by Tirichlabs

Embedded Linux utilizes Linux kernel for an embedded device, but it is quite different from the standard Linux OS. Its application to embedded systems is motivated by the availability of device support, file-systems, network connectivity, and UI support. It is a customized version of Linux for embedded systems, consequently having a much smaller size and minimal features and requires less processing power. Based on embedded system requirements, the Linux kernel is modified and optimized. Such embedded Linux can only run device-specific purpose-built applications.

The Real-Time Operating System (RTOS) with minimal code is used for such applications where least and fix processing time is required. RTOS is a time-sharing system based on clock interrupts that implement priority sequences to execute a process. In the event of a high priority, interrupt is generated by the system, the running low priority processes are stopped and the interrupt is served. The real-time operating system requires less operational memory and synchronizes the processes in such a way they can communicate with each other hence resources can be used efficiently without wastage of time.

COMPARISON

Size

The major difference between Embedded Linux and RTOS is in their sizes. RTOS running on an AVR requires approximately 4.4 kilobytes of ROM. Embedded Linux, on the other hand, is relatively larger. The kernel can be stripped of which are not required and even with that, the footprint is generally measured in megabytes.

Embedded Linux RAM requirement is in order of few megabytes. In practical applications, it requires more than that because some other tasks run under these Linux kernels. RTOS has much smaller memory requirements than Linux. A very simple setup, running two tasks, a scheduler, a queue for communication and a semaphore on an 8-bit architecture would use in the vicinity of 200 bytes.

Scheduler

The scheduler in an RT-system is important to ensure that tasks complete in a fixed time. Compared to a regular scheduler for a general-purpose system, it is not the main task of the scheduler to ensure ’fair’ distribution of CPU-time. A common technique is simply to let the task with the highest priority run before all tasks with lower priority. It works fine for a soft real-time system but for hard real-time, the system must provide a better guarantee.

RTOS scheduler

RTOS uses the highest priority first scheduler. It means that the task having the highest priority is always running. This is achieved by having a preemptive scheduler that at a tick-interrupt decides if the currently running task is allowed to continue executing or it needs to be switched for another task based on priority. The scheduler uses the priority to schedule the task with the highest priority. Tasks having the same priority are given a “fair” process time. This schedular allows us to achieve soft real-time but it is difficult to achieve hard real-time by not having any kind of deadline-based scheduling.

For this purpose, there are choices of having a preemptive or a cooperative scheduler. In preemptive mode, a task can be preempted unlike in cooperative mode where it’s up to all tasks to give away the CPU “often” enough so higher priority tasks get to run. Typical RTOS real-time kernel achieves scheduler latencies from zero to a few microseconds.

Embedded Linux scheduler

In Embedded Linux, there are more choices to choose the scheduler. The modular of Embedded Linux allows to change different parts of the system. A simple insmod gives the possibility to change the scheduler. There are a couple of schedulers designed for different things.

First of all, it has a basic highest priority first scheduler that uses the priority of a task and schedules it first. Embedded Linux also implements the Earliest deadline first which uses the periodic feature of Embedded Linux. Assuming that the deadline for every task is when it is next to be run again one can implement a fast EDF. In theory, it is optimal since it can schedule tasks to 100% CPU-usages. In practice, it is not the same due to some overheads. As in idle process Embedded Linux runs a usual Linux kernel and when there are no rt-tasks that can run, Linux gets to run. which can lead to starvation of Linux and thus effectively disabling Linux. But the importance of a real-time system is to run the real-time tasks this is not a big problem for the system. Typical latencies in real-time Linux schedular are in the order of tens to hundreds of microseconds.

CPU resource

Embedded Linux requires a significant amount of CPU resources, perhaps >200MIPS, 32bit processor, ideally with an MMU, 4Mb of ROM and 16MB of RAM and boot may take several seconds.

An RTOS, on the other hand, runs in less than 10Kb, on microcontrollers from 8-bit up and boot in milliseconds.

IoT Implementation of OS

Embedded Linux is often preferred for extremely low-power applications, such as sensors, run for months on batteries. The low-power nature often precludes direct IP connectivity which serves as a gateway for Internet connectivity. The gateway communicates the low-power protocol to the sensors and would translate them to IP. Linux may have an existing protocol to fulfill the requirements.

The basic requirement of an IoT device is network connectivity, typically in the form of IP via a web server. An RTOS can offer IP connectivity but have a risk to be buggy unless you examine it. For example, usually, RTOSs do not isolate the IP stack user from the IP stack itself. Network connectivity requires potentially dealing with low speed or congested links which can lead to obscure and hard-to-debug buffer handling issues when the stack is intermingled with other code. On the other hand, an embedded Linux leverages hardware separation and a widely utilized IP stack that probably has been exposed to corner cases.

Security is essential in IoT devices, which are often exposed to open Internet. A system compromise on the Internet interface is prone to intruders and information or control of the device can be hijacked. Developers can leverage native, embedded Linux features—multiuser, SELinux, and containers—to contain and limit the damage.

