Breaking News
Engineering Investigations

It always worked before, so you broke it

Tim Fyock
5/18/2011 05:22 PM EDT

 26 comments   post a comment
NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 3 / 3
jimfordbroadcom
User Rank
CEO
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
jimfordbroadcom   5/20/2011 7:02:34 PM
NO RATINGS
Well, I've worked with enough boneheaded software types who didn't know anything about hardware to say that you are the exception, Tim. Embedded engineers who know both are worth their weight in gold, even if boneheaded managers don't realize it. I totally agree with zeeglen; forget the finger-pointing and just figure out what's not working. Sometimes it's both H/W and S/W!

zeeglen
User Rank
Blogger
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
zeeglen   5/20/2011 6:41:20 PM
NO RATINGS
This reminds me of a time when a watchdog timer would sporadically time out when a processor took too long to execute a command/response sequence on a control bus. This was a new product in both HW and SW, and the late night sessions in the labs were not burdened by "it's a HW fault / no it's a SW fault". We just admitted that nobody knew yet where the fault was and we had to work together to find it. Finally, using an analog scope (digital scopes had not been invented yet) the SW guy and myself saw an event whiz by that the timeout occurred within the 1 second allocated time of the hardware. I took another look at the hardware, a long-chain ripple counter and realized that the guy who designed this had done the stage count based on a complete cycle at the final stage. He forgot that the timeout actually occurred on the rising edge HALFWAY through the cycle. Solution: knife and green wire. Lesson learned: Never assume HW or SW. Test, test, test....

Tombo0
User Rank
Rookie
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
Tombo0   5/19/2011 1:27:39 PM
NO RATINGS
I deal with this everyday

old account Frank Eory
User Rank
Rookie
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
old account Frank Eory   5/18/2011 10:35:10 PM
NO RATINGS
Interesting that in a new system -- new hardware and new software -- what ultimately turned out to be a signal integrity problem was blamed on software. "Mechanical and hardware assemblers said it was obviously software." And management simply took their word for it, without any data to back up that claim?

jnissen
User Rank
Manager
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
jnissen   5/18/2011 10:20:04 PM
NO RATINGS
Been there done that! Don't care to repeat it!

Dave33
User Rank
Rookie
re: It always worked before, so you broke it
Dave33   5/18/2011 8:30:24 PM
NO RATINGS
I've written and debugged firmware for many years and I can really relate to this story. Solving problems like those described in the story take time and a very good engineer. Unfortunately there's no way to measure the difficulty of a problem so there's no way to measure the value of the solution. Managers usually just look at how long you took and draw their own conclusions.

<<   <   Page 3 / 3
Flash Poll
Radio
LATEST ARCHIVED BROADCAST
Join our online Radio Show on Friday 11th July starting at 2:00pm Eastern, when EETimes editor of all things fun and interesting, Max Maxfield, and embedded systems expert, Jack Ganssle, will debate as to just what is, and is not, and embedded system.
Like Us on Facebook

Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed
Top Comments of the Week