month for feasibility analysis.


--

Anybody can give me his idea about this proposal?
Thx

Bye,
Recalcati
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


recalcati
 

2009/12/18 Raffaele Recalcati <lamiaposta71@...>:
Summary: Feasibility analisys of Android introduction in a completely
tested industrial device.

Description: By now Android has been ported to 600Mhz Cortex A8 cpu or similar.
The declared Android requirements are instead lower, about 200Mhz Arm9
cpu with 100Mhz Ram bus.
So I think the growing interest in this O.S. lacks some porting to
less powerful cpus.
The reasons to do this porting are commercial because of Google market
power, but are also technnical, because Android debugging environment
is very nice for not embedded developers.
This could help the diffusion of opensource embedded Linux.

The porting will be maybe against the 2.6.31 kernel for pxa270.
The idea is to preserve industrial tested development but adding
Android graphical interface.

The cpu dependency of the porting will be as small as possible.

Related work:
 * Android Porting - http://www.kandroid.org/<wbr></wbr>android_pdk/
 * Android Pxa270 - http://android-pxa270.sourceforge.net/

Scope:
This should take more than 1 month for feasibility analysis.


--

Anybody can give me his idea about this proposal?
Thx

Bye,
Recalcati


recalcati
 

Summary: Feasibility analisys of Android introduction in a completely
tested industrial device.

Description: By now Android has been ported to 600Mhz Cortex A8 cpu or similar.
The declared Android requirements are instead lower, about 200Mhz Arm9
cpu with 100Mhz Ram bus.
So I think the growing interest in this O.S. lacks some porting to
less powerful cpus.
The reasons to do this porting are commercial because of Google market
power, but are also technnical, because Android debugging environment
is very nice for not embedded developers.
This could help the diffusion of opensource embedded Linux.

The porting will be maybe against the 2.6.31 kernel for pxa270.
The idea is to preserve industrial tested development but adding
Android graphical interface.

The cpu dependency of the porting will be as small as possible.

Related work:
* Android Porting - http://www.kandroid.org/<wbr></wbr>android_pdk/
* Android Pxa270 - http://android-pxa270.sourceforge.net/

Scope:
This should take more than 1 month for feasibility analysis.


--
www.opensurf.it