RTLinux acquisition from FSMLabs

I was really pleased to see the news about Wind River’s acquisition of RTLinux hard real-time Linux (ZDnet) from FSMLabs.

Linux is already starting to be used in certain types of Aerospace & Defence applications due to its maturity (which I discussed in the previous blogs: ‘Linux in Aerospace & Defence and ‘Linux fit for Defence‘), but these are mainly non real-time classes of applications where Linux has provided a good technical fit to the requirements. However, RTLinux technology extends the reach of Linux into real-time, because it achieves hard real-time performance where as some other real-time Linux implementations have only achieved soft real-time and have also forked the Linux kernel with proprietary extensions which could be a maintenance nightmare on A&D programmes with long in-service lifetimes.

You may be thinking that Linux as provides high performance on modern microprocessors, so does the distinction between soft and hard real-time really matter? In my view, it matters a great deal. 

  • A real-time system is one which needs to complete a number of operations correctly by a specific deadline.
  • In a hard real-time system, completion of the operations after the deadline is unacceptable and may even result in system failure.
  • In a soft real-time system, deadline misses can be tolerated with degraded system performance.

Back in the days when I wrote host platform device drivers and libraries for high-performance multiprocessor DSP VMEbus (VITA) systems, I needed to develop stress tests to assess how the device drivers would perform under the severe loads which might be encountered in a deployed application. One test involved sending VME interrupts from a DSP (wikipedia) slave board to a host platform as fast as possible.  Of course, the DSP was able to generate interrupts at a very high sustained rate, and I was able to accurately measure with a VMEbus analyser the interrupt response times of the host platform and its operating system (which was either a multi-user OS or an RTOS). 

What was interesting when comparing the performance of the various operating systems, was not just the typical interrupt response times, but the variation between best case, worst case and average response times for each of the operating systems, especially in relation to increasing system load. This revealed that although some of the soft real-time platforms could achieve fairly respectable interrupt response times most of the time (especially under fairly light load), under severe load, the interrupt response times could vary dramatically. The hard real-time platforms (VxWorks in particular)produced much less variation.

The outcome was that the suitability of a particular host platform to the performance requirements of a specific application wasn’t determined by its best-case response time, but on its worst-case response time. For me, this lesson has a direct bearing on the suitability of Linux for hard real-time applications; as RTLinux’s hard real-time performance not only provides faster response, but also much better determinism and predictability, this will enable the adoption of Linux in a new class of applications. In A&D, I expect that Linux will now be able support certain types of radar and communications applications, etc.; but of course there will always be applications with such as EW (electronic warfare) systems and other sensors which even RTLinux will not address but they will instead will exploit the extreme hard real-time performance of VxWorks for a tactical advantage (for example, sub 2 microsecond interrupt response time on a 1GHz PowerPC), but these are at the two ends of the hard real-time spectrum.

So, now it’s Linux – fit for hard real-time defence.