From 69b7b6b763a2b0bf6ca1f2cdcb965acd81fb42c6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Ryan Steel (ETAS)" Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 14:01:33 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/5] docs: add module_template docs to time_daemon --- .../architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst | 215 ++++++++++++++++++ .../architecture/component_architecture.rst | 126 ++++++++++ score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst | 26 +++ .../docs/component_classification.rst | 198 ++++++++++++++++ .../chklst_impl_inspection.rst | 125 ++++++++++ .../docs/detailed_design/detailed_design.rst | 96 ++++++++ .../docs/detailed_design/index.rst | 45 ++++ score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst | 91 ++++++++ score/time_daemon/docs/manuals/.gitkeep | 0 .../requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst | 194 ++++++++++++++++ score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/index.rst | 24 ++ .../docs/requirements/requirements.rst | 106 +++++++++ .../docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst | 62 +++++ .../time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst | 60 +++++ .../time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst | 133 +++++++++++ .../docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep | 0 16 files changed, 1501 insertions(+) create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/component_architecture.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/component_classification.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/chklst_impl_inspection.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/detailed_design.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/index.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/manuals/.gitkeep create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/index.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/requirements.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst create mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..cc3b142a --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst @@ -0,0 +1,215 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + + +.. document:: Time Daemon Architecture Inspection Checklist + :id: doc__time_daemon_arc_inspection + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: YES + :realizes: wp__sw_arch_verification + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety``, ``security`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +Architecture Inspection Checklist +================================= + +Purpose +------- + +The purpose of the software architecture checklist is to ensure that the design meets the criteria and quality as +defined per project processes and guidelines for feature and component architectural design elements. +It helps to check the compliance with requirements, identify errors or inconsistencies, and ensure adherence to best +practices. +The checklist guides evaluation of the architecture design, identifies potential problems, and aids in +communication and documentation of architectural decisions to stakeholders. + +Conduct +------- + +As described in the concept :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` the following "inspection roles" are expected to be filled: + +- content responsible (author): +- reviewer: +- moderator: + +Checklist +--------- + +It is mandatory to fill in the "passed" column with "yes" or "no" for each checklist item and additionally to add in the remarks why it is passed or not passed. +In case of "no" an issue link to the issue tracking system has to be added in the last column (if not solved in the same issue). +See also :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular. + +.. list-table:: Architecture Design Review Checklist + :header-rows: 1 + + * - Review Id + - Acceptance criteria + - Guidance + - passed + - Remarks + - Issue link + * - ARC_01_01 + - Is the traceability from software architectural elements to requirements, and other level architectural elements (e.g. component to interface) established according to the "Relations between the architectural elements" as described in :need:`doc_concept__arch_process`? + - Trace should be checked automatically by tool support in the future. Will be removed from the checklist once the requirement (:need:`Correlations of the architectural building blocks `) is implemented. Refer to `Tool Requirements `_ for the current status. + - + - + - + * - ARC_01_02 + - Does the software architecture design consider all the requirements allocated or belonging to the architectural element, including functional, non-functional, safety, and security requirements and all related design decisions? + - Check if all requirements allocated or belonging to the architectural element are considered in the design. This includes functional requirements (e.g. functional safety requirements), non-functional requirements (e.g. performance, reliability), and security requirements (e.g. confidentiality, integrity). Additionally, ensure that all related design decisions are taken into account and documented in the architectural design. + - + - + - + * - ARC_01_03 + - If the architectural element is related to any supplier manuals (incl. safety and security) + are the relevant parts covered? + - If the architecture makes use of supplied elements, their manuals (like safety) have to be considered (i.e. its provided functionality matches the expectation and assumptions are fulfilled). Note that in case of safety component this means that assumed Technical Safety Requirements and AoUs of the safety manual are covered. + - + - + - + * - ARC_01_04 + - Is the architectural element traceable to the lower level artifacts as defined by the workproduct traceability? + - Will be removed from checklist once the requirement (:need:`Correlations of the architectural building blocks `) is implemented by automated tool check. See `Tool Requirements `_. + Details of possible linking can be depicted from the traceability concept. + - + - + - + * - ARC_02_01 + - Is the software architecture design compliant with the (overall) feature architecture? + - On component level check against the feature architecture, on feature level check other features with common components used. + - + - + - + * - ARC_02_02 + - Is appropriate and comprehensible operation/interface naming present in the architectural design? + - Check :need:`gd_guidl__arch_design` + - + - + - + * - ARC_02_03 + - Are correctness of data flow and control flow within the architectural elements considered? + - E.g. examine definitions, transformations, integrity, and interaction of data; check error handling, data + exchange between elements, correct response to inputs and documented decision making. + Note: consistency is ensured by the process/tooling, by defining each interface only once. + - + - + - + * - ARC_02_04 + - Are the interfaces between the software architectural element and other architectural elements well-defined? + - Check if the interface reacts on non-defined behaviour or errors; can established protocols be used; are the + interfaces for inputs, outputs, error codes documented; is loose coupling considered and only limited exposure; + can unit or integration test be written against the interface; data amount transferred; no sensitive data + exposure; + - + - + - + * - ARC_02_05 + - Does the software architectural element consider the timing constraints (from the parent requirement)? + - If there are hard requirements on the timing a programming time estimation should be performed and also + deadline supervision considered. + - + - + - + * - ARC_02_06 + - Is the documentation of the software architectural element, including textual and graphical descriptions + (e.g., UML diagrams), comprehensible and complete? + - Use of semi-formal notation is expected for architectural elements with an allocated ASIL level. + Is the architecture template correctly filled? + - + - + - + * - ARC_03_01 + - Is the architectural element modular and encapsulated? + - Check e.g. that only minimal interfaces are used. Design should be object oriented. Interfaces and interactions are clearly defined. Usage of access types (private, protected) properly set. Limited global variables. + - + - + - + * - ARC_03_02 + - Is the suitability of the software architecture for future modifications and maintainability considered? + - Check for e.g. loose coupling, separation of concerns, high cohesion, versioning strategy for interfaces, + decision records, use of established design patterns. + - + - + - + * - ARC_03_03 + - Are simplicity and avoidance of unnecessary complexity present in the software architecture and the component? + - Indicators for complexity are: number of use cases (corresponding to dynamic diagrams) + allocated to single design element, number of interfaces and operations in an interface, + function parameters, global variables, complex types, limited comprehensibility. + The belonging code metrics should be checked. + + Notes: + + If the "number of use cases" or "number of interfaces" above exceeds "3" or "number of function parameters" exceeds "5" or the "number of operations" exceeds "20" or global variables are used, a design rationale is mandatory. + + See also if component classification :need:`gd_temp__component_classification` as measure is present. + + - + - + - + * - ARC_03_04 + - Is the software architecture design following best practices and design principles? + - Refer to architectural guidelines and recommendations within the project documentation. + - + - + - + * - ARC_04_03 + - If your software architectural design of the component includes processes and tasks, are their scheduling policies and priorities (at least the needed relation one to another) defined to ensure that timing requirements are met? Please note, that the particular priorities or priority ranges will be probably defined by the project handbook or the software development plan. + + Note: see :need:`std_req__iso26262__software_743` + - Give a reason for these scheduling policies and priorities or explain why not needed. + - + - + - + + +.. attention:: + The above checklist entries must be filled according to your component architecture in scope. + +Note: If a Review ID is not applicable for your architecture, then state ""n/a" in status and comment accordingly in remarks. + +The following static views in "valid" state and with "inspected" tag set are in the scope of this inspection: + +.. needtable:: + :filter: "time_daemon" in docname and "architecture" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" + :style: table + :types: comp_arc_sta + :tags: time_daemon + :columns: id;status;tags + :colwidths: 25,25,25 + :sort: title + +and the following dynamic views: + +.. needtable:: + :filter: "time_daemon" in docname and "architecture" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" + :style: table + :types: comp_arc_dyn + :tags: time_daemon + :columns: id;status;tags + :colwidths: 25,25,25 + :sort: title + +.. attention:: + The above tables filtering must be updated according to your Component. diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/component_architecture.