Linux certainly is a robust and secure OS and the system has matured in an embedded operating system. Yet one of the drawbacks is its Memory footprint when compared to a real-time operating system even though it can be trimmed down by removing tools and system services that are not required in embedded systems, it still is a large software. It simply cannot run on 8 or 16-bit MCUs and requires more onboard RAM for the Linux kernel. For example, ARM Cortex-M architecture based MCUs, which typically have only a few hundred kilobytes of RAM, and Linux cannot run on these chips.

A common engineering solution for networked systems is to use two processors in the device. In this arrangement, an 8 or 16-bit MCU is used for the sensor or actuator, while a 32-bit processor is used for the network interface which runs an RTOS. Sales of 32-bit MCUs have exploded in the last several years, and have become the largest segment of the MCU market.

ORIGINALLY POSTED HERE ON TIRICH LABS

ADLINK is a global leader in edge computing driving data-to-decision applications across industries. The company recently introduced I-Pi SMARC for Industrial IoT prototyping.

-       AdLInk I-Pi SMARC consists of a simple carrier paired with a SMARC Computer on Module

-       SMARC Modules are available from entry level PX30 Rockchip to top of the line Intel Apollo Lake.

-       SMARC modules are specifically designed for typical industrial embedded applications that require long life, high MTBF and strict revision control.

-       Use popular off the shelve sensors and create prototypes or proof of concepts on short notice.

Additional information can be found here

By: Kelly McNelis

We have faced unprecedented disruption from the many challenges of COVID-19, and PTC’s LiveWorx was no exception. The definitive digital transformation event went virtual this year, and despite the transition from physical to digital, LiveWorx delivered.

Of the many insightful virtual keynotes, one that caught everyone’s attention was ‘Digital Transformation: The Technology & Support You Need to Succeed,’ presented by PTC’s Executive Vice President (EVP) of Products, Kevin Wrenn, and PTC’s EVP and Chief Customer Officer, Eduarda Camacho.

Their keynote focused on how companies should be prioritizing the use of best-in-class technology that will meet their changing needs during times of disruption and accelerated digital transformation. Wrenn and Camacho highlighted five of our customers through interactive case studies on how they are using PTC technology to capitalize on digital transformation to thrive in an era of disruption.

Below is a summary of the five customers and their stories that were highlighted during the keynote.

1. Royal Enfield (Mass Customization)

Royal Enfield is an Indian motorcycle company that has been manufacturing motor bikes since 1901. They have British roots, and their main customer base is located in India and Europe. Riders of Royal Enfield wants their bikes to be particular to their brand, so they worked to better manage the complexities of mass customization and respond to market demands.

Royal Enfield is a long time PTC customer, but they were on old versions of PTC technology. They first upgraded Creo and Windchill to the latest releases so they could leverage the new capabilities. They then moved on to transform their processes for platform and variant designs, introduced simulation much earlier by using Creo Simulation Live, and leveraged generative design by bringing AI into engineering and applying it to engine and chassis complex custom forged components. Finally, they retrained and retooled their engineering staff to fully leverage the power of new processes and technologies.

The entire Royal Enfield team now has digital capabilities that accelerate new product designs, variants, and accessories for personalization; as a result, they are able to deliver a much-shortened design cycle. Royal Enfield is continuing their digital transformation trend, and will invest in new ways to create value while leveraging augmented reality with PTC's Vuforia suite.

2. VCST (Manufacturing Efficiency, Quality, and Innovation)

VCST is part of the BMT Group and are a world-class automotive supplier of precision-machined power train and brake components. Their problem was that they had high costs for their production facility in Belgium. They either needed to improve their cost efficiency in their plant or face the potential of needing to shut down the facility and relocate it to another region. VCST decided to implement ThingWorx so that anyone can have instant visibility to asset status and performance. VCST is also creating the ability to digitize maintenance requests and the ability to acquire about spare parts to improve the overall efficiency in support of their costs reduction goals.

Additionally, VCST has a goal to reach zero complaints for their customers and, if any quality problems appear to their customers, they can be required to do a 100% inspection until the problem is solved. Moreover, as cars have gotten quieter with electrification, the noise from the gears has become an issue, and puts pressure on VCST to innovate and reduce gear noise.

VCST has again relied on ThingWorx and Windchill to collect and share data for joint collaborative analysis to innovate and reduce gear noise. VCST also plans to use Vuforia Expert Capture and Vuforia Chalk to train maintenance workers to further improve their efficiency and cost effectiveness. The company is not done with their digital transformation, and they have plans to implement Creo and Windchill to enable end-to-end digital thread connectivity to the factory.

3. BID Group Holdings (Connected Product)

BID Group Holdings operates in the wood processing industry. It is one of the largest integrated suppliers and North American leader in the field. The purpose of BID Group is to deliver a complete range of innovative equipment, digital technologies, turnkey installations, and aftermarket services to their customers. BID Group decided to focus on their areas of expertise, an rely on PTC, Microsoft, and Rockwell Automation’s combined capabilities and scale to deliver SaaS type solutions to their own industry.

