[SystemSafety] Critical systems Linux

[Chuck_Petras at selinc.com]

> I must have missed something. Are we talking here about certifying a 
piece of software with no reference to its operational context and safety 
requirements? 

Pretty much.




From:   Matthew Squair <mattsquair at gmail.com>
To:     Chuck_Petras at selinc.com
Cc:     systemsafety at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de
Date:   11/20/2018 01:15 PM
Subject:        Re: [SystemSafety] Critical systems Linux



I must have missed something. Are we talking here about certifying a piece 
of software with no reference to its operational context and safety 
requirements? 

Matthew Squair

MIEAust, CPEng
Mob: +61 488770655
Email; Mattsquair at gmail.com
Web: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__criticaluncertainties.com&d=DwIBAg&c=-_uRSsrpJskZgEkGwdW-sXvhn_FXVaEGsm0EI46qilk&r=rbPGBTBfGPLzkUTSzOHB-Rjj23FmdetRDLPJOqC3KU3bIo1A1-_9e8WQ6fRbAK0e&m=mP7ltx1d3xQI0RNT62o_ijOwGMBHkTzh-FZX2hEGblg&s=pPUf5o9RVmLPRDeq35_8DRhMg__ygUES5Zwocf0DTl8&e= [criticaluncertainties.com]

On 21 Nov 2018, at 5:29 am, Chuck_Petras at selinc.com wrote:

There is 

Open Source Automation Development Lab 
Safety Critical Linux 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.osadl.org_Safety-2DCritical-2DLinux.safety-2Dcritical-2Dlinux.0.html&d=DwIBAg&c=-_uRSsrpJskZgEkGwdW-sXvhn_FXVaEGsm0EI46qilk&r=rbPGBTBfGPLzkUTSzOHB-Rjj23FmdetRDLPJOqC3KU3bIo1A1-_9e8WQ6fRbAK0e&m=mP7ltx1d3xQI0RNT62o_ijOwGMBHkTzh-FZX2hEGblg&s=pbrO6xSOLU2DWnQuhNNSyieSLs6zaZ6t5orC7jyfHSA&e= 
[osadl.org] 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.osadl.org_SIL2LinuxMP.sil2-2Dlinux-2Dproject.0.html&d=DwIBAg&c=-_uRSsrpJskZgEkGwdW-sXvhn_FXVaEGsm0EI46qilk&r=rbPGBTBfGPLzkUTSzOHB-Rjj23FmdetRDLPJOqC3KU3bIo1A1-_9e8WQ6fRbAK0e&m=mP7ltx1d3xQI0RNT62o_ijOwGMBHkTzh-FZX2hEGblg&s=nShCm8vQC4SzQHQHOeIPAtD6TrLoBeCOXaFiJdbgcsU&e= [osadl.org] 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.osadl.org_Presentations-2Dand-2DDocuments.safety-2Dcritical-2Ddocuments.0.html&d=DwIBAg&c=-_uRSsrpJskZgEkGwdW-sXvhn_FXVaEGsm0EI46qilk&r=rbPGBTBfGPLzkUTSzOHB-Rjj23FmdetRDLPJOqC3KU3bIo1A1-_9e8WQ6fRbAK0e&m=mP7ltx1d3xQI0RNT62o_ijOwGMBHkTzh-FZX2hEGblg&s=J3wbVsiFEKAMrfy1CkUVvC3mwaogw09-IxEAD7arNrE&e= 
[osadl.org]

Chuck Petras, PE**
Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories, Inc
Pullman, WA  99163  USA
http://www.selinc.com

SEL Synchrophasors - A New View of the Power System <
http://synchrophasor.selinc.com>

Making Electric Power Safer, More Reliable, and More Economical (R)

** Registered in Oregon.


"systemsafety" <systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> wrote 
on 11/20/2018 09:40:26 AM:

> From: "Chris Hills" <safetyyork at phaedsys.com> 
> To: <systemsafety at techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> 
> Date: 11/20/2018 09:40 AM 
> Subject: [SystemSafety] Critical systems Linux 
> Sent by: "systemsafety" <
systemsafety-bounces at lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de> 
> 
> Hi All
> 
> A subversion of the thread to answer one of the points raised by Paul 
and
> almost every Linux aficionado
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > bielefeld.de [bielefeld.de]] On Behalf Of Paul Sherwood
> > Sent: Sunday, November 4, 2018 8:54 PM
> 
> > One anti-pattern I've grown a bit tired of is people choosing a
> micro-kernel instead of Linux, because of the notional 'safety cert',
> > and then having to implement tons of custom software in attempting to
> match off-the-shelf Linux functionality or performance. When application
> > of the standards leads to "develop new, from scratch" instead of using
> existing code which is widely used and known to be reliable, something
> > is clearly weird imo.
> 
> The question is:- 
> 
> As Linux is monolithic, already written  (with minimal 
requirements/design
> docs) and not to any coding standard
> How would the world go about making a Certifiable Linux? 
> 
> Is it possible?
> 
> 
> And the question I asked: why do it at all when there are plenty of 
other
> POSIX Compliant RTOS and OS out there that have full Safety 
Certification to
> 61508 SIL3 and  Do178  etc.?
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The System Safety Mailing List
> systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
_______________________________________________
The System Safety Mailing List
systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
Manage your subscription: 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.techfak.uni-2Dbielefeld.de_mailman_listinfo_systemsafety&d=DwIBAg&c=-_uRSsrpJskZgEkGwdW-sXvhn_FXVaEGsm0EI46qilk&r=rbPGBTBfGPLzkUTSzOHB-Rjj23FmdetRDLPJOqC3KU3bIo1A1-_9e8WQ6fRbAK0e&m=mP7ltx1d3xQI0RNT62o_ijOwGMBHkTzh-FZX2hEGblg&s=Woer5U5PmNhZzQpCtr9e3C_Pus-SP1eCeJXvMLNZ4eo&e= 
[lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20181120/f18ed812/attachment-0001.html>