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/component_architecture.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..54eea9e3 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/component_architecture.rst @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +.. _time_daemon_component_architecture: + +Time Daemon Architecture Documentation +====================================== + +.. document:: Time Daemon Architecture + :id: doc__time_daemon_architecture + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__component_arch + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs in this stack. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your needs. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + + +Overview +-------- + + + +Requirements Linked to Component Architecture +--------------------------------------------- + +.. code-block:: none + + .. needtable:: Overview of Component Requirements + :style: table + :columns: title;id + :filter: search("comp_arch_sta__archdes$", "fulfils_back") + :colwidths: 70,30 + +Description +----------- + + + + + + + +Rationale Behind Architecture Decomposition +******************************************* + +Mandatory: A motivation for the decomposition or reason for not further splitting it into internal components. + +.. note:: Common decisions across components / cross cutting concepts is at the higher level. + +Static Architecture +------------------- + +The components are designed to cover the expectations from the feature architecture +(i.e. if already exists a definition it should be taken over and enriched). + +A component can optional also consist of lower level components to further structure the architecture. The component and its static views can also optionally use interfaces provided by other components. + +.. comp:: Time Daemon + :id: comp__time_daemon + :security: YES + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :belongs_to: feat__time + +.. comp_arc_sta:: Time Daemon (Static View) + :id: comp_arc_sta__time_daemon__sv + :security: YES + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :belongs_to: comp__time_daemon + :fulfils: comp_req__time_daemon__some_title + + .. needarch:: + :scale: 50 + :align: center + + {{ draw_component(need(), needs) }} + +Dynamic Architecture +-------------------- + +.. comp_arc_dyn:: Dynamic View + :id: comp_arc_dyn__time_daemon__dv + :security: YES + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :belongs_to: comp__time_daemon + :fulfils: comp_req__time_daemon__some_title + + Put here a sequence diagram + +Interfaces +---------- + +.. code-block:: rst + + .. real_arc_int:: + :id: real_arc_int__<component>__<Title> + :security: <YES|NO> + :safety: <QM|ASIL_B> + :fulfils: <link to component requirement id> + :language: cpp diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..961afe62 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +.. _time_daemon_architecture_index: + +Component Architecture +====================== + +.. note:: + Work in progress: page structure only, content to follow in later PRs. + +.. toctree:: + + component_architecture + chklst_arc_inspection diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/component_classification.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/component_classification.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..58292440 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/component_classification.rst @@ -0,0 +1,198 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +Component Classification +======================== + +.. note:: Document header + +.. document:: Time Daemon Component Classification + :id: doc__time_daemon_comp_class + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__sw_component_class + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your Component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +| Classification of <component> +| +| <Link to OSS component source (e.g. in github) including the selected version> +| +| Additional documentation considered: +| <list of documentation links> + + +Step 1: Determine (P): the uncertainty of the Processes applied +--------------------------------------------------------------- + +| Apply the process measures to determine (P). +| The result of a process measure shall have as outcome [HE, PE, NE] +| - HE: High Evidence +| - PE: Partly Evidence but Manageable +| - NE: No Evidence + +.. list-table:: Determine (P) + :header-rows: 1 + + * - Id + - Indicator for applying process + - Result + - Rationale for result + + * - 1 + - Are rules, state-of-the art processes applied for the design, implementation and verification? + - <HE|PE|NE> + - <Rationale for result> + + * - 2 + - Are requirements available? + - <HE|PE|NE> + - <Rationale for result> + + * - 3 + - Are specifications for functionalities and properties available (architecture)? + - <HE|PE|NE> + - <Rationale for result> + + * - 4 + - Are design specifications available? + - <HE|PE|NE> + - <Rationale for result> + + * - 5 + - Are configuration specification and data available, if applicable? + - <HE|PE|NE> + - <Rationale for result> + + * - 6 + - Are verification measures including tests and reports available? + - <HE|PE|NE> + - <Rationale for result> + + +| (P=1) shall be selected when none of the determined process measures indicate PE or NE. +| (P=2) shall be selected when at least one of the determined process measures indicate PE or NE, but the gaps evaluated are acceptable, means +| the risk of systematic faults due to these gaps is sufficiently low or manageable by mitigating the gaps. +| (P=3) in all other cases. + +<component name> is determined as P=<1|2|3> + + +Step 2: Determine (C): the uncertainty of finding systematic faults based on the Complexity +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + +| Apply the complexity measures to determine (C). +| The result of a complexity measure shall have as outcome [NH, HM, NM] +| - NH: Not High +| - HM: High but Manageable +| - NM: high and Not Manageable +| +| **Complexity measure for programming language: <C++ or RUST>** + +<select the correct table below (table for C++ is TBD)> + +.. list-table:: Determine (C) for RUST + :header-rows: 1 + + * - Id + - Indicator for high Complexity + - Complexity measure Tool + - Result + - Number + + * - 1 + - High amount of Lines of Code + - Lines of Code (without comments) (generated code is excluded, e.g. ProtoCmpl) + - <NH|HM|NM> + - <Number> + + * - 2 + - Unsafe code used / total unsafe code + - Count: + * LoUC+N: lines of unsafe code with safety note + * LoUC : lines of unsafe code, no safety note + - <NH|HM|NM> + - <Number> + + * - 3 + - | Test exists / Coverage (Function, Line) + | (maybe better: testability, but how to measure?) + - Existing Tests Coverage + - <NH|HM|NM> + - <Number> + + * - 4 + - High amount of public function interfaces + - Number of public function interfaces + - <NH|HM|NM> + - <RNumber> + + * - 5 + - High amount of function parameters + - Number of parameters + - <NH|HM|NM> + - <Number> + + +| (C=1) shall be selected when none of the determined complexity measures indicate HM or NM. +| (C=2) shall be selected when at least one of the determined complexity measures indicate HM or NM, but the gaps evaluated are acceptable, means +| the risk of systematic faults due to these gaps is sufficiently low in the context of the project or manageable by mitigating the gaps. +| (C=3) in all other cases. +| + +<component name> is determined as C=<1|2|3> + + +Step 3: Determine (CLAS_OUT): the classification outcome +-------------------------------------------------------- + +| Select CLAS_OUT depending on the determined values of (C) and (P) + ++-------+-----------------------+ +| ( C ) | ( P ) | ++-------+-------+-------+-------+ +| | 1 | 2 | 3 | ++=======+=======+=======+=======+ +| 1 | Q | Q | QR | ++-------+-------+-------+-------+ +| 2 | QR | QR | QR | ++-------+-------+-------+-------+ +| 3 | QR | QR | NQ | ++-------+-------+-------+-------+ + +<component name> is classified as CLAS_OUT=<Q|QR|NQ> + + +Step 4: Document all results and rationale for choosing (P) and (C) and (CLAS_OUT) +---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- +This document + + +Step 5: Based on (CLAS_OUT) select the activities +------------------------------------------------- + +| As soon as the change request containing this is in status "Accepted", the module safety plan for the component development is adapted based on the following: (select according to above result) +| - Q: Follow the processes for qualification of software components in a safety context. +| - QR: Follow the process for pre-existing software architectural elements +| - NQ: Do no use this element in safety context diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/chklst_impl_inspection.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/chklst_impl_inspection.