Advertisement

Establishing Confidence in the Usage of Software Tools in Context of ISO 26262

  • Joachim Hillebrand
  • Peter Reichenpfader
  • Irenka Mandic
  • Hannes Siegl
  • Christian Peer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6894)

Abstract

The development of safety-critical electric/electronic (E/E) automotive systems is performed by an increasing number of software tools. Hence it is very important that software tool malfunctions do not have an impact on the final product. This paper proposes a systematic methodology to establish confidence in the usage of software tools. The approach has been developed on the basis of an industrial development project and is compliant to the framework required by the standard ISO 26262. The methodology is based on a multi-layered analysis that systematically identifies the risk of tool-introduced errors and error detection failures and allows for the derivation of the tool confidence level (TCL). The benefit of this methodology is to identify and reuse already existing verification measures in the development process for establishing confidence in the usage of software tools. Furthermore, the approach allows introducing new verification measures to optimize the overall development process.

Keywords

tool qualification ISO 26262 automotive tool confidence functional safety embedded systems 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alhir, S.S.: UML in a Nutshell. O’Reilly, Sebastopol (1998) ISBN 1-56592-448-7Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Conrad, M., Munier, P., Rauch, F.: Qualifying Software Tools According to ISO 26262. In: MBEES, pp. 117–128 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kindler, E., et al.: On the semantics of EPCs: A vicious circle. In: Proceedings of the EPK 2002: Business Process Management using EPCs. pp. 71–80 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    IEC 61508-2.0 Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety-related systems (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ISO 26262 - Draft International Standard Road Vehicles - Functional Safety - Part 8: Supporting Processes (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kornecki, A.J., Zalewski, J.: Experimental evaluation of software development tools for safety-critical real-time systems. ISSE 1(2), 176–188 (2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Beine, M.: A Model-Based Reference Workflow for the Development of Safety-Critical Software. In: Embedded Real Time Software and Systems (ERTS 2010), Toulouse (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Conrad, M., Sauler, J., Munier, P.: Experience Report: Two-Stage Qualification of Software Tools. In: Proc. 2. EUROFORUM ISO 26262 Conference, Stuttgart, Germany (September 27-28, 2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    MISRA: MISRA-C:2004 Guidelines for the Use of the C Language in Vehicle Based Software. Motor Industry Research Association, Nuneaton CV10 0TU, UK (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Powell, S., Baker, K., Lawson, B.: Errors in operational spreadsheets. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing 21(3), 24–36 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    RTCA Special Committee 167: Software considerations in airborne systems and equipment certification. Recommendation DO-178B, RTCA, Inc, Washington DC, USA (December 1992)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    The Mathworks, Inc: IEC Certification Kit product page, http://www.mathworks.com/products/iec-61508

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joachim Hillebrand
    • 1
  • Peter Reichenpfader
    • 1
  • Irenka Mandic
    • 2
  • Hannes Siegl
    • 2
  • Christian Peer
    • 2
  1. 1.Virtual Vehicle Research and Test CenterGrazAustria
  2. 2.Magna E-Car Systems GmbH & Co OGGrazAustria

Personalised recommendations