Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a Samsung TV with connected via optical output to my DTS sound system.TV has ARM CPU and an embedded linux operating system. It comes with an embedded media player.But internal media player doesn't pass DTS audio to my sound system. it only passes-though AC3 and other formats. I want to hack TV's firmware to pass-though DTS audio to my sound system.
What are the books, learning resources etc. to start this kind of hobby project ? I have never programmed on embedded platform. What should I know before the start ? For example Should I know audio programming, electronics, Linux Kernel, C Programming ? Any recommendation would be helpful.
Actually there is a whole dedicated sourceforge project related to firmware hacking on Samsung TVs called SamyGO. But When I asked one of main firmware hacker in this site, I didn't get a reply from him. So I thougth someone here can answer to my question.Thanks..
UPDATE :
How much electronics knowledge should I have for this kind of job ? (I have a C.S degree and basic knowledge about electronics, logic design etc.). Should I be a linux kernel or C expert ?
Actually I have always wondered how embedded device hackers like George Hotz gain this kind of knowledge.Because it is a closed system, they don't have any documentation, how can they do this? Do they learn it from school?(I don't think so). If they do, What do they study? Which books do they use? If they don't, how ?
I came across this excellent blog post on Reverse engineering firmware for Linksys router,
http://www.devttys0.com/2011/05/reverse-engineering-firmware-linksys-wag120n/
It explains in detail how to reverse engineer the firmware, get to the file system in clear steps. If you can follow through the steps, you would get a really good insight into what it takes to hack a firmware.
I don't think you require lot of electronics knowledge to hack a firmware, basic 101 level knowledge would suffice. If you understand basic OS and systems in general then you should be able to work your way through.
Hacking an undocumented system is nowhere a trivial task. You definitively should learn C and practice embedded programming and a good knowledge about electronics will help a lot (you'll have to look at the circuit and guess how it works, if you can't find any docs on google).
My advice is: get some (documented) ARM board to start hacking on (beagleboard/pandaboard comes to mind). You'll learn a lot about Linux, C, Kernel development and even electronics if you want to.
Trying to dive directly on a TV system will probably be very frustrating for you.
UPDATE:
At the electronics side, you don't need to be an electronic engineer. Study a lot of digital electronics and understand how CPU's, buses and commom peripherals work. Most of the time you can look at any chip code and search for it datasheet, but sometimes they're designed specially for one device, or have no identification at all. In this case, you'll need a logic analyzer to reverse engineer it and try to understand how to "talk" to it.
You can learn CS and electronics from books, but real reverse engineering can only be learnt by experience (of course, learning how others do things helps a lot).
Go on and open devices you find interesting, try to understand how they work and change things on it. You'll for sure burn some of them (begin with the cheaper ones), but it's the best way to learn how to hack devices.
Just take care to not die while messing with high voltage devices (and LCD TV do have some HV parts)
Suitable development boards to consider, with very active communities, i.e. easy to get help if you are stuck :-)
http://www.arduino.cc/
http://beagleboard.org/
Start with them to learn about embedded systems, before you move on the more difficult tasks
Yes,C language knowledge is important.
First try and learn Raspberry Pi then jump into Adruino.
You could find so many communities for these in facebook and google plus join and involve yourself.
Then you can learn so many hacks
Related
I need to develope a NFC chipset evaluation tool. i need to connect the NFC board (that includes the NFC chip) to PC (running in Windows). then i need to get all the data of the chip to my PC using a software tool. this is the first time i am trying to do it. i need some advises regarding the first steps. i suppose, i would use a TCP-IP protocol to connect with the chipset. but how exactly it would work? for example, there is a USB-tester... http://www.vconsole.com/client/?page=page&id=13. my tool will be similar to this.
i also need to validate in the low level entry, for the framework.
i need to have a process description for the development of the tool. what are the steps?
thanks for your advices.
You cannot use TCP/IP over a USB/I2C connection. Most test boards come with software that you can use to connect to the board. What you are asking is a very broad question. If you are trying to write your own question, or hook it up to Excel to run tests with, you are progressing down a very time consuming path. People here are willing to help you figure out a question you are stuck on, but not to do all the hard work for you.