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..f19648cf --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/chklst_impl_inspection.rst @@ -0,0 +1,125 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +.. document:: Time Daemon Implementation Inspection Checklist + :id: doc__time_daemon_impl_inspection + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: YES + :realizes: wp__sw_implementation_inspection + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your Component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety``, ``security`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +Implementation Inspection Checklist +=================================== + +Purpose +------- + +The purpose of this checklist is to collect the topics to be checked during implementation, +i.e. in the detailed design and the source code of the units. + +The checklist shall be agnostic to which programming language is used. Differences shall be treated +by linking to C++ or Rust specific documentation. + +Conduct +------- + +As described in the concept :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` the following "inspection roles" are expected to be filled: + +- content responsible (author): <contributor/committer explicitly named here, who is the main author, as can be seen in config mgt tooling> +- reviewer: <contributor/committer explicitly named here, who is the main content reviewer, must be different from content responsible> +- moderator: <committer explicitly named here, who is is the safety manager, security manager or quality manager initiating the inspection> + +Checklist +--------- + +It is mandatory to fill in the "passed" column with "yes" or "no" for each checklist item and additionally to add in the remarks why it is passed or not passed. +In case of "no" an issue link to the issue tracking system has to be added in the last column (if not solved in the same issue). +See also :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular. + +.. list-table:: Implementation Checklist + :header-rows: 1 + :widths: 10,30,50,6,6,8 + + * - Review ID + - Acceptance Criteria + - Guidance + - Passed + - Remarks + - Issue link + * - IMPL_01_01 + - Is the design according to guidelines? + - see :need:`gd_temp__detailed_design` and :need:`doc_concept__imp_concept` + (e.g. are the views done with the proposed UML diagrams) + - + - + - + * - IMPL_01_02 + - Is the implementation according to specification? + - Check if the linked component requirements are fulfilled + and detailed design also matches architecture description. + - + - + - + * - IMPL_01_03 + - Are the design decisions and constraints documented? + - Check also for plausibility of these. + - + - + - + * - IMPL_01_04 + - Are all external libraries used by the component specified in the detailed design? + - Check the automated dependency analysis. + Also make sure ASIL rated units also only use ASIL rated libraries. + - + - + - + * - IMPL_02_01 + - Are the static and dynamic code analysis reports verified for violations? + - All violations in ASIL related code must be justified. This includes the checks of coding guidelines. + - + - + - + * - IMPL_02_02 + - Do manual checks, that are derived from the coding guideline, find no safety critical error? + - Check this for the programming language used (e.g. C++ <link_to_checks_list>, Rust <link_to_checks_list>) + - + - + - + * - IMPL_03_01 + - Do the UID of the interface in component documentation match the implemented interface names of the unit? + - Compare interface UIDs (which contains the interface name) in component architecture/detailed design documentation + with public interfaces in source code (e.g. API headers, traits, public types/functions). + - + - + - + * - IMPL_03_02 + - Are detailed design and source code consistent and is the respective traceability established ? + - Check if available static and dynamic design diagrams and the textual descriptions match the code + (e.g. naming of interfaces, units, functions/operations/messages, data types). + Check if the folder/file names of the units and its source code matches the intended functionality. + For example if a unit is named "communication" it should not contain code for "data processing". + - + - + - diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/detailed_design.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/detailed_design.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..e5507dab --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/detailed_design.rst @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +.. _time_daemon_detailed_design: + +Time Daemon Detailed Design +=========================== + +.. document:: Time Daemon Detailed Design + :id: doc__time_daemon_detailed_design + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__sw_implementation + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your Component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +Detailed Design for Time Daemon +=============================== + +Description +----------- + +| Design Decisions - For the documentation of the decision the :need:`gd_temp__change_decision_record` can be used. +| Design Constraints + +Example: + + - component is split into two units unit1 and unit2 based on single responsibility principle. + - unit2 is injected to unit1 one via dependency injection for testability. + +Rationale Behind Decomposition into Units +****************************************** +| mandatory: a motivation for the decomposition into one or more units. + +.. note:: Reason for split into multiple units could be- + - Based on design principles like SOLID,DRY etc + - Based on design pattern's etc. + +Static Diagrams for Unit Interactions +------------------------------------- + +A static view provides an overview of the units and their relationships using +UML 2.0 notations (e.g. class diagrams, component diagrams). Use ``.. uml::`` +or ``.. image::`` directives to include the diagram. + +.. uml:: dd_example_ex_sta.puml + +Dynamic Diagrams for Unit Interactions (optional) +-------------------------------------------------- + +A dynamic view illustrates how the units within a component interact over their +interfaces to fulfill a specific use case or functionality. It is optional when the +component's behaviour is straightforward and can be understood from the static view +and interface documentation alone. + +Use standard UML behavioural diagrams (sequence diagrams, state machine diagrams) +with ``.. uml::`` or ``.. image::`` directives. + +.. uml:: dd_example_ex_dyn.puml + +Units within the Component +-------------------------- + +The relationship between a unit and its parent component is established implicitly +through the file path. Each component has its own directory, and units residing +within that directory belong to it. The unit's attributes and behaviour are documented +in the source code itself. A separate static diagram per unit is not required. + +Interface documentation of a software unit is part of the source code (e.g. public +API headers, trait definitions, or documented function signatures). + +Example: + +- unit1: implements the main logic (see source code for details) +- unit2: injected into unit1 via dependency injection for testability diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/index.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..c695047f --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/detailed_design/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +.. _time_daemon_detailed_design_index: + +Detailed Design +############### + +.. note:: + Work in progress: page structure only, content to follow in later PRs. + +.. attention:: + + The detailed design document is optional and should be created if the design of the component is complex and cannot be easily understood from the architecture documentation and interface documentation alone. + But the inspection checklist for the implementation is mandatory. + + +Detail design example +--------------------- + +An example of documenting detailed design can be found in: + + .. toctree:: + + detailed_design_example + +Inspection Checklist +-------------------- + +The checklist for verification of the detailed design and code can be found here: + +.. toctree:: + + chklst_impl_inspection diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..ca390ca2 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,91 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +.. _time_daemon: + +Time Daemon +##################### + +.. note:: Document header + +.. document:: Time Daemon + :id: doc__time_daemon + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__cmpt_request + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + +.. code-block:: rst + + .. comp:: Time Daemon + :id: comp__time_daemon_template + :security: YES + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + :implements: logic_arc_int__feature_name__interface_name1 + :consists_of: comp__component_name_internal_1, comp__component_name_internal_2, comp__component_name_internal_3 + :belongs_to: feat__feature_name + +.. attention:: + The above directives must be updated according to your Component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +Abstract +======== + +[A short (~200 word) description of the component.] + + +Specification +============= + +[Describe the requirements, architecture of any component.] or + + +How to Teach This +================= + +[How to teach users, new and experienced, how to apply the CR to their work.] + +.. note:: + For a CR that adds new functionality or changes behaviour, it is helpful to include a section on how to teach users, new and experienced, how to apply the CR to their work. + +Footnotes +========= + +[A collection of footnotes cited in the CR, and a place to list non-inline hyperlink targets.] + + +Further Documentation of the component can be found in the following sections: + +Component Detail Information +============================ + +.. toctree:: + :maxdepth: 1 + + architecture/index + detailed_design/index + requirements/index + safety_analysis/dfa + safety_analysis/fmea + safety_analysis/aou_requirements + component_classification diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/manuals/.gitkeep b/score/time_daemon/docs/manuals/.gitkeep new file mode 100644 index 00000000..e69de29b diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..c0211fd8 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst @@ -0,0 +1,194 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + + +.. document:: Time Daemon Requirements Inspection Checklist + :id: doc__time_daemon_req_inspection + :status: draft + :version: 2 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: YES + :realizes: wp__requirements_inspect + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your Component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety``, ``security`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +Requirement Inspection Checklist +================================ + +Purpose +------- + +The purpose of this requirement inspection checklist is to collect the topics to be checked during requirements inspection. + +Conduct +------- + +As described in the concept :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` the following "inspection roles" are expected to be filled: + +- content responsible (author): <contributor/committer explicitly named here, who is the main author, as can be seen in config mgt tooling> +- reviewer: <contributor/committer explicitly named here, who is the main content reviewer, must be