Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#101

Post by hulitu » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:06 PM UTC

schiffern wrote: post #7

> “We were able to substitute alternative chips, and then write the firmware in a matter of weeks,” Musk said. “It’s not just a matter of swapping out a chip; you also have to rewrite the software.” https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/26/22595060/tesla-chip-short...

If this is true, stay away from anything Tesla does. I work in the industry. 2 examples: 1) you have to change a transistor with one from a different supplier, same characteristics. You need to do some HW engineering tests. If the transistor is part of a safety relevant function, you need to do also system, SW and safety tests. And then environmental and EMC tests. Of course you can tailor but you need a very good justification. 2) You change the microcontroller. You need new SW, new tools (emulators - takes some time to be delivered), new sourcing, new HW design etc. It is from development perspective a new product so you need testing (HW, SW, System, Safety) and design validation (environmental tests, EMC) , maybe more than one loop.And when everything is passed and sourcing is done (i.e. you can buy the component) you can start production.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#102

Post by wrycoder » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:06 PM UTC

shiftpgdn wrote: post #38

01100011 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can tell, Tesla plays fast and loose, treating their product like a manufacturer of consumer electronics and not a manufacturer of a dangerous and durable good. That obviously allows them to out-compete other auto manufacturers who are more aware of things like product liability. See the Toyota accelerator-gate lawsuits. From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%E2%80%932011_Toyota_vehic... : > However, on…

Toyota accelerator-gate is largely a farce. Almost all of the people involved with Toyota unintended acceleration were over the age of 65 and had the poorly designed loose floor mats in their cars. Even if they had perfect readable John Carmack tier coding they still would have lost.

Easy to do. I stepped on the accelerator instead of the brake once. First impulse is to step harder, until you realize what’s going on. If your realization is slow, bad things can happen.

If bad things happen, the tendency is to blame someone else.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#103

Post by YetAnotherNick » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:08 PM UTC

phkahler wrote: post #91

Give me a microcontroller with between 32K and 2MB of onboard flash, some eeprom, multiple CAN peripherals, ADC, SPI, good timers, and some specialized peripherals - synched PWMs with dead time for driving power electronics, and some other special things. Dual-core lockstep for safety critical things (like the fronk latch). Some combination of all that at a price starting under a dollar. Oh, and a temperature range o…

ESP32 satisfies each of your requirement. They are available for $1(without BT sensor) in bulk pricing, have 4MB flash, have eeprom, have CAN, ADC, SPI, goof timers, good PWM, good DAC, is realtime, dualcore, and ambient temperature range of -40 to +125 C.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#104

Post by somehnguy » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:12 PM UTC

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #97

somehnguy wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I do! I've seen both fail just the same so it's not like ECUs are failure-proof or something.

Your radio dying won't kill you.

Correct, but you seem to have disregarded half my comment. ECUs are not failure-proof and fail all the time.

I've never heard of anyone dying due to ECU failure either..I'm not sure how that would even happen given all the critical systems on a car are mechanical first with electronic assist. So you can't lose steering, braking, etc. The worst that happens is you lose power, which is about the same risk as a subpar standard transmission driver stalling out (and can also happen in a number of different ways). Can you expand on how an ECU failing might kill you?

I would love if someone could elaborate on why I'm wrong instead of drive by downvoting. This isn't reddit.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#105

Post by coryrc » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:12 PM UTC

IshKebab wrote: post #75

jillesvangurp wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla is much better at writing software than most of their competitors. That's how they can adapt so quickly. They also do a lot more in house than their competitors. That means they can optimize their development processes, and align with chip suppliers across different components. If you have to work with a multitude of suppliers that each ship their own hardware and software, life is a lot more complicated. Chang…

Are they better at writing software or do they just care less about how safety critical it is?

I think you underestimate how poorly software development is done in traditional industries. Practice makes perfect and they mostly practice writing reports not software.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#106

Post by stefan_ » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:16 PM UTC

schiffern wrote: post #7

> “We were able to substitute alternative chips, and then write the firmware in a matter of weeks,” Musk said. “It’s not just a matter of swapping out a chip; you also have to rewrite the software.” https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/26/22595060/tesla-chip-short...

What software can turn a MSP430 or 68 knockoff into a highly efficient power transistor? Take everything Musk says with some caution..

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#107

Post by coryrc » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

baybal2 wrote: post #30

TaylorPhebillo wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the Cortex-R chips are more targeted here- I think the V8-R chips are designed specifically for automotive use, so I assume they have appropriate ratings.

There are very lazy car companies which simply specify "automotive certified" car chips for everything, including MCUs running window switches. So, don't be surprised $20 ARM-R based MCUs being used to do something trivial like driving window motor. I seen a few dashboard where there is an STM32 sitting connected to a single button, whose only duty is to register a key press, and burp something on the CanBus in respo…

I guarantee you no one is running $20 MCUs in trivial applications (in normal times). They're very cost-conscious.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#108

Post by mhh__ » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

bellyfullofbac wrote: post #6

I look forward to the cyber-punkish future (real soon now?) where there's an old beige computer case with a Pentium MMX sticker on it on someone's passenger seat with wires snaking into the engine bay. "Yeah the ECU died, so I had to hack together this replacement...".

Maybe we'll have CMOS printers by then... (I can dream!)

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#109

Post by raverbashing » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

csours wrote: post #51

Disclaimer up front: I work for GM. I don't work on chips or components for my day job. What follows is solely my own opinion. Some things to emphasize: OEMs (GM, Ford, Toyota, VW, etc) do not design components, and they do not want to. They design specifications for components, and then get suppliers to bid. This is great for efficiency in established ecosystems, not great for agility. To my knowledge, GM did not ca…

Yeah, I remember some talk about moving car buses to 24V or maybe even 48V but that didn't seem to have gained ground.

Re: Why Carmakers Can’t Transition to Newer Chips

#110

Post by mwint » Sat, Oct 02, 2021, 5:23 PM UTC

csours wrote: post #79

cainxinth wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A wholesale migration to a modern architecture is risky and costly. I have no doubt that your company and all the other big automakers are running the numbers and trying to weigh those risks and costs with the risks and costs of not updating. Given that the chipmakers and supply chain experts are not making rosy predictions for things to drastically improve in the next 12 months or longer, I wonder if the balance i…

> "I wonder if the balance is shifting towards taking action." I can't find a public source, but some actions are being taken. Bear in mind that any major shifts would happen in a new product, that is, something 5-7 years out.

Fundamentally, what is it that prevents the established auto makers from making changes mid lifecycle? Seems like Tesla keeps pulling it off; why can’t GM?

Is it that the component specification+acquisition cycle you describe is optimized to take as long as the development cycle of a new car?