Like I said, you are starting on a BIG project, and will need to research A LOT. Then I'd recommend asking specific questions rather than very general questions.
As far as where to start, I'd start by writing down everything you want to know, and then start figuring out how to get each individual piece.
was wondering - if knowing The Linux way of life or the Linux architecture, would give a better frame of mind for programming on embedded devices especially when they have some kind of OS in them.
Just want to be sure that I did not miss a major thing :)
Note:
I come from a windows background, can program in C and C++.
Passionate and finally want to get started into Embedded programming. I would like to start by doing typical hobbyists project at home.
It would be nice if anyone would also comment on BeagleBoard as a starting point for me.
"Embedded" is a fuzzy word. There are two categories:
There are realtime embedded systems: microcontroller/microprocessor applications that are intimately communicating directly with the hardware on a low abstraction level. Typical applications are control systems/automation, industrial, automotive, medtech, household electronics, data/telecom communications etc.
And then there are fluffy embedded systems: various laptop:ish computers, embedded linux, embedded windows, phones and phoney operative systems, anything involving internet, human-machine intefaces etc.
People working in both categories will firmly state that they are working with embedded systems, while the latter kind are often just doing another flavour of desktop applications. Depending on which category you are aiming for, Linux may or may not be a merit. The telecom branch for example, overlaps both of these categories, and they are often using embedded Linux even for non-fluffy applications.
In either case, *nix may be used as the development platform, so knowing it won't hurt.
Yes and no. Mostly yes.
Lundin correctly described the "two worlds of embedded" (although the border between them is very fuzzy).
If you're writing for "higher embedded", like Android, or other devices that run Linux, then definitely expert knowledge of Linux will be of much help. You still need to know some "bare bones" and don't get scared when you see the likes of &=~ operator in C, but knowing Linux - the Linux of the old, where you configured stuff by editing files in /etc, where you compiled your own kernels for everyday use, where you would build software from tarballs, that's what helps. Knowing modern Linux - Gnome, gconf-editor, Synaptic and the likes will not be of much help.
Then next, if you're programming devices without OS, in the middle area - fast and strong enough to run C programs, but not the OS, you still need Linux. Because crosscompile. You don't need actual Linux. Cygwin is okay for that. MinGW may suffice. Still, you will probably need to be able to build your own crosscompiler (based on GCC), linker, debugger, make tools, and the rest of "backbone" of the IDE. Unless your chip supplier is awesome and provides a complete toolchain with IDE.
Only when you're into tiny processors, you don't need Linux. Stuff like car alarm remote, christmas lights blinker, car tire pressure sensor, battery level monitor - stuff that can have 16 bytes RAM, 1KB EEPROM, and the rest of CPU to match, you will need to use an IDE that works with this CPU, no OS, no C compiler, nothing remotely close to Linux - the IDE will most likely be Windows based.
I'd say you really do not need to know Linux for embedded programming. Many companies developing embedded software do it on windows and have no contact with other OS.
But sure, knowing more makes you more versatile, and general knowledge makes you a better engineer. This includes different OS as many other things.
When it comes to BeagleBoard, it depends on the kind of application you are interested in.
If you want to understand the low-level, I would start on a simpler processor and learn how to use peripherals, hardware interrupts, debouncing signals... There is an educational point in doing this yourself some time.
I suppose you can also skip that and start with an ARM-A8 and possibly an embedded OS, it's just not the path I followed.
What I am about to say may cause a flame war, but...
I have found that Linux is a much more productive development environment than Windows. At my previous job, we were developing firmware for managed switches and industrial automation equipment, which ran an embedded Linux operating system. All the developers had both Windows and Linux boxes, as the user interface software only ran on Windows. We all used Linux for developing, though, as it was simply easier.
At my current job, the only choice is to run Windows, but to make it more productive we are running Cygwin, which provides a Linux-like environment. It is very difficult to develop software on Windows that is not specifically for Windows.
