 Hi, this is Jojo Sapin Bhartia, and we are here at Open Source Summit in Dublin, and today we have with us Gabriele Paoloni, your chairman of the Elisa Gorni board. First of all, it's great to have you on the show. Thank you. Thank you so much. Yeah, tell us a bit about the project. What does it mean? So what does it mean? So Elisa stands for enabling Linux in a safety critical applications and the main goal of the project is to help and facilitate third parties to integrate Linux in the safety critical systems and eventually make a safety claim on such systems. And what are safety critical systems? These are all systems where a fort could lead to a hazard in terms of damage to people or eventually even loss of human life. So, and yeah, the project started back in early 2019 and today we are working, you know, with a quite decent membership baseline across different working groups and across different industry domains. Perfect. Can you talk about the community as you mentioned, you know, what kind of companies are involved with the project? Yes, so we have different members. So especially we have mainly automotive domains, companies like BMW, Toyota, Intel, Mobileye. But recently we also have, you know, also Boeing joined as a premium member and that is like a significant change because we can now start also investigating and working into the avionic domain. So till now we were mainly focused on automotive and medical domains and now we are able to effectively to expand. Also, we have different general member. I can think of code thing, ARM, ZTE. So it's, you know, it's quite, you know, a significant, you know, membership baseline. I think right now we are more than 20 members active. Yeah, something like that. Yeah. And before you, I was talking to one of the working groups, which was in the automotive space. I was talking to Philip there. I also want to understand when you talk about, you know, the safety critical applications. What is the scope of this project? Because when it comes to safety, safety, because sometimes folks confuse safety with security. So if you can define what, what is the specific about safety critical applications? Yes. So the main difference is that so safety is all about reducing the risk of a hazard to an acceptable degree. Okay, it's not about eliminating the risk. So therefore, in order to achieve safety, it is we evaluate, you know, how measure and techniques, you know, can contribute to this risk reduction. Security, it is, you know, it implies a malicious intent. Okay, safety is mainly focused on a random fault on a bug without any malicious intent. Whereas security, you know, it always implies that there is a malicious action behind that could exploit, you know, the current system. So, and this is the main difference. So in the end, indeed, techniques can be used on a common ground between safety and security, but they must be interpreted, you know, with a different view. Okay, something that can be acceptable for security cannot be acceptable for safety and also vice versa. Yeah, this is interesting because when we talk about safety, it could be also building safety. I talked to a lot of companies, they just, you know, focus on building management where we talk about, you know, all the fire hazard and a lot of things. So can you also talk about from the perspective of the group, what kind of industries are involved, any specific industry that are, you know, kind of actively engage the project? Right. So right now, as I said, we have actively, so Elisa is actively working on two domains. That is the medical domain and the automotive domain. In the medical domain, we are investigating in open APS use case. So that is basically a control machine for an artificial pancreas and so for people that are suffering for diabetes, for instance. And in the automotive domain, we are working, you know, on the, we are working on the telltale use case. And in general, we are always keen, you know, to embrace more and more use cases as members chime in and, you know, make proposals. Right now, since Boeing joined as a premium member, I think it was like last month or something like that. So right now, also an avionic working group has been proposed. And that is, you know, quite, you know, it is quite interesting because it would allow us to embrace yet one more domain. And the interesting thing is that even if we work across different domains, there is always a common ground from a technical point of view. So all the ingredients, techniques and tools that we, you know, deliver as part of Elisa, so they can contribute significantly, you know, on all these safety critical domains. OK, even if the safety standards are, you know, are different. The fact there is a one emerging space which is becoming very interesting, which is, of course, I talked to, you know, Philip before that about the automotive cars. But we are not talking about the traditional cars. We are also talking about EVs or smart cars like Tesla's and everybody's moving into some. So that's kind of creating a totally different set of challenges when it comes to safety. Is that also within the scope of the project? I think we need to make a clarification here. So Elisa, as such, doesn't make any safety claim. OK, so effectively, we do not provide a safe Linux distribution and we do not make a safety claim on the tools that are provided, on the documentation that is provided. What we do is we deliver a set of ingredients and tools that can be used by the integrators, by the third parties. OK, now going back to the question, I mean, indeed, enabling Linux to run autonomous driving application that is quite a challenging target. Are we trying to achieve that? Are we trying to support that from an Elisa point of view? The answer is yes. I mean, the analysis and techniques that we are, you know, investigating this can be used also in, you know, in supporting autonomous driving application. In fact, from red dot, we are doing that right now. So we are effectively, you know, leveraging this, the work that we do in Elisa for our own vehicle or as distribution, as an example. So the answer is yes. But it also depends on the integrators, as you said. Absolutely, yes. So, yes. Perfect. If I ask you, the project, I think, was created like around 2019, if I'm not wrong. Can you share some of the milestones that you have? You see that, hey, this is the achievement we have made over the years. Where will those be? Yeah. Well, the first thing is I remember when I joined the project, it was in late 2019. At that stage, there was no automotive working group. There was no architectural working group. There was no development process working group that now is called OSCP. So and so what happened? So the first thing is we started to look into a specific use case. So we enabled the automotive use cases. I think at that time, there was the medical device that was the only use case. So we enabled the automotive domain. We kicked off a series of working group that are providing, you know, tools and technical solutions with a specific focus on the kernel. So that is the SIFT architecture working group, OSCP working group, Linux for safety, critical future working group. So all of these were, you know, were missing. And indeed, also the membership baseline, it grew quite significantly from between 2019 and now. I think probably it more than doubled something like that, if I remember correctly. Now, I don't have the numbers in my hand. So, but, you know, we had definitely a significant increase in the membership. And last, but not least, the public visibility of Elisa, right? So right now we have, you know, a YouTube channel. We are active on Twitter or LinkedIn and we are able to reach, you know, the ecosystem, you know, of functional safety quite effectively. Whereas initially, we, you know, very few people could, you know, could know about Elisa, right? So and yeah, so we have made many different programs on multiple aspects. So the use case aspects, the technical deliverables aspects and the, you know, also from a public visibility point of view sponsorship point of view that also view significantly. Yes. What are the things that you are working on? What are the things that are in the pipeline? OK, so as a chair of the governing board, I make sure that the goals that are set by the governing boards are progressing, you know, to completion. And I'm tracking, you know, the stills of these goals. And also from a technical point of view, you know, I also lead the safety architecture working group and I'm quite deeply involved with tools that are able to provide an architectural view of the Linux internals, drivers and subsystems. We, you know, we also work on safety analysis. So we analyze, you know, what are the most critical subparts of the kernel in supporting a specific safety application that are defined by the domain working group like the automotive working group and the medical working group. So and so this is personally what I do, right? So on, let's say, on the management side, you know, I'm, you know, I make sure that, you know, the Lisa goals are are progressing pretty well. And on the technical side, I look after, you know, my safety architecture working group. Yes. Gaviali, thank you so much for taking time out today and talk about the Lisa project, the scope and also clarifying, you know, something about safety and what are the industry that are leveraging it. And as usual, I would love to have you back on the show. Thank you. Thank you so much. It was my pleasure to be here and to talk about Lisa and the current activities. Thank you.