Leveraging this combined power, the BID Group developed a digital strategy for service to improve mill efficiency and profitability. The solution is named OPER8 and was built on the ThingWorx platform. This allowed BID Group to provide their customers an out of the box solution with efficient time-to-value and low costs of ownership. BID Group is continuing to work with PTC and Rockwell Automation, to develop additional solutions that will reduce downtime of OPER8 with a predictive analytics module by using ThingWorx Analytics and LogixAI.

4. Hitachi (Service Optimization)

Hitachi operates an extensive service decision that ensures its customers’ data systems remain up and running. Their challenge was not to only meet their customers uptime Service Level Agreements, but to do it without killing their cost structure. Hitachi decided to implement PTC’s Servigistics Service Parts Management software to ensure the right parts are available when and where they are needed for service. With Servigistics, Hitachi was able to accomplish their needs while staying cost effective and delighting their customers.

Hitachi runs on the cloud, which allows them to upgrade to current releases more often, take advantage of new functionality, and avoid unexpected costs.

PTC has driven engagement and support for Hitachi through the PTC Community, and encourages all customers to utilize this platform. The network of collaborative spaces in a gathering place for PTC customers and partners to showcase their work, inspire each other, and share ideas or best practices in order to expand the value of their PTC solutions and services.

5. COVID-19 Response 

COVID-19 has put significant strain on the world’s hospitals and healthcare infrastructure, and hospitalization rates for COVID brought into question the capacity of being able to handle cases. Many countries began thinking of the value field hospitals could bring to safely care for patients and ease the admissions numbers of ‘regular’ hospitals. However, the complication is that field hospitals have essentially no isolation or air filtration capability that is required for treating COVID patients or healthcare workers.

As a result, the US Army Corp of Engineers has put out specifications to create self-contained isolation units, which are fully functioning hospital rooms that can be transported or built onsite. But, the assembly needed to happen fast, and a group of companies (including PTC) led by The Innovation Machine rallied to help design and define the SCIU’s.

With buy-in from numerous companies, a common platform was needed for companies to collaborate. PTC felt compelled to react, and many PTC customers and partners joined in to help create a collaboration platform, with cloud-based Windchill as the foundation. But, PTC didn’t just provide software to this collaboration; PTC also contributed with digital thread and design advice to help the group solve some of the major challenges. This design is a result of the many companies coming together to create deployments across various US state governments, agencies, and FEMA.

Final Thoughts

All of the above customers approached digital transformation as a business imperative. They all had sizeable challenges that needed to be solved and took leadership positions to implement plans that leveraged digital transformation technologies combined with new processes.

PTC will continue to innovate across the digital transformation portfolio and is committed to ensuring that customer success offerings capture value faster and provide the best outcomes.

Original Post Link: https://www.ptc.com/en/product-lifecycle-report/liveworx-digital-transformation–technology-and-support-you-need-to-succeed

Author Bio: Kelly is a corporate communications specialist at PTC. Her responsibilities include drafting and approving content for PTC’s external and social media presence and supporting communications for the Chief Strategy Officer. Kelly has previous experience as a communications specialist working to create and implement materials for the Executive Vice President of the Products Organization and senior management team members.

The tinyML Foundation is excited to be offering a new activity to our community: tinyML Talks webcast series. A strong line-up of speakers making 30-minute presentations will take place twice a month on Tuesdays at 8 am Pacific time to make sure that tinyML enthusiasts worldwide will have an opportunity to watch them live. Presentations and videos will be available online the day afterwards for those that were not able to join live.

View Schedule of Upcoming Talks

If you want to re-watch all talks starting March 31 or were unable to join us live, the slides and links to our YouTube Channel of the talks are posted at our tinyML Forums. Many questions were asked during the presentations but not all could be answered in the allotted time frame. The answers to some of those can be found on the tinyML Forums as well.

About The Eclipse Foundation
The Eclipse Foundation provides our global community of individuals and organizations with a mature, scalable, and business-friendly environment for open source software collaboration and innovation.

In this IoT Central Video Feature, we present Jacob Sorber's video, "How to Get Started Learning Embedded Systems." Jacob is a computer scientist, researcher, teacher, and Internet of Things enthusiast. He teaches systems and networking courses at Clemson University and leads the PERSIST research lab. His “get started” videos are valuable for those early in their practice. 

From Jacob: I've been meaning to start making more embedded systems videos — that is, computer science videos oriented to things you don't normally think of as computers (toys, robots, machines, cars, appliances). I hope this video helps you take the first step.

Helium, the company behind one of the world’s first peer-to-peer wireless networks, is announcing the introduction of Helium Tabs, its first branded IoT tracking device that runs on The People’s Network. In addition, after launching its network in 1,000 cities in North America within one year, the company is expanding to Europe to address growing market demand with Helium Hotspots shipping to the region starting July 2020. 

