This contains just some minutes. Main project page here.
June 5
Agenda:
- getting everybody updated
- review of critical use cases.
Participants:
- Albert Kos (Conti)
- Kai Lampka (EB)
- Christoph Lipka (ADIT)
- Franz Walkembach (Sysgo)
- Sriram (KPIT)
- Sang bum Suh (Perseus)
- Gunnar (GENIVI)
- Philippe (GENIVI)
apologies: Matti (Opensynergy)
Minutes
- getting everybody updated: we have currently 3 threads active
- device driver virtualization (prepared by Matti)
- AGL paper review (prepared by Nikola)
- critical use cases (prepared by Sriram)
- device driver virtualization
- Matti cannot attend today's call, got the clearance to provide his inputs, will upload them in the wiki today, topic for next week
- critical use cases
- Sriram presents the critical use cases wiki page and his views on how APIs can be identified allocated in an instrument cluster context
- Sriram: this is WIP, will add block diagrams
- Sriram: details the assumptions and the use cases
- Gunnar: we need to check how these use cases fit with the domain interacti
- more on use case / scenario #1 - Rear view Camera at Startup
- Sriram: the rear view camera can be Ethernet connected, or LVDS connected, rather than analog cameras (converted to digital)
- you still need to compose the camera output with the park assistant
- it is a data stream available on a certain port
- Ethernet based cameras would be a good use case to start with
- discussion
- Sang-bum: AGL paper talks about resource allocation on top of hypervisors (linux VM, Android VM)
- Albert: we need to make a distinction between various partitions (safe, secure, others), it is a very complex landscape, IMHO that cannot be solved with one HV, first of all we have to focus on the safety critical part (Autosar based) based on type 1 HV and look at type 2 HV for other applications (e.g. linux containers, etc.)
- Gunnar: we are not at this step of describing a solution using type 1 and/or type 2
- Sang bum: we need to make a decision on our scope type 1 only and/or upper layers with sw virtualization
- /TODO/ Albert provide a problem statement for next week (for instance on the rear view camera)
- Kai: IMHO in order to be concrete with safety, we need to address ASIL levels which is a far-reaching goal, we should first focus on requirements like boot time and data throughput and latency bounds which current HV technologies have problem to comply with
- Kai: most OEMS are a bit hesitating because they are not convinced HV will meet performance requirements
- Sang bum: what about VMs on top of an HV ?
- Kai: first need is to run legacy code and to have different sw islands to run them
- Sang bum: IMHO para-virtualization is included in the scope of solutions
- Sang bum: state of the art is that silicon supports virtualization, we do not need para-virtualization
- Sang bum: in GENIVI we could runLMbench on linux on top of HVs and make performance measurements
- discussion on performance benchmarking (for audio for instance)
- Gunnar: this benchmarking is an industry effort, would start this by having this group agree on the method to do the measures
- Albert: not sure, we did this benchmarking already
- Sriram: I will add KPI to the use cases I have provided, we need to treat each problem statement, we have the right group to do the job
- Sang bum: Android ? running on the fly of Android applications is another use case, using this approach OEMs could avoid Google certification
- Gunnar: asks every participant to provide his views in the wiki
- /TODO/ All provide inputs on the various problem statements identified in the wiki page
- next week
- review of Opensynergy inputs on virtual device drivers
May 29
Agenda:
- review of the summary of AGL paper prepared by Nikola .
...