-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 17
add documentation examples #58
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
RolandJentschETAS
merged 38 commits into
main
from
improvement_add_documentation_examples
Apr 23, 2026
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
38 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
a4b9193
add documentation examples
RolandJentschETAS d663e72
fix copyright check
RolandJentschETAS bf89f92
add copyright
RolandJentschETAS 683d5df
add newline at end of file
RolandJentschETAS c23e2f9
Revert "add newline at end of file"
RolandJentschETAS 87736d6
add newlines
RolandJentschETAS dd338b2
take over general structure according to process
RolandJentschETAS a368dd9
use folder template from process repo
RolandJentschETAS ef83c1f
fix commit hash
RolandJentschETAS 90b3293
fix strange format error
RolandJentschETAS 3e7930d
structuring module documentation
RolandJentschETAS 932dd61
add directory tree picture
RolandJentschETAS 32f0836
add some comments
RolandJentschETAS 66f9fae
change to include folder approach
RolandJentschETAS f00943c
use main path instead of link
RolandJentschETAS e781916
fix builds
RolandJentschETAS 60aa73e
remove stakeholder reqs
RolandJentschETAS c14608e
remove stakeholder reqs
RolandJentschETAS eff3896
temp fix for docs at root
AlexanderLanin e981b1d
fix links
RolandJentschETAS 7f4f5b5
add any necessary files
RolandJentschETAS bfee7e5
add main index file
RolandJentschETAS 6fd9311
move aou
RolandJentschETAS 59bc409
move aou
RolandJentschETAS 45b433d
update folder structure entry picture
RolandJentschETAS 778b735
empty gitkeep
RolandJentschETAS 4fd4bcf
rework test folders
RolandJentschETAS 590638c
small adaption of the folder structure
RolandJentschETAS ea1cf04
remove CR content
RolandJentschETAS 6f7f588
remove CR content
RolandJentschETAS 668691f
move verification
RolandJentschETAS db86d4e
add review results
RolandJentschETAS c1bec9b
minor changes
RolandJentschETAS 9d9611f
add hints
RolandJentschETAS 9d90c3b
add missing wp
RolandJentschETAS 31ed8a9
add hint
RolandJentschETAS 91e451f
fix review findings
RolandJentschETAS 70b1e0e
add notes
RolandJentschETAS File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Large diffs are not rendered by default.
Oops, something went wrong.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
219 changes: 219 additions & 0 deletions
219
docs/features/feature_example/architecture/chklst_arc_inspection.rst
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,219 @@ | ||
| .. | ||
| # ******************************************************************************* | ||
| # Copyright (c) 2025 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:: [Your Feature Name] Architecture Inspection Checklist | ||
| :id: doc__feature_example_arc_inspection | ||
| :status: draft | ||
| :safety: ASIL_B | ||
| :security: YES | ||
| :realizes: wp__sw_arch_verification | ||
| :tags: template | ||
|
|
||
| .. attention:: | ||
| The above directive must be updated according to your Feature. | ||
|
|
||
| - Modify ``Your Feature Name`` to be your Feature Name | ||
| - Modify ``id`` to be your Feature Name in lower snake case preceded by ``doc__`` and followed by ``_arc_inspection`` | ||
| - 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. It 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 to the architectural element, including functional, non-functional, safety, and security requirements and all related design decisions? | ||
| - manual | ||
| - Check if all requirements allocated 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 (including 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 work product traceability? | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| * - 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 and interface naming present in the architectural design? | ||
| - Check :need:`gd_guidl__arch_design` | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| * - ARC_02_03 | ||
| - Are the correctness of data flow and control flow within the architectural elements considered? | ||
| - For example, 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 handles undefined behaviour or errors; can established protocols be used; are the interfaces for inputs, outputs, and error codes documented; is loose coupling considered and only limited exposure; can unit or integration tests be written against the interface; data amount transferred; ensure no sensitive data is exposed; | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| * - ARC_02_05 | ||
| - Does the software architectural element consider the timing constraints (from the parent requirement)? | ||
| - If there are strict timing requirements, a programming time estimation should be performed and deadline supervision should be considered. | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| * - ARC_02_06 | ||
| - Is the documentation of the software architectural element, including textual and graphical descriptions (e.g., UML diagrams), clear 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, for example, that only minimal interfaces are used. The design should be object oriented. Interfaces and interactions are clearly defined. Usage of access types (private, protected) is properly set. Limited global variables. | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| * - ARC_03_02 | ||
