From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 May 2015 11:03:53 -0500 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Sun, 3 May 2015 12:03:51 -0400 From: Peter Chapin X-X-Sender: pcc09070@WIL414CHAPIN.vtc.vsc.edu Subject: Re: Boeing 787 integer overflow In-Reply-To: <9f20f713-d65c-471d-ab7c-d314a14fdcd0@googlegroups.com> Message-ID: References: <201505021834588468-rblove@airmailnet> <9f20f713-d65c-471d-ab7c-d314a14fdcd0@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (CYG 23 2013-08-11) Organization: Vermont Technical College MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-KVe/su1pcxD5lUwP+TVPq1InA0QxzlaWyI+gYuuno6BNPm/V/ZuQghqWuE6YmIhpe7AKlc3DQzQmMGX!I3AHivDV7Mslb4WY0RbXC6gGqksaDoQ2w6/yUXR0jJxNMdK3mnkCFB+hcTl11Jmt3KzwSuxDa+4t!/TpYnuI6lDnpRjojMw== X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 2621 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:25705 Date: 2015-05-03T12:03:51-04:00 List-Id: On Sun, 3 May 2015, Maciej Sobczak wrote: >> Can anyone comment on what language Boeing used for this? > > It does not matter. The ability to run continuously for 8 months was > most likely not in the requirements (planes have to be switched off for > maintenance more frequently than that anyway), so there was no need to > implement a solution for this. I guess it depends on if there is a *requirement* to reboot the system periodically (less than 8 months) in the maintenance plan. The matter should be handled somewhere and it seems like it wasn't. In other words it was just "luck" that these systems have been getting restarted frequently enough. Planes obviously don't fly for 8 months straight and I'm sure they get maintained, in general, more regularly than that as well. I don't know precisely which system this issue is connected with, but it seems possible to me that, in some cases at least, some systems would be left up and running while others are being maintained. In other words a daily maintenance schedule may not imply that the counter in question is getting reset daily. A software fix might be nice, such as increasing the counter to 64 bits to push the overflow time out to something ridiculous, but just adding an item to the maintenance checklist might also be sufficient. Peter