diff --git a/score/time_slave/docs/index.rst b/score/time_slave/docs/index.rst index 6e07edcd..27df135f 100644 --- a/score/time_slave/docs/index.rst +++ b/score/time_slave/docs/index.rst @@ -19,9 +19,3 @@ time_slave Component :maxdepth: 1 component_classification - architecture/index - detailed_design/index - requirements/index - manuals/index - safety_analysis/index - security_analysis/index diff --git a/score/ts_client/docs/detailed_design/chklst_impl_inspection.rst b/score/ts_client/docs/detailed_design/chklst_impl_inspection.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..22b8ddb7 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/ts_client/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 Sync Client Implementation Inspection Checklist + :id: doc__ts_client_impl_inspection + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__sw_implementation_inspection + :tags: ts_client + +.. 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): +- 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:: 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++ , Rust ) + - + - + - + * - 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/ts_client/docs/detailed_design/detailed_design.rst b/score/ts_client/docs/detailed_design/detailed_design.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..bcd6ab92 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/ts_client/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 + # ******************************************************************************* + +.. _ts_client_detailed_design: + +Time Sync Client Detailed Design +================================= + +.. document:: Time Sync Client Detailed Design + :id: doc__ts_client_detailed_design + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__sw_implementation + :tags: ts_client + +.. 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 Sync Client +===================================== + +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/ts_client/docs/detailed_design/index.rst b/score/ts_client/docs/detailed_design/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..f898e2bf --- /dev/null +++ b/score/ts_client/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 + # ******************************************************************************* + +.. _ts_client_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/ts_client/docs/index.rst b/score/ts_client/docs/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..dc0edc49 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/ts_client/docs/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # 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 + # ******************************************************************************* + +.. _ts_client: + +Time Sync Client +################ + +.. document:: Time Sync Client + :id: doc__ts_client + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: QM + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__cmpt_request + :tags: ts_client + +.. comp:: Time Sync Client + :id: comp__time_ts_client + :security: NO + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: valid + :version: 1 + :belongs_to: feat__time + +Abstract +======== + +This component provides IPC mechanisms for time synchronization data exchange between time daemons and client applications within an ECU. + +Specification +============= + +The component provides shared memory-based IPC for distributing time synchronization data with thread-safe, low-latency access: + +* :need:`comp_req__time_ts_client__shared_memory_mgmt` +* :need:`comp_req__time_ts_client__data_publishing` +* :need:`comp_req__time_ts_client__data_reception` +* :need:`comp_req__time_ts_client__lockfree_sync` +* :need:`comp_req__time_ts_client__low_latency` + +Footnotes +========= + +Further Documentation of the component can be found in the following sections: + +Component Detail Information +============================ + +.. toctree:: + :maxdepth: 1 + + detailed_design/index + requirements/index + safety_analysis/dfa + safety_analysis/fmea + safety_analysis/aou_requirements diff --git a/score/ts_client/docs/.gitkeep b/score/ts_client/docs/manuals/.gitkeep similarity index 100% rename from score/ts_client/docs/.gitkeep rename to score/ts_client/docs/manuals/.gitkeep diff --git a/score/ts_client/docs/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst b/score/ts_client/docs/requirements/chklst_req_inspection.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..9a5d1ef2 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/ts_client/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 Sync Client Requirements Inspection Checklist + :id: doc__ts_client_req_inspection + :status: draft + :version: 2 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__requirements_inspect + :tags: ts_client + +.. 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): +- reviewer: +- moderator: +- test expert: + +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: "ts_client" in docname and "requirements" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" + :style: table + :types: comp_req + :tags: ts_client + :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: "ts_client" in docname and "requirements" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" + :style: table + :types: aou_req + :tags: ts_client + :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/ts_client/docs/requirements/index.rst b/score/ts_client/docs/requirements/index.