As for developing for an embedded system without an OS... I have an Arduino that I play with occasionally. I have programmed it both from Windows and Linux, and have found the experiences fairly similar. Using Arduino's own tools, Windows seems to run a bit more smoothly, but if you want to hack on it and make something interesting, you're better off using Linux.
Personally (and this will likely provoke some nasty comments), I feel that Linux is best for doing productive work, and Windows is best for playing games.
So basically, this all boils down to this: Try using Linux for developing your project. You will probably find it to be a much smoother, more productive experience. If you don't like it, you don't have to keep using it. But the experience will probably be worth it.
Edit (due to question rewording): Knowing the "Linux way of life" is unlikely to help much when coding for an embedded project that is not running Linux itself. As I understand it, the Unix philosophy is about two main issues:
Each tool should do one thing and do it well (don't make something that tries to be everything).
Whenever possible, data should be plain text (allows for simple piping through processes and searching for content).
If you are working on a system without an operating system, you are writing code for a compiler and not likely working with a full shell at any point. You also are unlike to have any sort of file system. So both of these points are moot; you are not likely to gain anything concretely related to embedded programming by studying Linux, although it certainly couldn't hurt :-)
I really think if you want to learn a little about embedded sphere you should not start by using an OS directly. Prefer to have hands on a small low level project then add an OS if it's really needed for your final application.
I don't think setting up an OS into an embedded device will be easier than starting from scratch. It will bring you some functionalities (that I am not sure you really need to learn embedded) but it will bring you lot of hard debugging time in case of problems in the OS port.
I have been doing embedded programming for 10 years, currently for networking equipment and before that Apache helicopters. Both companies had POSIX-like operating systems on the target, but not embedded Linux directly. My current company uses mostly Windows for individual developer environments. However, we do have a few Linux boxes hanging around for special purposes. My previous company used a mix of Windows and Sun Solaris Unix. So wherever you go, you may not use Unix or Linux on your day to day computer, but you are likely to come across it at least occasionally.
On the other hand, I've known developers who have programmed on Linux for embedded Linux targets their entire careers. It really depends on the company, as smaller or newer companies have a tendency to use Linux more than corporations. However, using embedded forms of Windows on targets is very rare in my experience. I know devices are out there, but I've never personally met a developer who worked on one.
Anyway, Linux is free to use and has other benefits besides being good for a job. There's really no downside to giving it a try for a couple of months, other than giving up some of your time.
Linux is growing in embedded... see latest research:
Top 10 trends for the embedded software and tools market in 2011 - VDC research
Android Becomes Number One in U.S. Smartphone Market Share
Knowing the Linux way of life will definitely be a plus in embedded domain provided the kind of apps you are interested in are contained in the above mentioned links.
understanding Linux architecture will be over kill (although basic overview is good) before just starting in embedded field
e.g. to cut a tree you don't have to invent an axe - just start using one, then gradually you could learn to sharpen the axe
Its better to get started small - get hands-on, and focus on specific areas as is the need of the hour. grow with your work and work keeping your goals in mind
you will surely gain much faster and not get stuck in self loop - R&D to do R&D ;)
Only if you want to embed Linux! And as an embedded systems developer of some 22 years, I would suggest that Linux is unsuitable and unnecessary for a very large proportion of embedded systems projects.
Understanding the workings of an RTOS, and real-time priority based pre-emptive scheduling and IPC mechanisms would stand you in better stead. Take a look at this for example.
I was recently elected programming team lead for my community college's engineering club. We're going to put a solar panel on a roof. The programming part involves
Controlling servos to adjust the orientation of the panel
Sending data on the electricity collected by the panel to a server (we haven't decided whether we want this to be via a wired or wireless connection.)
Although I know a fair amount about programming in general, I know next to nothing about networking or microcontrollers.
Can you recommend any books I can read to familiarize myself with these topics? Is there an obvious choice of programming language and library for either domain? Any linux man pages I should read? I'm actually not sure whether the computer we'll put on the roof will be running Linux or Windows. So I'd appreciate recommendations for both OS's.