Since its launch in June 2019, Helium quickly grew its footprint with Hotspots covering more than 700,000 square miles across North America. Helium is now expanding to Europe to allow for seamless use of connected devices across borders. Powered by entrepreneurs looking to own a piece of the people-powered network, Helium’s open-source blockchain technology incentivizes individuals to deploy Hotspots and earn Helium (HNT), a new cryptocurrency, for simultaneously building the network and enabling IoT devices to send data to the Internet. When connected with other nearby Hotspots, this acts as the backbone of the network. 

“We’re excited to launch Helium Tabs at a time where we’ve seen incredible growth of The People’s Network across North America,” said Amir Haleem, Helium’s CEO and co-founder. “We could not have accomplished what we have done, in such a short amount of time, without the support of our partners and our incredible community. We look forward to launching The People’s Network in Europe and eventually bringing Helium Tabs and other third-party IoT devices to consumers there.”  

Introducing Helium Tabs that Run on The People’s Network
Unlike other tracking devices,Tabs uses LongFi technology, which combines the LoRaWAN wireless protocol with the Helium blockchain, and provides network coverage up to 10 miles away from a single Hotspot. This is a game-changer compared to WiFi and Bluetooth enabled tracking devices which only work up to 100 feet from a network source. What’s more, due to Helium’s unique blockchain-based rewards system, Hotspot owners will be rewarded with Helium (HNT) each time a Tab connects to its network. 

In addition to its increased growth with partners and customers, Helium has also seen accelerated expansion of its Helium Patrons program, which was introduced in late 2019. All three combined have helped to strengthen its network. 

Patrons are entrepreneurial customers who purchase 15 or more Hotspots to help blanket their cities with coverage and enable customers, who use the network. In return, they receive discounts, priority shipping, network tools, and Helium support. Currently, the program has more than 70 Patrons throughout North America and is expanding to Europe. 

Key brands that use the Helium Network include: 

• Nestle, ReadyRefresh, a beverage delivery service company
• Agulus, an agricultural tech company
• Conserv, a collections-focused environmental monitoring platform

Helium Tabs will initially be available to existing Hotspot owners for $49. The Helium Hotspot is now available for purchase online in Europe for €450.

IoT security testing should comprise activities like checking for endpoints, authentication, encryption, firewalls, and compliance requirements. The testing helps the IoT ecosystem to function safely and prevent incidences of a data breach.

The Internet of Things or IoT has swept the realm of technology and become mainstream as far as automation is concerned. Its popularity is attributable to features such as communication between machines, easy usage, and the integration of various devices, enabling technologies, and protocols.

When one talks about smart cities, smart transport, smart healthcare, or smart homes, the role of IoT is paramount.  According to Gartner, the number of connected things courtesy IoT is projected to reach 20.8 billion by 2020. Since IoT is about connected products that communicate with each other and share a huge volume of data, it is vulnerable to security breaches. With greater digitization and a rush towards delivering smart devices to add more comfort to people’s lives, businesses may end up keeping their flanks uncovered. The threats related to cybersecurity, besides threatening the smooth functioning of the digital ecosystem, are putting a question mark on the implementation of the IoT ecosystem.

The future is likely to be driven by smart systems with IoT at their core. Since such systems will witness a huge exchange of data, their security needs to be ensured. Also, as the smooth functioning of such smart systems will hinge on the accuracy and integrity of data, enabling IoT security at every step of the way should be the norm. If statistics are to be believed then around 84% of companies adopting IoT have reported security breaches of some kind (Source: Stoodnt.com.) The resident vulnerabilities in such systems are exploited by cybercriminals to exhibit malicious behavior such as committing credit card theft, phishing and spamming, distributed denial of service attacks, and malware distribution, among others.

How to conduct IoT security testing effectively

The security implications of a vulnerable or broken IoT system can be catastrophic for individuals, businesses, and entities. The devices and the transfer of data within them should be monitored by the implementing agency to check for a data breach. The best ways to conduct IoT security is as follow:

• Checking of endpoints: As more devices or endpoints are added to expand the network, more vulnerabilities are created. Since IoT systems are built using devices of different configurations, computing and storage power, and running on different versions and types of operating systems, every such device should be evaluated for safety. An inventory of such devices should be made and tracked.
• Authentication: Care should be taken that the vendor-supplied default passwords for specific systems should be dealt with at the beginning. If not, these can be exploited by hackers to take control of the IoT ecosystem and wreak havoc. Moreover, every device in the IoT system should be authenticated before being plugged into the network. This should be made an integral part of the internet of things testing.
• Firewalls: The firewall present in the network should be tested for its capability of filtering specific data range and controlling traffic. Also, data aimed at terminating the device to ensure its optimal performance should be tested.
• Encryption: Since IoT systems transmit data among themselves they should be encrypted for safety. During testing IoT applications the encryption approach and nitty-gritty should be thoroughly checked and validated. If not, then while relaying the location of assets in the IoT system, the information can be easily read by a hacker.
• Compliance: Mere testing of IoT devices is not complete unless compliance with standards like FCC and ETSI/CE is carried out. These regulations and standards have been instituted to validate the performance of the IoT devices based on certain parameters. So, any IoT testing approach should take into account compliance with such regulations.

