← Back to context

Comment by ryukoposting

1 day ago

This is fascinating stuff, especially the per-subsystem data. I've worked with CAN in several different professional and amateur settings, I'm not surprised to see it near the bottom of this list. That's not a dig against the kernel or the folks who work on it... more of a heavy sigh about the state of the industries that use CAN.

On a related note, I'm seeing a correlation between "level of hoopla" and a "level of attention/maintenance." While it's hard to distinguish that correlation from "level of use," the fact that CAN is so far down the list suggests to me that hoopla matters; it's everywhere but nobody talks about it. If a kernel bug takes down someone's datacenter, boy are we gonna hear about it. But if a kernel bug makes a DeviceNet widget freak out in a factory somewhere? Probably not going to make the front page of HN, let alone CNN.

There is a general rule on bugs is that the more devices they are on, the more apt they are to trigger.

A CAN with 10,000 machines total and relatively fixed applications is either going to trigger the bug right off the bat and then work around it, or trigger the bug so rarely it won't be recognized as a kernel issue.

General purpose systems running millions and millions of units with different workloads are an evolutionary breeding ground for finding bugs and exploits.