Live data from Hacker News

Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

electrek.co

61–70 of 386 posts

Re: Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

#61
post #6
post #3

This is why I have a Dumbcar connected to a Smartphone via bluetooth.

That's why _I_ have a Dumbcar connected to a smartphone via FM for audio only :)

I've tried that before, but it sounded terrible. What dongle do you use?

Re: Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

#62
post #13

It's easy to underestimate how hard and expensive it is to build, deploy, and remotely upgrade software that runs reliably on a fleet of diverse cars (different models, different years, slightly different components from batch to batch, etc.). It makes updating a mobile phone OS look trivial in comparison. So far, only Tesla seems to be able to update car software remotely, regularly and reliably. I'm certain it's ne…

if (cpu == A) do code

else if (cpu == B) do other code

They invited the multiple combination vampire into their house. They know what devices are being used. If you don't want a dedicated update per piece of equipment, it'll be a large binary with lots of branching. Saying they don't know what device is where is just lazy. Ask the device what it is, and have a branch for it. If the device IDs itself as something unknown, don't do anything.

Re: Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A/B partitions tends to solve that. You will only switch to the new partition when the update is 100% verified installed. If it doesn't complete in an atomic manner, your device will just boot into the previous healthy partition.

A/B gets complicated in the real world. BL1 may not support A/B for example, so to implement A/B bootloaders you may need a shim that can read/write NVM to handle that. Your HSM may not have slots for multiple keys to have different signatures, so upgrading one may trample the other if your update code doesn't check that. Lots of ways to screw this up, especially in automotive where you're likely to be dealing with T…

With all due respect, that all sounds like Programmer Induced Problems(tm).

Cars are a long solved problem, being around for over a century. Telephony and computing hardware and infrastructure today are in the realm of the ludicrously good compared to even just a few decades ago, even if we consider bottom of the barrel worst case scenarios. If software somehow can't work a solved problem using ludicrously good hardware, the programmers (and their managers) are the problem.

Re: Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

#64
post #13

It's easy to underestimate how hard and expensive it is to build, deploy, and remotely upgrade software that runs reliably on a fleet of diverse cars (different models, different years, slightly different components from batch to batch, etc.). It makes updating a mobile phone OS look trivial in comparison. So far, only Tesla seems to be able to update car software remotely, regularly and reliably. I'm certain it's ne…

> All things considered, physical buttons and dials are probably easier and cheaper, because they don't require software updates!

If it ain't broke it's ripe for disruption

Re: Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

#66
post #13

It's easy to underestimate how hard and expensive it is to build, deploy, and remotely upgrade software that runs reliably on a fleet of diverse cars (different models, different years, slightly different components from batch to batch, etc.). It makes updating a mobile phone OS look trivial in comparison. So far, only Tesla seems to be able to update car software remotely, regularly and reliably. I'm certain it's ne…

> All things considered, physical buttons and dials are probably easier and cheaper, because they don't require software updates!

I am pretty sure there is a market for a dumb modern car, but no one is building it. I am thinking of an electric car without anything "smart" in it. Modern safety features can stay, if they work completely self contained and without requiring an external connection ever over the lifespan of the car.

Re: Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

#67
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why _I_ have a Dumbcar connected to a smartphone via FM for audio only :)

I've tried that before, but it sounded terrible. What dongle do you use?

I mean, totally, it doesn't sound great but that's all I can do, my car doesn't have bluetooth :)

Re: Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

#68
post #13

It's easy to underestimate how hard and expensive it is to build, deploy, and remotely upgrade software that runs reliably on a fleet of diverse cars (different models, different years, slightly different components from batch to batch, etc.). It makes updating a mobile phone OS look trivial in comparison. So far, only Tesla seems to be able to update car software remotely, regularly and reliably. I'm certain it's ne…

Forget updates entirely. My car is one of the few places I expect to get software that works the first time.

If you absolutely must have updates, then at least not OTA updates. Have them done at the dealership or service center so any issues can be dealt with immediately.

Come on, is this engineering or hacking? This is a car, not a CRUD app. Get. It. Right.

Re: Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

#69

Is it possible, as a licensee of the Rivian vehicle system, to disable the automatic OTA updates without having expert-level knowledge or tooling? Also, yes, I'm specifically avoiding using the word "owner" above for obvious reasons.

Rivian "licensee" here. So far all updates have required you to press a button (in the car or on the app) to launch the update installer. Not sure how many weeks you can ignore it for as I never tried.

Re: Rivian software update bricks infotainment system, fix not obvious

#70
Can’t imagine how much it would suck to be the engineer who fat fingered it and caused a huge crisis for the company, inconveniencing tons of customers and costing millions. Even if there should be processes in place to prevent it in the first place, you’d still know you were the “but for cause” of the problem.
Post reply on HN