Why IoT systems should undergo security testing?

The smart devices forming part of the IoT system need to undergo IoT testing (security) to:

• Prevent data theft: The unsecured endpoints within the system can leave a trail for hackers to strike but for the IoT device testing solutions. The vulnerabilities can be used to break into the controlling mechanism of the system in order to launch more malicious forms of attacks.
• Protect brand equity: When scores of companies are competing with each other to get a pie of the IoT market, a security breach or malware attack can put a brand in jeopardy. With IoT penetration testing, such attacks can be pre-empted with the elimination of vulnerabilities and glitches.

Conclusion

The IoT ecosystem is projected to grow at a humongous pace and scale. Technology companies having an integrated IoT security testing approach are likely to earn a huge chunk of the pie. The approach when executed at regular intervals should be able to help enterprises achieve growth across domains.

When talking about advanced technology in general and Internet of Things (IoT) in particular the first aspects that come to mind are things such as gleaming manufacturing production lines, industrial IoT solutions, critical infrastructure facilities, and consumer products for the home or fitness. It is rare that agriculture or farming gets included. Yet IoT is already having an impact within the agricultural sector, helping to improve productivity and yields.

The need

While food shortages can often be more of a food distribution problem than an absolute shortage of production per se, increases in agricultural food production are going to be essential in the years ahead. The United Nations’ World Population Prospects 2019 predicts that global population will rise from an estimated 7.7 billion people in 2019 to c.8.5 billion in 2030, 9.7 billion in 2050 and 10.9 billion by the end of the century, increasing the demand for food. This is combined with likely increased levels of prosperity and reductions in poverty, which has been shown before to always lead to increases in per capita food consumption as well as, importantly, changes in the food stuffs consumed. As the UN report puts it, “continued rapid population growth presents challenges for sustainable development”.

The response

First off, it’s important to say that any predictions of a Malthusian population crunch are likely to be way off the mark. In recent history, the agricultural sector has shown itself able to substantially increase levels of production, for example through the Green Revolution in the 1950s and 1960s that witnessed the use of new disease resistance high-yield varieties of wheat, rice and other crops.

But to ensure that food production can keep up with demand, a range of responses will be needed. Some of will be knowledge-based, others practice-based: for example, with knowledge of new farming techniques being spread, notably in developing countries; with increased used of hardier and more resistance varieties of crops; and with increased access to tools that enable greater productivity.

In some cases, this access to tools can mean access to farming equipment such as tractors or irrigation equipment. On others, it can include what is being called ‘smart farming’, ‘precision farming’, or ‘smart agriculture’.

Smart farming

The UN Food and Agriculture Organization summarizes smart farming as: “a farming management concept using modern technology to increase the quantity and quality of agricultural products. Farmers in the 21st century have access to GPS, soil scanning, data management, and Internet of Things technologies. By precisely measuring variations within a field and adapting the strategy accordingly, farmers can greatly increase the effectiveness of pesticides and fertilizers, and use them more selectively. Similarly, using Smart Farming techniques, farmers can better monitor the needs of individual animals and adjust their nutrition correspondingly, thereby preventing disease and enhancing herd health”.

In essence, smart farming is the deployment of advanced technology and IoT in agriculture.

The benefits that can be gained from this are manifold. There are the afore mentioned increases in production and greater effectiveness of agricultural inputs, such as fertilizer. But there are also major environmental benefits to be gained through the more sustainable use of water, energy, feed and the soil. The commercial and economic benefits are also significant. An Irish Government initiative that promotes smart farming states that, on participating farms, it averages EUR 6,300 in cost savings per farm and ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 10%.

Using IoT and technology in agriculture

Despite the images that many may have of agriculture being technologically limited, this could hardly be further from the truth. Advanced technology and IoT have been rolling out within the sector in line with the developments elsewhere. One of the first studies to look at IoT in agriculture by Beecham Research identified several aspects where in which these could be used:

• Sensing (or observation) technologies,
• Software applications,
• Communication systems,
• Telematics and positioning technologies,
• Data analytics,
• Hardware and software systems.

Specific areas where IoT and related technologies are being rolled out within include:

• Livestock monitoring,
• Storage monitoring, for example in water tanks, fuel tanks, waste tanks,
• Indoor farming in greenhouses and stables,
• Forestry,
• Arable farming,
• Fleet management,
• Fish farming.

There are a wide range of uses within each of these areas. For examples, drones are being used for crop spraying as well as providing remote monitoring of crop growth. DroneFly, a US-based drone supplier, provides a multispectral imagery drone for agricultural use that is enabled for sunlight detection; it further estimates that fertilizer can be delivered approximately 40-60 times faster than through traditional methods. 

Larger equipment is also being outfitted with IoT technology. John Deere, the major agricultural and horticultural equipment company, provides a range of precision agricultural equipment that enables automated guidance for harvesting equipment and data collection to assist with input placement and land stewardship, amongst others.