Will Beej's guide to network programming
http://beej.us/guide/bgnet/
be useful, or is it only for internet applications and not local networks? Is there software that operates at a higher level than sockets that I should use instead?
If nothing else, give me some non-obvious keywords I can use to search on Google.
I'd look at the arduino platform, it's a very simple platform for building things exactly like this on top of it: http://arduino.cc
And from Wikipedia
Arduino is a physical computing platform based on a simple open hardware design for a single-board microcontroller, with embedded I/O support and a standard programming language.1 The Arduino programming language is based on Wiring and is essentially C/C++ (several simple transformations are performed before passing to avr-gcc).[2] The goal of the Arduino project is to make tools available that are accessible, low-cost, low capital investment, flexible and easy-to-use for artists and hobbyists. Particularly those who might not otherwise have access to more sophisticated controllers that require more complicated tools.[3]
because that ethernet is popular, so i suggest that design layer 2 as ethernet type.
for physical layer and wireless or wired, there're so many datasheet and specification samples and design guides which you could found at http://developer.intel.com and http://software.intel.com, both chips level or drivers level. enjoy that.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
Now I'm sure we're all well aware of the relative merits of Linux vs Windows Desktop. However I've heard much less about the world of embedded development. I'm mainly interested in solutions for industry and am therefore uninterested about the IPhone or Android and more interested in these two OSes.
What are the relative trade-offs between the two platforms in the embedded world? If you were considering building a box for a specific project with custom hardware, a partially customised OS and a custom app then which would you choose and why?
I would assume that Windows CE wins on tools and Linux wins on both cost and possibly performance. However this is just utter speculation. Does anyone have any facts or experience of the two?
I worked for several years at a company that provided both CE and Linux for all of their hardware, so I'm fairly familiar with both sides of this equation.
Tools: Windows CE tools certainly are better than those provided by Linux, though the linux tools are certainly getting better.
Performance: Windows CE is real-time. Linux is not. The linux kernel is not designed for determinism at all. There are extensions that you can add to get sort-of real time, but CE beats it.
Cost: This is an area of great misunderstanding. My general experience is that CE is lower cost out of the box ($1k for Platform Builder and as low as $3 per device for a shipping runtime. "What?" you ask? "Linux is free." Well, not really so much, especially in the embedded arena. Yes, there are free distributions like Debian. But there are plenty of pieces that you might need that aren't in that free category. UI frameworks like QT, Java runtimes and media codecs just as a start. Also, most Linux distributions with a commercially-backed support system (e.g. MontaVista) are far from free.
Source Availability: Linux proponents may like to say that CE is a bad choice due to lack of source code. All I can say is that in over a decade of working with CE, half of which spent doing custom kernel and driver work for custom boards, I've only ever had need for source that didn't ship with CE (they ship a vast majority of it) once. I like having source too, but Microsoft provides support, so in the rare case you might think you need that source, you can get them to fix the problem (the one time we needed source, Microsoft provided a fix, and for free - which is their model under CE.
Does this mean that CE wins every time? No. I wouldn't suggest that at all. If you are a Linux shop and you have lots of Linux experience and code assets, you'd be foolish to run out and go CE. However, if you're coming into it from scratch CE usually has a lower TCO. Developers with Win32/C# experience are more prevalent and consequently less expensive. You also get a lot more "in the box" with CE than most other distributions, meaning faster time to market if you don't already have these things done in-house already.
I'll speak for the Linux side, at least for the category of software I'm familiar with (which is RF data collection equipment). Or industrial apps vs. consumer apps.
Windows CE (and its associated tools) IMH fairly recent E) is strongly biased to creating a "Windows Experience" on a small screen. The user input mode emphasizes mouse-like actions. Logons, application selection, etc. all try to be as similar to standard Windows as possible.
If a user is driving a lift truck, or filling a picking cart, or moving material from one place to another, there's a problem.
And it's a moving target - particularly on the .NET side. The Compact .NET runtime is seriously handicapped, and important libraries (like networking, data handling, and UI) are incomplete and versions too often deprecate the previous version. . CE seems to be the stepchild in the Windows family (possibly because there's not a lot of active competition selling to the hardware integrators.)