different from content responsible> +- moderator: <committer explicitly named here, who is is the safety manager, security manager or quality manager initiating the inspection> +- test expert: <one of the reviewers explicitly named here, to cover REQ_08_01 as described> + +Checklist +--------- + +It is mandatory to fill in the "passed" column with "yes" or "no" for each checklist item and additionally to add in the remarks why it is passed or not passed. +In case of "no" an issue link to the issue tracking system has to be added in the last column (if not solved in the same issue). +See also :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular. + +.. list-table:: Component Requirement Inspection Checklist + :header-rows: 1 + :widths: 10,30,50,6,6,8 + + * - Review ID + - Acceptance Criteria + - Guidance + - Passed + - Remarks + - Issue link + * - REQ_01_01 + - Is the requirement formulation template used? + - see :need:`gd_temp__req_formulation`, this includes the use of "shall". + - + - + - + * - REQ_02_01 + - Is the requirement description *comprehensible* ? + - If you think the requirement is hard to understand, comment here. + - + - + - + * - REQ_02_02 + - Is the requirement description *unambiguous* ? + - Especially search for "weak words" like "about", "etc.", "relevant" and others (see the internet documentation on this). This check shall be supported by tooling. + - + - + - + * - REQ_02_03 + - Is the requirement description *atomic* ? + - A good way to think about this is to consider if the requirement may be tested by one (positive) test case or needs more of these. The requirement formulation template should also avoid being non-atomic already. Note that there are cases where also non-atomic requirements are the better ones, for example if those are better understandable. + - + - + - + * - REQ_02_04 + - Is the requirement description *feasible* ? + - If at the time of the inspection the requirement has already some implementation, the answer is yes. This can be checked via traces, but also :need:`gd_req__req_attr_impl` shows this. In case the requirement has no implementation at the time of inspection (i.e. not implemented at least as "proof-of-concept"), a development expert should be invited to the Pull-Request review to explicitly check this item. + - + - + - + * - REQ_02_05 + - Is the requirement description *independent from implementation* ? + - This checkpoint should improve requirements definition in the sense that the "what" is described and not the "how" - the latter should be described in architecture/design derived from the requirement. But there can also be a good reason for this, for example we would require using a file format like JSON and even specify the formatting standard already on stakeholder requirement level because we want to be compatible. A finding in this checkpoint does not mean there is a safety problem in the requirement. + - + - + - + * - REQ_03_01 + - Is the *linkage to the parent requirement* correct? + - Linkage to correct levels and ASIL attributes is checked automatically, but it needs checking if the child requirement implements (at least) a part of the parent requirement. + - + - + - + * - REQ_04_01 + - Is the requirement *internally and externally consistent*? + - Does the requirement contradict other requirements within the same or higher levels? One may restrict the search to the feature for component requirements, for features to other features using same components. Is the description of the requirement consistent with all its attributes (if not already part of another check, e.g. does the title fit?). + - + - + - + * - REQ_05_01 + - Do the software requirements consider *timing constraints*? + - This checkpoint encourages to think about timing constraints even if those are not explicitly mentioned in the parent requirement. If the reviewer of a requirement already knows or suspects that the code execution will be consuming a lot of time, one should think of the expectation of a "user". + - + - + - + * - REQ_06_01 + - Does the requirement consider *external interfaces*? + - The SW platform's external interfaces (to the user) are defined in the Feature Architecture, so the Feature and Component Requirements should determine the input data use and setting of output data for these interfaces. Are all output values defined? + - + - + - + * - REQ_07_01 + - Is the *safety* attribute set correctly? + - Derived requirements are checked automatically, see :need:`gd_req__req_linkage_safety`. But for the top level requirements (and also all AoU) this needs to be checked manually for correctness. + - + - + - + * - REQ_07_02 + - Is the attribute *security* set correctly? + - For component requirements this checklist item is supported by automated check: "Every requirement which satisfies a feature requirement with security attribute set to YES inherits this". But the component requirements/architecture may additionally also be subject to a :need:`wp__sw_component_security_analysis`. + - + - + - + * - REQ_08_01 + - Is the requirement *verifiable*? + - If at the time of the inspection already tests are created for the requirement, the answer is yes. This can be checked via traces, but also :need:`gd_req__req_attr_test_covered` shows this. In case the requirement is not sufficiently traced to test cases already, a test expert is invited to the inspection to give their opinion whether the requirement is formulated in a way that supports test development and the available test infrastructure is sufficient to perform the test. + - + - + - + * - REQ_08_02 + - Is the requirement verifiable by design or code review in case it is not feasibly testable? + - In very rare cases a requirement may not be verifiable by test cases, for example a specific non-functional requirement. In this case a requirement analysis verifies the requirement by design/code review. If such a requirement is in scope of this inspection, please check this here and link to the respective review record. A test expert is invited to the inspection to confirm their opinion that the requirement is not testable. + - + - + - + * - REQ_09_01 + - Do the requirements that define a safety mechanism specify the error reaction leading to a safe state? + - Alternatively to the safe state there could also be "repair" mechanisms. Also do not forget to consider REQ_05_01 for these. + - + - + - + * - REQ_10_01 + - Is the requirement description *complete* ? + - For every requirement in the inspection, follow to its parent (feature) requirement(s) and then check if this/these are fulfilled completely by its/their linked children (component requirements, including those which are not in scope of the inspection). + - + - + - + +.. attention:: + The above checklist entries must be filled according to your component requirements in scope. + +Note: If a Review ID is not applicable for your requirement, then state ""n/a" in status and comment accordingly in remarks. + +The following requirements in "valid" state and with "inspected" tag set are in the scope of this inspection: + +.. needtable:: + :filter: "time_daemon" in docname and "requirements" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" + :style: table + :types: comp_req + :tags: time_daemon + :columns: id;status;tags + :colwidths: 25,25,25 + :sort: title + +And also the following AoUs in "valid" state and with "inspected" tag set (for these please answer the questions above as if the AoUs are requirements, except question REQ_03_01): + +.. needtable:: + :filter: "time_daemon" in docname and "requirements" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" + :style: table + :types: aou_req + :tags: time_daemon + :columns: id;status;tags + :colwidths: 25,25,25 + :sort: title + +.. attention:: + The above tables filtering must be updated according to your Component. diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/index.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..400d1d03 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +Requirements +############ + +.. note:: + Work in progress: page structure only, content to follow in later PRs. + +.. toctree:: + + requirements + chklst_req_inspection diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/requirements.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/requirements.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..dfadfd33 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/requirements/requirements.rst @@ -0,0 +1,106 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +Component Time Daemon Requirements +################################### + +.. document:: Time Daemon Requirements + :id: doc__time_daemon_requirements + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: YES + :realizes: wp__requirements_comp[version==1] + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your Component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety``, ``security`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +<Headlines (for the list of requirements if structuring is needed)> +=================================================================== + +Functional Requirements +----------------------- + +.. comp_req:: Some Title + :id: comp_req__time_daemon__some_title + :reqtype: Process + :security: YES + :safety: ASIL_B + :derived_from: feat_req__example_feature__example_req + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :satisfied_by: comp__time_daemon + + The Component shall do xyz to another component to bring it to this condition at this time + + Note: (optional, not to be verified) + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your component requirements. + + - Replace the example content by the real content for your first requirement + - Set ``derived_from`` with links to Feature requirements + - Set ``satisfied_by`` with a link to the right Component id + - Set ``safety`` and ``security`` to the right value + - Set the status to valid and start the review/merge process + - Add other needed requirements for your component + +Assumption of Use Requirements +------------------------------ + +.. aou_req:: Next Title + :id: aou_req__time_daemon__next_title + :reqtype: Process + :security: YES + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + + The Component User shall do xyz to use the component safely/securely + +Environmental Requirements +-------------------------- + +.. aou_req:: Another Title + :id: aou_req__time_daemon__another + :reqtype: Process + :security: YES + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :tags: environment + + The Component