Some of the most important IoT solutions and tools involve observation and diagnostics. Sensing IoT solutions can be used, for example, to record and monitor conditional data from crops, soil, meteorological conditions, or livestock. As with IoT solutions in other fields, this data can then be integrated and diagnosed in order for automated decisions to be taken or alerts raised. All of this reduces the workload on the farmer while improving reaction time.

Conclusion

Although public awareness of IoT solutions within smart agriculture is less than those provided for industrial IoT solutions or within the consumer environment, the range of IoT tools, systems and applications that are being deployed is rapidly growing and will make an important contribution to the future farming and food needs of us all.

This blog is the final part of a series covering the insights I uncovered at the 2020 Embedded Online Conference.

In the previous blogs in this series, I discussed the opportunities we have in the embedded world to make the next-generation of small, low-power devices smarter and more capable. I also discussed the improved accessibility of embedded technologies, such as FPGAs, that are allowing more developers to participate, experiment, and drive innovation in our industry.

Today, I’d like to discuss another topic that is driving change in our industry and was heavily featured at the Embedded Online Conference – security. 

Security is still being under-prioritised in our industry. You only have to watch the first 12 minutes of Maria "Azeria" Markstedter’s ‘defending against Hackers’ talk to see the lack of security features in widely used IoT devices today. 

Security is often seen as a burden - but, it doesn’t need to be. In recent years, many passionate security researchers have helped to highlight some simple steps you can take to vastly improve the overall security of your system. In fact, by clearly identifying the threats and utilizing appropriate and well-defined mitigation techniques, systems become much harder to compromize. I’d recommend watching these talks to familiarize yourself with some of the different aspects of security you need to consider: 

• Azeria is a security researcher and Arm Innovator, she is passionate about educating developers on how to defend their applications against malicious attacks. In this talk, Maria focusses on shedding the light on the most common exploit mitigations to consider for memory-corruption-based exploits, when writing code for Arm Cortex-A processors, such as Execute Never (XN), Address Space Layout Randomisation (ASLR) and stack canaries. What’s really interesting is that it becomes clear from listening to Azeria’s talk and from seeing the audience comments that there is a lot of low-hanging fruit that we, as developers, are not fully aware of. We should collectively, start to see exploit mitigations as great tools to increase the security of our systems, no matter what type of code we are writing.
• In the same vein as Maria’s talk, Aljoscha Lautenbach discusses some of the most common vulnerabilities and security mechanisms for the IoT, but with a focus on cryptography. He focusses on how to use block cipher modes correctly, common insecure algorithms to watch out for and the importance of entropy and initialization vectors (IVs)
• A different approach is taken by Colin O'Flynn in his talk, Hardware Hacking: Hands-On. I personally really appreciate the angle that Colin takes, as it is something that, as software engineers, we tend to forget. The IoT and embedded devices running our code can be physically tampered in order to extract our secrets. As Colin mentions protecting from these attacks is usually costly, but there are a lot of steps we can take to substantially mitigate the risk. The first step is to analyse the weaknesses of our system by performing a threat analysis to ensure we are covering all bases when architecting and implementing our code. A popular framework to address the issue of security is the Platform Security Architecture (PSA) that Jacob Beningo describes in detail during his talk. Colin then moves on to introduce practical tools and techniques that you can use to test the ability of your systems to resist physical attacks. 

The passion of the security community to educate embedded software developers on security system flaws is shown during the talks and the answers to the questions submitted.

With the growing number of news headlines depicting compromised IoT devices, it is clear that security is no longer optional. The collaboration between the security researchers and the software and hardware communities I have seen at this and at many other conferences and events reassures me that we really are on the verge of putting security first.  

It has been great to see so many talks at the Embedded Online Conference, highlighting the new opportunities for developers in the embedded world. If you missed the conference and would like to catch the talks mentioned above*, visit www.embeddedonlineconference.com

*This blog only features a small collection of all the amazing speakers and talks delivered at the Conference!

In case you missed the previous posts in this series, here they are:

• Part 1, Embedded Online Conference – Developing for a Changing World
• Part 2, Embedded Online Conference – Software Defined Hardware

To participate in the 2020 IoT Developer Survey, organized by the Eclipse IoT Working Group, simply click here.  This survey should take less than 10 minutes to complete.

This blog is the second part of a series covering the insights I uncovered at the 2020 Embedded Online Conference. 

Last week, I wrote about the fascinating intersection of the embedded and IoT world with data science and machine learning, and the deeper co-operation I am experiencing between software and hardware developers. This intersection is driving a new wave of intelligence on small and cost-sensitive devices.

Today, I’d like to share with you my excitement around how far we have come in the FPGA world, what used to be something only a few individuals in the world used to be able to do, is at the verge of becoming more accessible.