A nice stable rows-and-columns Linux console is a pretty handy context for many (in my experience most) high-use apps on a dinky screen.
Not much good for games on your cell-phone or Zune, though.
NOTE:
I think ctacke probably speaks accurately for the hardware integrator's side. I'm more aligned with the players further down the pipe - software integrators and users.
Choice is often made largely on perception and culture, rather than concrete data. And, making a choice based on concrete data is difficult when you consider the complexity of a modern OS, all the issues associated with porting it to custom hardware, and unknown future requirements. Even from an application perspective, things change over the life of a project. Requirements come and go. You find yourself doing things you never thought you would, especially if they are possible. The ubiquitous USB and network ports open a lot of possibilities -- for example adding Cell modem support or printer support. Flash based storage makes in-field software updates the standard mode of operation. And in the end, each solution has its strengths and weaknesses -- there is no magic bullet that is the best in all cases.
When considering Embedded Linux development, I often use the iceberg analogy; what you see going into a project is the part above the water. These are the pieces your application interacts with, drivers you need to customize, the part you understand. The other 90% is under water, and herein lies a great deal of variability. Quality issues with drivers or not being able to find a driver for something you may want to support in the future can easily swamp known parts of the project. There are very few people who have a lot of experience with both WinCE and Linux solutions, hence the tendency to go with what is comfortable (or what managers are comfortable with), or what we have experience with. Below are thoughts on a number of aspects to consider:
SYSTEM SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT
Questions in this realm include CPU support, driver quality, in field software updates, filesystem support, driver availability, etc. One of the changes that has happened in the past two years, is CPU vendors are now porting Linux to their new chips as the first OS. Before, the OS porting was typically done by Linux software companies such as MontaVista, or community efforts. As a result, the Linux kernel now supports most mainstream embedded cpus with few additional patches. This is radically different than the situation 5 years ago. Because many people are using the same source code, issues get fixed, and often are contributed back to the mainstream source. With WinCE, the BSP/driver support tends to be more of a reference implementation, and then OEM/users take it, fix any issues, and that is where the fixes tend to stay.
From a system perspective, it is very important to consider flexibility for future needs. Just because it is not a requirement now does not mean it will not be a requirement in the future. Obtaining driver support for a peripheral may be nearly impossible, or be too large an effort to make it practical.
Most people give very little thought to the build system, or never look much beyond the thought that "if there is a nice gui wrapped around the tool, it must be easy". OpenEmbedded is very popular way to build embedded Linux products, and has recently been endorsed as the technology base of MontaVista's Linux 6 product, and is generally considered "hard to use" by new users. While WinCE build tools look simpler on the surface (the 10% above water), you still have the problem of what happens when I need to customize something, implement complex features such as software updates, etc. To build a production system with production grade features, you still need someone on your team who understands the OS and can work at the detail level of both the operating system, and the build system. With either WinCE or Embedded Linux, this generally means companies either need to have experienced developers in house, or hire experts to do portions of the system software development. System software development is not the same as application development, and is generally not something you want to take on with no experience unless you have a lot of time. It is quite common for companies to hire expert help for the first couple projects, and then do follow-on projects in-house. Another feature to consider is parallel build support. With quad core workstations becoming the standard, is it a big deal that a full build can be done in 1.2 hours versus 8? How flexible is the build system at pulling and building source code from various sources such as diverse revision control systems, etc.
Embedded processors are becoming increasingly complex. It is no longer good enough to just have the cpu running. If you consider the OMAP3 cpu family from TI, then you have to ask the following questions: are there libraries available for the 3D acceleration engine, and can I even get them without being committing to millions of units per year? Is there support for the DSP bridge? What is the cost of all this? On a recent project I was involved in, a basic WinCE BSP for the Atmel AT91SAM9260 cost $7000. In terms of developer time, this is not much, but you have to also consider the on-going costs of maintenance, upgrading to new versions of the operating system, etc.
APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT
Both Embedded Linux and WinCE support a range of application libraries and programming languages. C and C++ are well supported. Most business type applications are moving to C# in the WinCE world. Linux has Mono, which provides extensive support for .NET technologies and runs very well in embedded Linux systems. There are numerous Java development environments available for Embedded Linux. One area where you do run into differences is graphics libraries. Generally the Microsoft graphical APIs are not well supported on Linux, so if you have a large application team that are die-hard windows GUI programmers, then perhaps WinCE makes sense. However, there are many options for GUI toolkits that run on both Windows PCs and Embedded Linux devices. Some examples include GTK+, Qt, wxWidgets, etc. The Gimp is an example of a GTK+ application that runs on windows, plus there are many others. The are C# bindings to GTK+ and Qt. Another feature that seems to be coming on strong in the WinCE space is the Windows Communication Foundation (WCF). But again, there are projects to bring WCF to Mono, depending what portions you need. Embedded Linux support for scripting languages like Python is very good, and Python runs very well on 200MHz ARM processors.
There is often the perception that WinCE is realtime, and Linux is not. Linux realtime support is decent in the stock kernels with the PREEMPT option, and real-time support is excellent with the addition of a relatively small real-time patch. You can easily attain sub millisecond timing with Linux. This is something that has changed in the past couple years with the merging of real-time functionality into the stock kernel.
DEVELOPMENT FLOW
In a productive environment, most advanced embedded applications are developed and debugged on a PC, not the target hardware. Even in setups where remote debugging on a target system works well, debugging an application on workstation works better. So the fact that one solution has nice on-target debugging, where the other does not is not really relevant. For data centric systems, it is common to have simulation modes where the application can be tested without connection to real I/O. With both Linux and WinCE applications, application programing for an embedded device is similar to programming for a PC. Embedded Linux takes this a step further. Because embedded Linux technology is the same as desktop, and server Linux technology, almost everything developed for desktop/server (including system software) is available for embedded for free. This means very complete driver support (see USB cell modem and printer examples above), robust file system support, memory management, etc. The breadth of options for Linux is astounding, but some may consider this a negative point, and would prefer a more integrated solution like Windows CE where everything comes from one place. There is a loss of flexibility, but in some cases, the tradeoff might be worth it. For an example of the number of packages that can be build for Embedded Linux systems using Openembedded, see.
GUI TRENDS
It is important to consider trends for embedded devices with small displays being driven by Cell Phones (iPhone, Palm Pre, etc). Standard GUI widgets that are common in desktop systems (dialog boxes, check boxes, pull down lists, etc) do not cut it for modern embedded systems. So, it will be important to consider support for 3D effects, and widget libraries designed to be used by touch screen devices. The Clutter library is an example of this type of support.
REMOTE SUPPORT
Going back to the issue of debugging tools, most people stop at the scenario where the device is setting next to a workstation in the lab. But what about when you need to troubleshoot a device that is being beta-tested half-way around the world? That is where a command-line debugger like Gdb is an advantage, and not a disadvantage. And how do you connect to the device if you don't have support for cell modems in New Zealand, or an efficient connection mechanism like ssh for shell access and transferring files?
SUMMARY
Selecting any advanced technology is not a simple task, and is fairly difficult to do even with experience. So it is important to be asking the right questions, and looking at the decision from many angles. Hopefully this article can help in that.
I have worked in projects that involved customizing the software of an OEM board and I wouldn't say that Linux is cheaper. When buying a board you also need to buy the SDK. You still need to pay even for the Linux version. Some manufacturers offer both Windows CE and Linux solutions for their boards and there isn't a price difference. For Windows CE you also need the Platform Builder and pay for the licenses, but it is easier to go without support.
Another important issue is if you are building a User Interface or a headless device. For devices that require an LCD screen and human interaction is much easier to go with Windows CE. If on the other hand you are building a headless device, Linux may be a sounder option - especially if network protocols are involved. I believe that Linux implementations are more reliable and easier to tweak.
With Linux you are never on you own and you are never dependent on one single entity to provide permissions. There are many support options and you have the freedom to choose your support options for any part of the system through many competing sources.