shall only be used in a xyz environment to ensure its proper functioning. + +Hints +----- + +.. attention:: + The above directives must be updated according to your feature requirements. + + - Replace the example content by the real content for your first requirement (according to :need:`gd_guidl__req_engineering`) + - Set ``safety`` and ``security`` to the right value (ASIL B/QM; YES/NO) + - Set ``reqtype`` with a link to the right value (<Functional|Interface|Process|Non-Functional>) + - Add other needed requirements for your feature + - Set ``status`` to ``valid`` and start the review/merge process + +.. needextend:: is_external == False and "time_daemon" in id + :+tags: time_daemon diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..ba4cd258 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst @@ -0,0 +1,62 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + +AoU Component Requirements Template +=================================== + +.. document:: Time Daemon Component AoU + :id: doc__time_daemon_feat_aou + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__requirements_comp_aou + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your Component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety``, ``security`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +This page contains Assumption of Use requirement snippets that belong to the +template repository. + +Component AoU +------------- + +.. code-block:: rst + + .. aou_req:: Next Title + :id: aou_req__time_daemon__next_title + :reqtype: Process + :security: YES + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + + The Component User shall do xyz to use the component safely/securely + + .. aou_req:: Another Title + :id: aou_req__time_daemon__another + :reqtype: Process + :security: YES + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + :tags: environment + + The Component shall only be used in a xyz environment to ensure its proper functioning. diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..cf5e3bd0 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst @@ -0,0 +1,60 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + + +DFA (Dependent Failure Analysis) +================================ + +.. document:: Time Daemon DFA + :id: doc__time_daemon_dfa + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__sw_component_dfa + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + +.. note:: Use the content of the document to describe e.g. why a fault model is not applicable for the diagram. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your Component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +Dependent Failure Initiators +---------------------------- + +.. code-block:: rst + + .. comp_saf_dfa:: <Title> + :violates: <Component architecture> + :id: comp_saf_dfa__<Component>__<Element descriptor> + :failure_id: <ID from DFA failure initiators :need:`gd_guidl__dfa_failure_initiators`> + :failure_effect: "description of failure effect of the failure initiator on the element" + :mitigated_by: <ID from Component Requirement | ID from AoU Component Requirement> + :mitigation_issue: <ID from Issue Tracker> + :sufficient: <yes|no> + :status: <valid|invalid> + +.. note:: Argument is inside the 'content'. Therefore content is mandatory. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your component DFA. + + - The above "code-block" directive must be updated + - Fill in all the needed information in the <brackets> diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..a2c09779 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst @@ -0,0 +1,133 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation + # + # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional + # information regarding copyright ownership. + # + # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the + # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at + # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + # + # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 + # ******************************************************************************* + + +FMEA (Failure Modes and Effects Analysis) +========================================= + +.. document:: Time Daemon FMEA + :id: doc__time_daemon_fmea + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__sw_component_fmea + :tags: time_daemon + +.. note:: + Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. + +.. note:: Use the content of the document to describe e.g. why a fault model is not applicable for the diagram. + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your Component. + + - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` + - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs + +Failure Mode List +----------------- + +.. list-table:: Fault Models for sequence diagrams + :header-rows: 1 + :widths: 10,20,10,20 + + * - ID + - Failure Mode + - Applicability + - Rationale + * - MF_01_01 + - message is not received (is a subset/more precise description of MF_01_05) + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - MF_01_02 + - message received too late (only relevant if delay is a realistic fault) + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - MF_01_03 + - message received too early (usually not a problem) + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - MF_01_04 + - message not received correctly by all recipients (different messages or messages partly lost). Only relevant if the same message goes to multiple recipients. + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - MF_01_05 + - message is corrupted + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - MF_01_06 + - message is not sent + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - MF_01_07 + - message is unintended sent + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - CO_01_01 + - minimum constraint boundary is violated + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - CO_01_02 + - maximum constraint boundary is violated + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - EX_01_01 + - Process calculates wrong result(s) (is a subset/more precise description of MF_01_05 or MF_01_04). This failure mode is related to the analysis if e.g. internal safety mechanisms are required (level 2 function, plausibility check of the output, …) because of the size / complexity of the feature. + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - EX_01_02 + - processing too slow (only relevant if timing is considered) + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - EX_01_03 + - processing too fast (only relevant if timing is considered) + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - EX_01_04 + - loss of execution + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - EX_01_05 + - processing changes to arbitrary process + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + * - EX_01_06 + - processing is not complete (infinite loop) + - <yes | no> + - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> + +FMEA +---- +For all identified applicable failure initiators, the FMEA is performed in the following section. + +.. code-block:: rst + + .. comp_saf_fmea:: <Title> + :violates: <Component architecture> + :id: comp_saf_fmea__<Component>__<Element descriptor> + :fault_id: <ID from fault model :need:`gd_guidl__fault_models`> + :failure_effect: "description of failure effect of the fault model on the element" + :mitigated_by: <ID from Component Requirement | ID from AoU Component Requirement> + :mitigation_issue: <ID from Issue Tracker> + :sufficient: <yes|no> + :status: <valid|invalid> + + .. note:: argument is inside the 'content'. Therefore content is mandatory + +.. attention:: + The above directive must be updated according to your component FMEA. + + - The above "code-block" directive must be updated + - Fill in all the needed information in the <brackets> diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep b/score/time_daemon/docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep new file mode 100644 index 00000000..e69de29b From 3610692fd7d438d4e3087558f1542c4d631c4a6d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ryan Steel <str1yok@bosch.com> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 10:53:18 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/5] chore: remove architecture dir --- .../architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst | 215 ------------------ .../architecture/component_architecture.rst | 126 ---------- score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst | 26 --- score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst | 1 - 4 files changed, 368 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst delete mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/component_architecture.rst delete mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst deleted file mode 100644 index cc3b142a..00000000 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst +++ /dev/null @@ -1,215 +0,0 @@ -.. - # ******************************************************************************* - # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation - # - # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional - # information regarding copyright ownership. - # - # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the - # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at - # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - # - # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 - # ******************************************************************************* - - -.. document:: Time Daemon Architecture Inspection Checklist - :id: doc__time_daemon_arc_inspection - :status: draft - :version: 1 - :safety: ASIL_B - :security: YES - :realizes: wp__sw_arch_verification - :tags: time_daemon - -.. note:: - Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. - -.. attention:: - The above directive must be updated according to your component. - - - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` - - Adjust ``safety``, ``security`` and ``tags`` according to your needs - -Architecture Inspection Checklist -================================= - -Purpose -------- - -The purpose of the software architecture checklist is to ensure that the design meets the criteria and quality as -defined per project processes and guidelines for feature and component architectural design elements. -It helps to check the compliance with requirements, identify errors or inconsistencies, and ensure adherence to best -practices. -The checklist guides evaluation of the architecture design, identifies