I’m a hardware guy and I started my career writing in VHDL at university. I then started working on designing digital circuits with Verilog and C and used Python only as a way of automating some of the most tedious daily tasks. More recently, I have started to appreciate the power of abstraction and simplicity that is achievable through the use of higher-level languages, such as Python, Go, and Java. And I dream of a reality in which I’m able to use these languages to program even the most constrained embedded platforms.

At the Embedded Online Conference, Clive Maxfield talked about FPGAs, he mentions “in a world of 22 million software developers, there are only around a million core embedded programmers and even fewer FPGA engineers.” But, things are changing. As an industry, we are moving towards a world in which taking advantage of the capabilities of a reconfigurable hardware device, such as an FPGA, is becoming easier.

• What the FAQ is an FPGA, by Max the Magnificent, starts with what an FPGA is and the beauties of parallelism in hardware – something that took me quite some time to grasp when I first started writing in HDL (hardware description languages). This is not only the case for an FPGA, but it also holds true in any digital circuit. The cool thing about an FPGA is the fact that at any point you can just reprogram the whole board to operate in a different hardware configuration, allowing you to accelerate a completely new set of software functions. What I find extremely interesting is the new tendency to abstract away even further, by creating HLS (high-level synthesis) representations that allow a wider set of software developers to start experimenting with programmable logic.
• The concept of extending the way FPGAs can be programmed to an even wider audience is taken to the next level by Adam Taylor. He talks about PYNQ, an open-source project that allows you to program Xilinx boards in Python. This is extremely interesting as it opens up the world of FPGAs to even more software engineers. Adam demonstrates how you can program an FPGA to accelerate machine learning operations using the PYNQ framework, from creating and training a neural network model to running it on Arm-based Xilinx FPGA with custom hardware accelerator blocks in the FPGA fabric.

FPGAs always had the stigma of being hard and difficult to work on. The idea of programming an FPGA in Python, was something that no one had even imagined a few years ago. But, today, thanks to the many efforts all around our industry, embedded technologies, including FPGAs, are being made more accessible, allowing more developers to participate, experiment, and drive innovation.

I’m excited that more computing technologies are being put in the hands of more developers, improving development standards, driving innovation, and transforming our industry for the better.

If you missed the conference and would like to catch the talks mentioned above*, visit www.embeddedonlineconference.com

Part 3 of my review can be viewed by clicking here

In case you missed the previous post in this blog series, here it is:

• Part 1, Embedded Online Conference - Developing for a Changing World 

*This blog only features a small collection of all the amazing speakers and talks delivered at the Conference! 

Recovering from a system failure or a software glitch can be no easy task.  The longer the fault occurs the harder it can be to identify and recover.  The use of an external watchdog is an important and critical tool in the embedded systems engineer toolbox.  There are five tips that should be taken into account when designing a watchdog system.

Tip #1 – Monitor a heartbeat

The simplest function that an external watchdog can have is to monitor a heartbeat that is produced by the primary application processor.  Monitoring of the heartbeat should serve two distinct purposes.  First, the microcontroller should only generate the heartbeat after functional checks have been performed on the software to ensure that it is functioning.  Second, the heartbeat should be able to reveal if the real-time response of the system has been jeopardized.

Monitoring the heartbeat for software functionality and real-time response can be done using a simple, “dumb” external watchdog.  The external watchdog should have the capability to assign a heartbeat period along with a window that the heartbeat must appear within.  The purpose of the heartbeat window is to allow the watchdog to detect that the real-time response of the system is compromised.  In the event that either functional or real-time checks fail the watchdog then attempts to recover the system through a reset of the application processor.

Tip #2 – Use a low capability MCU

External watchdogs that can be to monitor a heartbeat are relatively low cost but can severely limit the capabilities and recovery possibilities of the watchdog system.  A low capability microcontroller can cost nearly the same amount as an external watchdog timer so why not add some intelligence to the watchdog and use a microcontroller.  The microcontroller firmware can be developed to fulfill the windowed heartbeat monitoring with the addition of so much more.  A “smart” watchdog like this is sometimes referred to as a supervisor or safety watchdog and has actually been used for many years in different industries such as automotive.  Generally a microcontroller watchdog has been reserved for safety critical applications but given the development tools and the cost of hardware it can be cost effective in other applications as well.

Tip #3 – Supervise critical system functions

The decision to use a small microcontroller as a watchdog opens nearly endless possibilities of how the watchdog can be used.  One of the first roles of a smart watchdog is usually to supervise critical system functions such as a system current or sensor state.  One example of how a watchdog could supervise a current would be to take an independent measurement and then provide that value to the application processor.  The application processor could then compare its own reading to that of the watchdog.  If there were disagreement between the two then the system would execute a fault tree that was deemed to be appropriate for the application.

Tip #4 – Observe a communication channel

Sometimes an embedded system can appear to be operating as expected to the watchdog and the application processor but from an external observer be in a non-responsive state.  In such cases it can be useful to tie the smart watchdog to a communication channel such as a UART.  When the watchdog is connected to a communication channel it not only monitor channel traffic but even commands that are specific to the watchdog.  A great example of this is a watchdog designed for a small satellite that monitors radio communications between the flight computer and ground station.  If the flight computer becomes non-responsive to the radio, a command could be sent to the watchdog that is then executed and used to reset the flight computer.