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..dc4d9417 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/ts_client/docs/requirements/index.rst @@ -0,0 +1,114 @@ +.. + # ******************************************************************************* + # 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 Sync Client Requirements +######################################## + +.. document:: Time Sync Client Requirements + :id: doc__time_ts_client_requirements + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__requirements_comp[version==1] + :tags: requirements, time_ts_client + + +Functional Requirements +----------------------- + +.. comp_req:: Shared Memory Channel Management + :id: comp_req__time_ts_client__shared_memory_mgmt + :reqtype: Functional + :security: NO + :safety: ASIL_B + :derived_from: feat_req__time__vehicle_time_sync[version==1] + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :satisfied_by: comp__time_ts_client + + The ts_client component shall provide operations to create, open, and close shared memory segments for gPTP time synchronization data exchange. + +.. comp_req:: Time Synchronization Data Publishing + :id: comp_req__time_ts_client__data_publishing + :reqtype: Functional + :security: NO + :safety: ASIL_B + :derived_from: feat_req__time__vehicle_time_sync[version==1] + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :satisfied_by: comp__time_ts_client + + The ts_client component shall provide a publisher interface that enables time daemon processes to write time synchronization metadata (synchronized time points, synchronization status, rate correction) to shared memory using single-writer semantics. + +.. comp_req:: Time Synchronization Data Reception + :id: comp_req__time_ts_client__data_reception + :reqtype: Functional + :security: NO + :safety: ASIL_B + :derived_from: feat_req__time__vehicle_time_sync[version==1] + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :satisfied_by: comp__time_ts_client + + The ts_client component shall provide a receiver interface that enables multiple reader processes to access time synchronization metadata from shared memory without blocking writers or other readers. + +.. comp_req:: Lock-Free Data Synchronization + :id: comp_req__time_ts_client__lockfree_sync + :reqtype: Functional + :security: NO + :safety: ASIL_B + :derived_from: feat_req__time__vehicle_time_sync[version==1] + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :satisfied_by: comp__time_ts_client + + The ts_client component shall allow thread-safe, lock-free access to shared time synchronization data between publisher and receiver processes. + + +Non-Functional Requirements +--------------------------- + +.. comp_req:: Low-Latency Time Data Access + :id: comp_req__time_ts_client__low_latency + :reqtype: Non-Functional + :security: NO + :safety: ASIL_B + :derived_from: feat_req__time__vehicle_time_ctrl_flow[version==1] + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + :satisfied_by: comp__time_ts_client + + The ts_client component shall provide time synchronization data access operations with minimal latency to support real-time time-sensitive applications. + +Assumption of Use Requirements +------------------------------ + +.. aou_req:: Single Publisher Process + :id: aou_req__time_ts_client__single_publisher + :reqtype: Process + :security: NO + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + :version: 1 + + The ts_client user shall ensure that only one publisher process opens and writes to a shared memory segment to maintain data consistency. + +.. needextend:: is_external == False and "time_ts_client" in id + :+tags: time_ts_client + +.. toctree:: + :maxdepth: 1 + + chklst_req_inspection diff --git a/score/ts_client/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst b/score/ts_client/docs/safety_analysis/aou_requirements.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..5a5cf16a --- /dev/null +++ b/score/ts_client/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 Sync Client Component AoU + :id: doc__ts_client_feat_aou + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__requirements_comp_aou + :tags: ts_client + +.. 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__ts_client__next_title + :reqtype: Process + :security: NO + :safety: ASIL_B + :status: invalid + + The Component User shall do xyz to use the component safely/securely + + .. aou_req:: Another Title + :id: aou_req__ts_client__another + :reqtype: Process + :security: NO + :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/ts_client/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst b/score/ts_client/docs/safety_analysis/dfa.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..82c27854 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/ts_client/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 Sync Client DFA + :id: doc__ts_client_dfa + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__sw_component_dfa + :tags: ts_client + +.. 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:: + :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/ts_client/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst b/score/ts_client/docs/safety_analysis/fmea.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..93406716 --- /dev/null +++ b/score/ts_client/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 Sync Client FMEA + :id: doc__ts_client_fmea + :status: draft + :version: 1 + :safety: ASIL_B + :security: NO + :realizes: wp__sw_component_fmea + :tags: ts_client + +.. 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/ts_client/docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep b/score/ts_client/docs/security_analysis/.gitkeep new file mode 100644 index 00000000..e69de29b