potential problems, and aids in -communication and documentation of architectural decisions to stakeholders. - -Conduct -------- - -As described in the concept :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` the following "inspection roles" are expected to be filled: - -- content responsible (author): <contributor/committer explicitly named here, who is the main author, as can be seen in config mgt tooling> -- reviewer: <contributor/committer explicitly named here, who is the main content reviewer, must be different from content responsible> -- moderator: <committer explicitly named here, who is is the safety manager, security manager or quality manager initiating the inspection> - -Checklist ---------- - -It is mandatory to fill in the "passed" column with "yes" or "no" for each checklist item and additionally to add in the remarks why it is passed or not passed. -In case of "no" an issue link to the issue tracking system has to be added in the last column (if not solved in the same issue). -See also :need:`doc_concept__wp_inspections` for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular. - -.. list-table:: Architecture Design Review Checklist - :header-rows: 1 - - * - Review Id - - Acceptance criteria - - Guidance - - passed - - Remarks - - Issue link - * - ARC_01_01 - - Is the traceability from software architectural elements to requirements, and other level architectural elements (e.g. component to interface) established according to the "Relations between the architectural elements" as described in :need:`doc_concept__arch_process`? - - Trace should be checked automatically by tool support in the future. Will be removed from the checklist once the requirement (:need:`Correlations of the architectural building blocks <gd_req__arch_build_blocks_corr>`) is implemented. Refer to `Tool Requirements <https://eclipse-score.github.io/docs-as-code/main/internals/requirements/requirements.html>`_ for the current status. - - - - - - - * - ARC_01_02 - - Does the software architecture design consider all the requirements allocated or belonging to the architectural element, including functional, non-functional, safety, and security requirements and all related design decisions? - - Check if all requirements allocated or belonging to the architectural element are considered in the design. This includes functional requirements (e.g. functional safety requirements), non-functional requirements (e.g. performance, reliability), and security requirements (e.g. confidentiality, integrity). Additionally, ensure that all related design decisions are taken into account and documented in the architectural design. - - - - - - - * - ARC_01_03 - - If the architectural element is related to any supplier manuals (incl. safety and security) - are the relevant parts covered? - - If the architecture makes use of supplied elements, their manuals (like safety) have to be considered (i.e. its provided functionality matches the expectation and assumptions are fulfilled). Note that in case of safety component this means that assumed Technical Safety Requirements and AoUs of the safety manual are covered. - - - - - - - * - ARC_01_04 - - Is the architectural element traceable to the lower level artifacts as defined by the workproduct traceability? - - Will be removed from checklist once the requirement (:need:`Correlations of the architectural building blocks <gd_req__arch_build_blocks_corr>`) is implemented by automated tool check. See `Tool Requirements <https://eclipse-score.github.io/docs-as-code/main/internals/requirements/requirements.html>`_. - Details of possible linking can be depicted from the traceability concept. - - - - - - - * - ARC_02_01 - - Is the software architecture design compliant with the (overall) feature architecture? - - On component level check against the feature architecture, on feature level check other features with common components used. - - - - - - - * - ARC_02_02 - - Is appropriate and comprehensible operation/interface naming present in the architectural design? - - Check :need:`gd_guidl__arch_design` - - - - - - - * - ARC_02_03 - - Are correctness of data flow and control flow within the architectural elements considered? - - E.g. examine definitions, transformations, integrity, and interaction of data; check error handling, data - exchange between elements, correct response to inputs and documented decision making. - Note: consistency is ensured by the process/tooling, by defining each interface only once. - - - - - - - * - ARC_02_04 - - Are the interfaces between the software architectural element and other architectural elements well-defined? - - Check if the interface reacts on non-defined behaviour or errors; can established protocols be used; are the - interfaces for inputs, outputs, error codes documented; is loose coupling considered and only limited exposure; - can unit or integration test be written against the interface; data amount transferred; no sensitive data - exposure; - - - - - - - * - ARC_02_05 - - Does the software architectural element consider the timing constraints (from the parent requirement)? - - If there are hard requirements on the timing a programming time estimation should be performed and also - deadline supervision considered. - - - - - - - * - ARC_02_06 - - Is the documentation of the software architectural element, including textual and graphical descriptions - (e.g., UML diagrams), comprehensible and complete? - - Use of semi-formal notation is expected for architectural elements with an allocated ASIL level. - Is the architecture template correctly filled? - - - - - - - * - ARC_03_01 - - Is the architectural element modular and encapsulated? - - Check e.g. that only minimal interfaces are used. Design should be object oriented. Interfaces and interactions are clearly defined. Usage of access types (private, protected) properly set. Limited global variables. - - - - - - - * - ARC_03_02 - - Is the suitability of the software architecture for future modifications and maintainability considered? - - Check for e.g. loose coupling, separation of concerns, high cohesion, versioning strategy for interfaces, - decision records, use of established design patterns. - - - - - - - * - ARC_03_03 - - Are simplicity and avoidance of unnecessary complexity present in the software architecture and the component? - - Indicators for complexity are: number of use cases (corresponding to dynamic diagrams) - allocated to single design element, number of interfaces and operations in an interface, - function parameters, global variables, complex types, limited comprehensibility. - The belonging code metrics should be checked. - - Notes: - - If the "number of use cases" or "number of interfaces" above exceeds "3" or "number of function parameters" exceeds "5" or the "number of operations" exceeds "20" or global variables are used, a design rationale is mandatory. - - See also if component classification :need:`gd_temp__component_classification` as measure is present. - - - - - - - - * - ARC_03_04 - - Is the software architecture design following best practices and design principles? - - Refer to architectural guidelines and recommendations within the project documentation. - - - - - - - * - ARC_04_03 - - If your software architectural design of the component includes processes and tasks, are their scheduling policies and priorities (at least the needed relation one to another) defined to ensure that timing requirements are met? Please note, that the particular priorities or priority ranges will be probably defined by the project handbook or the software development plan. - - Note: see :need:`std_req__iso26262__software_743` - - Give a reason for these scheduling policies and priorities or explain why not needed. - - - - - - - - -.. attention:: - The above checklist entries must be filled according to your component architecture in scope. - -Note: If a Review ID is not applicable for your architecture, then state ""n/a" in status and comment accordingly in remarks. - -The following static views in "valid" state and with "inspected" tag set are in the scope of this inspection: - -.. needtable:: - :filter: "time_daemon" in docname and "architecture" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" - :style: table - :types: comp_arc_sta - :tags: time_daemon - :columns: id;status;tags - :colwidths: 25,25,25 - :sort: title - -and the following dynamic views: - -.. needtable:: - :filter: "time_daemon" in docname and "architecture" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" - :style: table - :types: comp_arc_dyn - :tags: time_daemon - :columns: id;status;tags - :colwidths: 25,25,25 - :sort: title - -.. attention:: - The above tables filtering must be updated according to your Component. diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/component_architecture.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/component_architecture.rst deleted file mode 100644 index 54eea9e3..00000000 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/component_architecture.rst +++ /dev/null @@ -1,126 +0,0 @@ -.. - # ******************************************************************************* - # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation - # - # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional - # information regarding copyright ownership. - # - # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the - # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at - # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - # - # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 - # ******************************************************************************* - -.. _time_daemon_component_architecture: - -Time Daemon Architecture Documentation -====================================== - -.. document:: Time Daemon Architecture - :id: doc__time_daemon_architecture - :status: draft - :version: 1 - :safety: ASIL_B - :security: NO - :realizes: wp__component_arch - :tags: time_daemon - -.. note:: - Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs in this stack. - -.. attention:: - The above directive must be updated according to your needs. - - - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` - - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs - - -Overview --------- - -<Brief summary of the architecture.> - -Requirements Linked to Component Architecture ---------------------------------------------- - -.. code-block:: none - - .. needtable:: Overview of Component Requirements - :style: table - :columns: title;id - :filter: search("comp_arch_sta__archdes$", "fulfils_back") - :colwidths: 70,30 - -Description ------------ - -<General Description> - -<Design Decisions - For the documentation of the decision the :need:`gd_temp__change_decision_record` can be used.