Tip #5 – Consider an externally timed reset function

The question of who is watching the watchdog is undoubtedly on the minds of many engineers when using a microcontroller for a watchdog.  Using a microcontroller to implement extra features adds some complexity and a new software element to the system.  In the event that the watchdog goes off into the weeds how is the watchdog going to recover? One option would be to use an external watchdog timer that was discussed earlier.  The smart watchdog would generate a heartbeat to keep itself from being reset by the watchdog timer.  Another option would be to have the application processor act as the watchdog for the watchdog.  Careful thought needs to be given to the best way to ensure both processors remain functioning as intended.

Conclusion

The purpose of the smart watchdog is to monitor the system and the primary microcontroller to ensure that they operate as expected.  During the design of a system watchdog it can be very tempting to allow the number of features supported to creep.  Developers need to keep in mind that as the complexity of the smart watchdog increases so does the probability that the watchdog itself will contain potential failure modes and bugs.  Keeping the watchdog simple and to the minimum necessary feature set will ensure that it can be exhaustively tested and proven to work.

Originally Posted here

I recently joined the Embedded Online Conference thinking I was going to gain new insights on embedded and IoT techniques. But I was pleasantly surprised to see a huge variety of sessions with a focus on modern software development practices. It is becoming more and more important to gain familiarity with a more modern software approach, even when you’re programming a constrained microcontroller or an FPGA.

Historically, there has been a large separation between application developers and those writing code for constrained embedded devices. But, things are now changing. The embedded world intersecting with the world of IoT, data science, and ML, and the deeper co-operation between software and hardware communities is driving innovation. The Embedded Online Conference, artfully organised by Jacob Beningo, represented exactly this cross-section, projecting light on some of the most interesting areas in the embedded world - machine learning on microcontrollers, using test-driven development to reduce bugs and programming an FPGA in Python are all things that a few years ago, had little to do with the IoT and embedded industry.

This blog is the first part of a series discussing these new and exciting changes in the embedded industry. In this article, we will focus on machine learning techniques for low-power and cost-sensitive IoT and embedded Arm-based devices.

Think like a machine learning developer

Considered for many year's an academic dead end of limited practical use, machine learning has gained a lot of renewed traction in recent years and it has now become one of the most interesting trends in the IoT space. TinyML is the buzzword of the moment. And this was a hot topic at the Embedded Online Conference. However, for embedded developers, this buzzword can sometimes add an element of uncertainty.

The thought of developing IoT applications with the addition of machine learning can seem quite daunting. During Pete Warden’s session about the past, present and future of embedded ML, he described the embedded and machine learning worlds to be very fragmented; there are so many hardware variants, RTOS’s, toolchains and sensors meaning the ability to compile and run a simple ‘hello world’ program can take developers a long time. In the new world of machine learning, there’s a constant churn of new models, which often use different types of mathematical operations. Plus, exporting ML models to a development board or other targets is often more difficult than it should be.

Despite some of these challenges, change is coming. Machine learning on constrained IoT and embedded devices is being made easier by new development platforms, models that work out-of-the-box with these platforms, plus the expertise and increased resources from organisations like Arm and communities like tinyML. Here are a few must-watch talks to help in your embedded ML development: 

• New to the tinyML space is Edge Impulse, a start-up that provides a solution for collecting device data, building a model based around it and deploying it to make sense of the data directly on the device. CTO at Edge Impulse, Jan Jongboom talks about how to use a traditional signal processing pipeline to detect anomalies with a machine learning model to detect different gestures. All of this has now been made even easier by the announced collaboration with Arduino, which simplifies even further the journey to train a neural network and deploy it on your device.
• Arm recently announced new machine learning IP that not only has the capabilities to deliver a huge uplift in performance for low-power ML applications, but will also help solve many issues developers are facing today in terms of fragmented toolchains. The new Cortex-M55 processor and Ethos-U55 microNPU will be supported by a unified development flow for DSP and ML workloads, integrating optimizations for machine learning frameworks. Watch this talk to learn how to get started writing optimized code for these new processors.
• An early adopter implementing object detection with ML on a Cortex-M is the OpenMV camera - a low-cost module for machine vision algorithms. During the conference, embedded software engineer, Lorenzo Rizzello walks you through how to get started with ML models and deploying them to the OpenMV camera to detect objects and the environment around the device.

Putting these machine learning technologies in the hands of embedded developers opens up new opportunities. I’m excited to see and hear what will come of all this amazing work and how it will improve development standards and transform embedded devices of the future.

If you missed the conference and would like to catch the talks mentioned above*, visit www.embeddedonlineconference.com

*This blog only features a small collection of all the amazing speakers and talks delivered at the Conference!

Part 2 of my review can be viewed by clicking here

5 Tips for Expanding your Embedded Skills