With Windows CE you must adhere to the license and restrictions as set forth in the complex license agreements that must be agreed to. Get a lawyer. With windows CE you have only one proprietary source for OS support and you will proceed only as they see fit to support and provide what you need. You may not agree with their position, but will not have any recourse but to bend to what they prescribe. The costs of incremental components, modules, development kits, licensing, and support tend to pile up with proprietary platforms. In the longer term, what happens when the vendor no longer desires to support the platform and you do not have the rights to support and distribute it yourself? What happens when the vendor moves to newer technology and wants you to move along with them even though you may not be ready to make the move? $$$
Our experience with Windows solutions in general is that they tend to become more expensive over time. What was originally considered lowest TCO gravitates quickly towards and solution that is encumbered and costly to maintain and support. Licenses have to be re-negotiated over time and the new technologies, often unneeded, are forced into the picture at the whim of the provider for the sake of THEIR business needs. On top of that, the license agreements are CONTINUALLY changing--get a lawyer.
With Linux you have the freedom to provide in-house support and expertise without being encumbered against distributing the solution as you need. You also have the freedom to continue to use and support technology that original providers no longer want to support. Having the source code and the RIGHTs to do with it what you want (GPL, LGPL) is a powerful attractor when it comes to business continuity and containing costs while providing access to the very latest technologies or technologies that fit your needs.
I have developed network drivers that work both on RT Linux (to be more specific, Linux preemptive kernel with RT patch) and Windows CE. My experience was windows CE was more stable in terms of real-time response. Frame timings also showed that windows CE had less jitter.
On RT Linux, we had all sorts of problems. For example, when user moved the mouse; our frames were being delayed. Guess what, certain variants of x-windows disable interrupts. You may also feel that you are safer on console screen only. If you have VGA frame buffers enabled, you are doomed again. We had only one problem with windows CE in terms of jitter again. The problem happened when the USB controller was set to an incorrect mode in the BIOS and windows CE was using lots of time for polling.
To be honest, windows CE had more support. On Linux, you are on your own. You have to read every possible mailing list to understand what problems you may hve.
a partially customised OS
Is much easier to achieve if the OS is open source (and you have the expertise).
Android is a good option for some embedded systems.(it's linux based)
You have many experts that are able to develop on this system.
You have access to many libraries in java or C.
but it uses lot of memory and energy.
What we often forget with paid / licenced software is that you have to deal with licenses. It takes time and energy! Then you have to track if you pay it correctly. It involves many different people with different skills and it costs in decision.
This cost is often not included in the studies that show that open-source/free is more expensive than paid software.
With "free software" it's way easier to deal with licenses and you spend less time on dealing with these issues. Personally I prefer to avoid unnecessary communications with your legal / financing team every time you change some pieces of the software.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
We don’t allow questions seeking recommendations for books, tools, software libraries, and more. You can edit the question so it can be answered with facts and citations.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I was always attracted to the world of kernel hacking and embedded systems.
Has anyone got good tutorials (+easily available hardware) on starting to mess with such stuff?
Something like kits for writing drivers etc, which come with good documentation and are affordable?
Thanks!
If you are completely new to kernel development, i would suggest not starting with hardware development and going to some "software-only" kernel modules like proc file / sysfs or for more complex examples filesystem / network development , developing on a uml/vmware/virtualbox/... machine so crashing your machine won't hurt so much :) For embedded development you could go for a small ARM Development Kit or a small Via C3/C4 machine, or any old PC which you can burn with your homebrew USB / PCI / whatever device.
A good place to start is probably Kernelnewbies.org - which has lots of links and useful information for kernel developers, and also features a list of easy to implement tasks to tackle for beginners.
Some books to read:
Understanding the Linux Kernel - a very good reference detailing the design of the kernel subsystems
Linux Device Drivers - is written more like a tutorial with a lot of example code, focusing on getting you going and explaining key aspects of the linux kernel. It introduces the build process and the basics of kernel modules.