> - -<Design Constraints> - -Rationale Behind Architecture Decomposition -******************************************* - -Mandatory: A motivation for the decomposition or reason for not further splitting it into internal components. - -.. note:: Common decisions across components / cross cutting concepts is at the higher level. - -Static Architecture -------------------- - -The components are designed to cover the expectations from the feature architecture -(i.e. if already exists a definition it should be taken over and enriched). - -A component can optional also consist of lower level components to further structure the architecture. The component and its static views can also optionally use interfaces provided by other components. - -.. comp:: Time Daemon - :id: comp__time_daemon - :security: YES - :safety: ASIL_B - :status: invalid - :version: 1 - :belongs_to: feat__time - -.. comp_arc_sta:: Time Daemon (Static View) - :id: comp_arc_sta__time_daemon__sv - :security: YES - :safety: ASIL_B - :status: invalid - :version: 1 - :belongs_to: comp__time_daemon - :fulfils: comp_req__time_daemon__some_title - - .. needarch:: - :scale: 50 - :align: center - - {{ draw_component(need(), needs) }} - -Dynamic Architecture --------------------- - -.. comp_arc_dyn:: Dynamic View - :id: comp_arc_dyn__time_daemon__dv - :security: YES - :safety: ASIL_B - :status: invalid - :version: 1 - :belongs_to: comp__time_daemon - :fulfils: comp_req__time_daemon__some_title - - Put here a sequence diagram - -Interfaces ----------- - -.. code-block:: rst - - .. real_arc_int:: <Title> - :id: real_arc_int__<component>__<Title> - :security: <YES|NO> - :safety: <QM|ASIL_B> - :fulfils: <link to component requirement id> - :language: cpp diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst deleted file mode 100644 index 961afe62..00000000 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/architecture/index.rst +++ /dev/null @@ -1,26 +0,0 @@ -.. - # ******************************************************************************* - # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation - # - # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional - # information regarding copyright ownership. - # - # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the - # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at - # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - # - # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 - # ******************************************************************************* - -.. _time_daemon_architecture_index: - -Component Architecture -====================== - -.. note:: - Work in progress: page structure only, content to follow in later PRs. - -.. toctree:: - - component_architecture - chklst_arc_inspection diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst index ca390ca2..c0fdff36 100644 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst @@ -82,7 +82,6 @@ Component Detail Information .. toctree:: :maxdepth: 1 - architecture/index detailed_design/index requirements/index safety_analysis/dfa From d62bf6687e3cce5d79f8ccc399bb6343408addbc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ryan Steel <str1yok@bosch.com> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 11:05:26 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 3/5] docs: remove unneeded component classification --- .../docs/component_classification.rst | 198 ------------------ 1 file changed, 198 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/component_classification.rst diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/component_classification.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/component_classification.rst deleted file mode 100644 index 58292440..00000000 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/component_classification.rst +++ /dev/null @@ -1,198 +0,0 @@ -.. - # ******************************************************************************* - # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation - # - # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional - # information regarding copyright ownership. - # - # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the - # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at - # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - # - # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 - # ******************************************************************************* - -Component Classification -======================== - -.. note:: Document header - -.. document:: Time Daemon Component Classification - :id: doc__time_daemon_comp_class - :status: draft - :version: 1 - :safety: ASIL_B - :security: NO - :realizes: wp__sw_component_class - :tags: time_daemon - -.. note:: - Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. - -.. attention:: - The above directive must be updated according to your Component. - - - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` - - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs - -| Classification of <component> -| -| <Link to OSS component source (e.g. in github) including the selected version> -| -| Additional documentation considered: -| <list of documentation links> - - -Step 1: Determine (P): the uncertainty of the Processes applied ---------------------------------------------------------------- - -| Apply the process measures to determine (P). -| The result of a process measure shall have as outcome [HE, PE, NE] -| - HE: High Evidence -| - PE: Partly Evidence but Manageable -| - NE: No Evidence - -.. list-table:: Determine (P) - :header-rows: 1 - - * - Id - - Indicator for applying process - - Result - - Rationale for result - - * - 1 - - Are rules, state-of-the art processes applied for the design, implementation and verification? - - <HE|PE|NE> - - <Rationale for result> - - * - 2 - - Are requirements available? - - <HE|PE|NE> - - <Rationale for result> - - * - 3 - - Are specifications for functionalities and properties available (architecture)? - - <HE|PE|NE> - - <Rationale for result> - - * - 4 - - Are design specifications available? - - <HE|PE|NE> - - <Rationale for result> - - * - 5 - - Are configuration specification and data available, if applicable? - - <HE|PE|NE> - - <Rationale for result> - - * - 6 - - Are verification measures including tests and reports available? - - <HE|PE|NE> - - <Rationale for result> - - -| (P=1) shall be selected when none of the determined process measures indicate PE or NE. -| (P=2) shall be selected when at least one of the determined process measures indicate PE or NE, but the gaps evaluated are acceptable, means -| the risk of systematic faults due to these gaps is sufficiently low or manageable by mitigating the gaps. -| (P=3) in all other cases. - -<component name> is determined as P=<1|2|3> - - -Step 2: Determine (C): the uncertainty of finding systematic faults based on the Complexity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - -| Apply the complexity measures to determine (C). -| The result of a complexity measure shall have as outcome [NH, HM, NM] -| - NH: Not High -| - HM: High but Manageable -| - NM: high and Not Manageable -| -| **Complexity measure for programming language: <C++ or RUST>** - -<select the correct table below (table for C++ is TBD)> - -.. list-table:: Determine (C) for RUST - :header-rows: 1 - - * - Id - - Indicator for high Complexity - - Complexity measure Tool - - Result - - Number - - * - 1 - - High amount of Lines of Code - - Lines of Code (without comments) (generated code is excluded, e.g. ProtoCmpl) - - <NH|HM|NM> - - <Number> - - * - 2 - - Unsafe code used / total unsafe code - - Count: - * LoUC+N: lines of unsafe code with safety note - * LoUC : lines of unsafe code, no safety note - - <NH|HM|NM> - - <Number> - - * - 3 - - | Test exists / Coverage (Function, Line) - | (maybe better: testability, but how to measure?) - - Existing Tests Coverage - - <NH|HM|NM> - - <Number> - - * - 4 - - High amount of public function interfaces - - Number of public function interfaces - - <NH|HM|NM> - - <RNumber> - - * - 5 - - High amount of function parameters - - Number of parameters - - <NH|HM|NM> - - <Number> - - -| (C=1) shall be selected when none of the determined complexity measures indicate HM or NM. -| (C=2) shall be selected when at least one of the determined complexity measures indicate HM or NM, but the gaps evaluated are acceptable, means -| the risk of systematic faults due to these gaps is sufficiently low in the context of the project or manageable by mitigating the gaps. -| (C=3) in all other cases. -| - -<component name> is determined as C=<1|2|3> - - -Step 3: Determine (CLAS_OUT): the classification outcome --------------------------------------------------------- - -| Select CLAS_OUT depending on the determined values of (C) and (P) - -+-------+-----------------------+ -| ( C ) | ( P ) | -+-------+-------+-------+-------+ -| | 1 | 2 | 3 | -+=======+=======+=======+=======+ -| 1 | Q | Q | QR | -+-------+-------+-------+-------+ -| 2 | QR | QR | QR | -+-------+-------+-------+-------+ -| 3 | QR | QR | NQ | -+-------+-------+-------+-------+ - -<component name> is classified as CLAS_OUT=<Q|QR|NQ> - - -Step 4: Document all results and rationale for choosing (P) and (C) and (CLAS_OUT) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -This document - - -Step 5: Based on (CLAS_OUT) select the activities -------------------------------------------------- - -| As soon as the change request containing this is in status "Accepted", the module safety plan for the component development is adapted based on the following: (select according to above result) -| - Q: Follow the processes for qualification of software components in a safety context. -| - QR: Follow the process for pre-existing software architectural elements -| - NQ: Do no use this element in safety context From 02f5a4b70e5756e14a608af123f16b4307d51e8a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ryan Steel <str1yok@bosch.com> Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 11:12:41 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 4/5] docs: delete component_classification --- score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst index c0fdff36..a3a86531 100644 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst @@ -87,4 +87,3 @@ Component Detail Information safety_analysis/dfa