| - Is the suitability of the software architecture for future modifications and maintainability considered? | ||
| - Check for, for example, loose coupling, separation of concerns, high cohesion, versioning strategy for interfaces, decision records, and use of established design patterns. | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| * - ARC_03_03 | ||
| - Are simplicity and avoidance of unnecessary complexity present in the software architecture? | ||
| - Indicators of complexity include: the number of use cases (corresponding to dynamic diagrams) allocated to a single design element, the number of interfaces and operations in an interface, function parameters, global variables, complex types, and limited comprehensibility. | ||
|
|
||
| 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. | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| * - 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_01 | ||
| - If your software architectural design includes processes with different safety ratings (QM/ASIL), is freedom from interference for shared resources (CPU time, shared memory, etc.) ensured? See also ARC_04_03. | ||
|
|
||
| Note: see :need:`std_req__iso26262__software_7411` and :need:`std_req__iso26262__software_749` with Annex D for partitioning to ensure freedom from interference. | ||
| Note: Modules should not mix ASIL and QM processes unless justified otherwise; therefore, this question is only relevant on the feature level. | ||
| - | ||
| Check whether your architecture design complies with project guidelines to establish freedom from interference between components. This can be achieved, for example, by using a hypervisor or an OS that supports partitioning with an MMU or specific scheduling mechanisms, as well as safety mechanisms like watchdogs or program flow monitoring. | ||
| Also check if the operating system supports freedom from interference between the processes and make sure an "Assumption of Use requirement" for this exists in your project. For example, see `score aou_req__platform__process_isolation <https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/main/requirements/platform_assumptions/index.html#aou_req__platform__process_isolation>`_. | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| * - ARC_04_02 | ||
| - Does the software architectural design consider its feasibility with respect to the required resources for the embedded software, especially for time-critical aspects like startup time, but also including RAM, ROM, non-volatile memory, communication bandwidth, and processing time limits according to the requirements or foreseeable customer needs? See also ARC_02_05. | ||
|
|
||
| Note: see :need:`std_req__iso26262__software_7413` | ||
| - | ||
| Check if there are any limits for resource consumption or timing aspects in your project, such as startup time, communication bandwidth, or memory usage. If such limits exist, ensure that your architecture takes these limits into account, especially with respect to scalability. For this, make an estimation of the required resources based on the architectural design and a prototypical implementation or a measurement of an existing implementation, and compare it to the defined limits or planned scalability. Check if any bottlenecks are present in the architecture that could lead to resource overuse or timing violations. | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| * - ARC_04_03 | ||
| - If your software architectural design includes processes and tasks, are their scheduling policies and priorities (at least the necessary relationships between them) defined to ensure that timing requirements are met? Please note that the particular priorities or priority ranges will probably be defined by the project handbook or the software development plan. | ||
|
|
||
| Note: see :need:`std_req__iso26262__software_743` | ||
| - Provide a rationale for these scheduling policies and priorities, or explain why they are not needed. | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
| - | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| .. attention:: | ||
| The above checklist entries must be filled according to your feature 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: "feature_name" in docname and "architecture" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" | ||
| :style: table | ||
| :types: feat_arc_sta | ||
| :tags: feature_name | ||
| :columns: id;status;tags | ||
| :colwidths: 25,25,25 | ||
| :sort: title | ||
|
|
||
| and the following dynamic views: | ||
|
|
||
| .. needtable:: | ||
| :filter: "feature_name" in docname and "architecture" in docname and docname is not None and status == "valid" | ||
| :style: table | ||
| :types: feat_arc_dyn | ||
| :tags: feature_name | ||
| :columns: id;status;tags | ||
| :colwidths: 25,25,25 | ||
| :sort: title | ||
|
|
||
| .. attention:: | ||
| The above tables filtering must be updated according to your Feature. | ||
|
|
||
| - Modify ``feature_name`` to be your Feature Name in lower snake case |
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As far as I know doxygen is not used currently.
OR am I on old information?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is unchanged (was there also before PR). We have to check that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Implementation process is not finalised yet, that was planned for implementation, detailed design