Linux Kernel Module Programming Guide - Some more introductory material
As suggested earlier, looking at the linux code is always a good idea, especially as Linux Kernel API's tend to change quite often ... LXR helps a lot with a very nice browsing interface - lxr.linux.no
To understand the Kernel Build process, this link might be helpful:
Linux Kernel Makefiles (kbuild)
Last but not least, browse the Documentation directory of the Kernel Source distribution!
Here are some interesting exercises insolently stolen from a kernel development class:
Write a kernel module which creates the file /proc/jiffies reporting the current time in jiffies on every read access.
Write a kernel module providing the proc file /proc/sleep. When an application writes a number of seconds as ASCII text into this file ("echo 3 > /proc/sleep"), it should block for the specified amount of seconds. Write accesses should have no side effect on the contents of the file, i.e., on the read accesses, the file should appear to be empty (see LDD3, ch. 6/7)
Write a proc file where you can store some text temporarily (using echo "blah" > /proc/pipe) and get it out again (cat /proc/pipe), clearing the file. Watch out for synchronisation issues.
Modify the pipe example module to register as a character device /dev/pipe, add dynamic memory allocation for write requests.
Write a really simple file system.
An absolute must is this book by Rubini. (available both as a hardcopy or a free soft copy)
He gives implementations of several dummy drivers that don't require that you have any hardware other than your pc. So for getting started in kernel development it's the easiest way to go.
As for doing embedded work I would recommend purchasing one of the numerous SBC (single board computers) that are out there. There are a number of these that are based on x86 processors, usually with PC/104 interfaces (electrically PC/104 is identical to the ISA bus standard, but based on stackable connectors rather than edge connectors - very easy to interface custom hardware to)
They usually have vga connectors that make it easier to do debugging.
For embedded Linux hacking, simple Linksys WRT54G router that you can buy everywhere is a development platform on its own http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linksys_WRT54G_series:
The WRT54G is notable for being the first consumer-level network device that had its firmware source code released to satisfy the obligations of the GNU GPL. This allows programmers to modify the firmware to change or add functionality to the device. Several third-party firmware projects provide the public with enhanced firmware for the WRT54G.
I've tried installing OpenWrt and DD-WRT firmware on it. You can check those out as a starting point for hacking on a low-cost platform.
For starters, the best way is to read a lot of code. Since Linux is Open Source, you'll find dozens of drivers. Find one that works in some ways like what you want to write. You'll find some decent and relatively easy-to-understand code (the loopback device, ROM fs, etc.)
You can also use the lxr.linux.no, which is the Linux code cross-referenced. If you have to find out how something works, and need to look into the code, this is a good and easy way.
There's also an O'Reilly book (Understanding the Linux Kernel, the 3rd edition is about the 2.6 kernels) or if you want something for free, you can use the Advanced Linux Programing book (http://www.advancedlinuxprogramming.com/). There are also a lot of specific documentation about file systems, networking, etc.
Some things to be prepared for:
you'll be cross-compiling. The embedded device will use a MIPS, PowerPC, or ARM CPU but won't have enough CPU power, memory, or storage to compile its own kernel in a reasonable amount of time.
An embedded system often uses a serial port as the console, and to lower the cost there is usually no connector soldered onto production boards. Debugging kernel panics is very difficult unless you can solder on a serial port connector, you won't have much information about what went wrong.
The Linksys NSLU2 is a low-cost way to get a real embedded system to work with, and has a USB port to add peripherals. Any of a number of wireless access points can also be used, see the OpenWrt compatibility page. Be aware that current models of the Linksys WRT54G you'll find in stores can no longer be used with Linux: they have less RAM and Flash in order to reduce the cost. Cisco/Linksys now uses vxWorks on the WRT54G, with a smaller memory footprint.
If you really want to get into it, evaluation kits for embedded CPUs start at a couple hundred US dollars. I'd recommend not spending money on these unless you need it professionally for a job or consulting contract.
I am completely beginner in kernel hacking :) I decided to buy two books "Linux Program Development: a guide with exercises" and "Writing Linux Device Drivers: a guide with exercises" They are very clearly written and provide good base to further learning.