safety_analysis/fmea safety_analysis/aou_requirements - component_classification From a432178415e7af4edc22b8aa756bf182e866ca34 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ryan Steel <str1yok@bosch.com> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2026 09:53:19 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 5/5] docs: remove unnecessary safety boilerplate --- score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst | 3 - .../docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst | 62 -------- .../time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst | 60 -------- .../time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst | 133 ------------------ .../docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep | 0 5 files changed, 258 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst delete mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst delete mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst delete mode 100644 score/time_daemon/docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst index a3a86531..60226e58 100644 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst +++ b/score/time_daemon/docs/index.rst @@ -84,6 +84,3 @@ Component Detail Information detailed_design/index requirements/index - safety_analysis/dfa - safety_analysis/fmea - safety_analysis/aou_requirements diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst deleted file mode 100644 index ba4cd258..00000000 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst +++ /dev/null @@ -1,62 +0,0 @@ -.. - # ******************************************************************************* - # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation - # - # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional - # information regarding copyright ownership. - # - # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the - # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at - # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - # - # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 - # ******************************************************************************* - -AoU Component Requirements Template -=================================== - -.. document:: Time Daemon Component AoU - :id: doc__time_daemon_feat_aou - :status: draft - :version: 1 - :safety: ASIL_B - :security: NO - :realizes: wp__requirements_comp_aou - :tags: time_daemon - -.. note:: - Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. - - -.. attention:: - The above directive must be updated according to your Component. - - - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` - - Adjust ``safety``, ``security`` and ``tags`` according to your needs - -This page contains Assumption of Use requirement snippets that belong to the -template repository. - -Component AoU -------------- - -.. code-block:: rst - - .. aou_req:: Next Title - :id: aou_req__time_daemon__next_title - :reqtype: Process - :security: YES - :safety: ASIL_B - :status: invalid - - The Component User shall do xyz to use the component safely/securely - - .. aou_req:: Another Title - :id: aou_req__time_daemon__another - :reqtype: Process - :security: YES - :safety: ASIL_B - :status: invalid - :tags: environment - - The Component shall only be used in a xyz environment to ensure its proper functioning. diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst deleted file mode 100644 index cf5e3bd0..00000000 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst +++ /dev/null @@ -1,60 +0,0 @@ -.. - # ******************************************************************************* - # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation - # - # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional - # information regarding copyright ownership. - # - # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the - # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at - # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - # - # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 - # ******************************************************************************* - - -DFA (Dependent Failure Analysis) -================================ - -.. document:: Time Daemon DFA - :id: doc__time_daemon_dfa - :status: draft - :version: 1 - :safety: ASIL_B - :security: NO - :realizes: wp__sw_component_dfa - :tags: time_daemon - -.. note:: - Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. - -.. note:: Use the content of the document to describe e.g. why a fault model is not applicable for the diagram. - -.. attention:: - The above directive must be updated according to your Component. - - - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` - - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs - -Dependent Failure Initiators ----------------------------- - -.. code-block:: rst - - .. comp_saf_dfa:: <Title> - :violates: <Component architecture> - :id: comp_saf_dfa__<Component>__<Element descriptor> - :failure_id: <ID from DFA failure initiators :need:`gd_guidl__dfa_failure_initiators`> - :failure_effect: "description of failure effect of the failure initiator on the element" - :mitigated_by: <ID from Component Requirement | ID from AoU Component Requirement> - :mitigation_issue: <ID from Issue Tracker> - :sufficient: <yes|no> - :status: <valid|invalid> - -.. note:: Argument is inside the 'content'. Therefore content is mandatory. - -.. attention:: - The above directive must be updated according to your component DFA. - - - The above "code-block" directive must be updated - - Fill in all the needed information in the <brackets> diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst b/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst deleted file mode 100644 index a2c09779..00000000 --- a/score/time_daemon/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst +++ /dev/null @@ -1,133 +0,0 @@ -.. - # ******************************************************************************* - # Copyright (c) 2026 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation - # - # See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional - # information regarding copyright ownership. - # - # This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the - # terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at - # https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 - # - # SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 - # ******************************************************************************* - - -FMEA (Failure Modes and Effects Analysis) -========================================= - -.. document:: Time Daemon FMEA - :id: doc__time_daemon_fmea - :status: draft - :version: 1 - :safety: ASIL_B - :security: NO - :realizes: wp__sw_component_fmea - :tags: time_daemon - -.. note:: - Work in progress: structure, titles, and needs IDs only. Content and req/comp/feat traceability links to follow in later PRs. - -.. note:: Use the content of the document to describe e.g. why a fault model is not applicable for the diagram. - -.. attention:: - The above directive must be updated according to your Component. - - - Adjust ``status`` to be ``valid`` - - Adjust ``safety`` and ``tags`` according to your needs - -Failure Mode List ------------------ - -.. list-table:: Fault Models for sequence diagrams - :header-rows: 1 - :widths: 10,20,10,20 - - * - ID - - Failure Mode - - Applicability - - Rationale - * - MF_01_01 - - message is not received (is a subset/more precise description of MF_01_05) - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - MF_01_02 - - message received too late (only relevant if delay is a realistic fault) - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - MF_01_03 - - message received too early (usually not a problem) - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - MF_01_04 - - message not received correctly by all recipients (different messages or messages partly lost). Only relevant if the same message goes to multiple recipients. - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - MF_01_05 - - message is corrupted - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - MF_01_06 - - message is not sent - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - MF_01_07 - - message is unintended sent - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - CO_01_01 - - minimum constraint boundary is violated - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - CO_01_02 - - maximum constraint boundary is violated - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - EX_01_01 - - Process calculates wrong result(s) (is a subset/more precise description of MF_01_05 or MF_01_04). This failure mode is related to the analysis if e.g. internal safety mechanisms are required (level 2 function, plausibility check of the output, …) because of the size / complexity of the feature. - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - EX_01_02 - - processing too slow (only relevant if timing is considered) - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - EX_01_03 - - processing too fast (only relevant if timing is considered) - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - EX_01_04 - - loss of execution - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - EX_01_05 - - processing changes to arbitrary process - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - * - EX_01_06 - - processing is not complete (infinite loop) - - <yes | no> - - <Rationale if not applicable, otherwise link to filled out FMEA> - -FMEA ----- -For all identified applicable failure initiators, the FMEA is performed in the following section. - -.. code-block:: rst - - .. comp_saf_fmea:: <Title> - :violates: <Component architecture> - :id: comp_saf_fmea__<Component>__<Element descriptor> - :fault_id: <ID from fault model :need:`gd_guidl__fault_models`> - :failure_effect: "description of failure effect of the fault model on the element" - :mitigated_by: <ID from Component Requirement | ID from AoU Component Requirement> - :mitigation_issue: <ID from Issue Tracker> - :sufficient: <yes|no> - :status: <valid|invalid> - - .. note:: argument is inside the 'content'. Therefore content is mandatory - -.. attention:: - The above directive must be updated according to your component FMEA. - - - The above "code-block" directive must be updated - - Fill in all the needed information in the <brackets> diff --git a/score/time_daemon/docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep b/score/time_daemon/docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep deleted file mode 100644 index e69de29b..00000000