Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
3	CF089A_BmwDrvgDynStMac_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwDrvgDynStMacInit1	None	RTE (Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwDrvgDynStMacPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
N/A

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

None

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

2.2 - BmwDrvgDynStMac_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwDrvgDynStMac

April 13, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1	17-Apr-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 5

1.1 Purpose 5

1.2 Scope 5

2 BmwDrvgDynStMac & High-Level Description 6

3 Design details of software module 7

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwDrvgDynStMac 7

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 7

3.2.1 Component level DFD 7

3.2.2 Function level DFD 7

4 Constant Data Dictionary 8

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 8

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 8

5 Software Component Implementation 9

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 9

5.1.1 Init: BmwDrvgDynStMacInit1 9

5.1.2 Per: BmwDrvgDynStMacPer1 9

5.2 Server Runables 9

5.3 Interrupt Functions 9

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 10

5.4.1 Local Function DetermineErrorMode 10

5.4.2 Local Function Fac 10

5.4.3 Local Function AssiLvlCnd 11

5.4.4 Local Function CheckActivityTime 11

5.4.5 Local Function CheckDeactivateTime 11

5.4.6 Local Function ErrorIfTi 12

5.4.7 Local Function StateMachine 12

5.4.8 Local Function StateMachineInit 13

5.4.9 Local Function StateMachineIfAvl 13

5.4.10 Local Function StateMachineIfActv 14

5.4.11 Local Function StateMachineStbEpsSts 14

5.4.12 Local Function StateMachineEntry 15

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 16

6 Known Limitations with Design 17

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 18

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 19

Appendix B Glossary 20

Appendix C References 21

Introduction

Purpose

Model Deign Document for CF089A_BmwDrvgDynStMac_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwDrvgDynStMac & High-Level Description

The component implements the functionality of Driving Dynamics State Machine. It is based on requirements for DD State Machine in LH10716411 starting from ID_6159. It outputs signals for CF083A and CF040A.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwDrvgDynStMac

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

None

Function level DFD

None

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
*

*Refer FDD for local constants

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: BmwDrvgDynStMacInit1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

None

Per: BmwDrvgDynStMacPer1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

Local Function DetermineErrorMode

Function Name	DetermineErrorMode	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	SysStFltOutpReqDi_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	0	1
	DiagcStsNonRcvrlReqDiFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	0	1
	DiagcStsCtrldShtDwnFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	0	1
	StsSteerAssi_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	1
	BmwVehCdn_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
Return Value	ErrMod_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "DetermineErrorMode" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function Fac

Function Name	Fac	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	EffortCmdSca_Uls_T_f32	float32	1	2
	DampgCmdSca_Uls_T_f32	float32	0	1
	RtnCmdSca_Uls_T_f32	float32	0	1
Return Value	Fac_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "Fac" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function AssiLvlCnd

Function Name	AssiLvlCnd	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	MotTqCmdPwrLimd_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8
Return Value	MotTqCmdPwrLimdActvtUppr_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	MotTqCmdPwrLimdActvtLowr_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	MotTqCmdPwrLimdDeactvtLowr_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "AssiLvlCnd" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function CheckActivityTime

Function Name	CheckActivityTime	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	MotTqCmdPwrLimdCdnActvt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	MotTqCmdPwrLimdActvt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "CheckActivity Time" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function CheckDeactivateTime

Function Name	CheckDeactivateTime	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	MotTqCmdPwrLimdCdnDeactvt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	MotTqCmdPwrLimdDeactvt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "CheckDeactivate Time" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function ErrorIfTi

Function Name	ErrorIfTi	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	ErrIf_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	ErrIfTi_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "ErrorIfTi" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function StateMachine

Function Name	StateMachine	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	ErrMod_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	ErrIf_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwTarHwTqOvrlQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwDrvgDynFacQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTarSteerTqDrvrActrQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgStReq_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	Fac_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	MotTqCmdOvrlEquZero_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	MotTqCmdPwrLimd_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8
Return Value	N/A

Design Rationale

Implementation of "StateMachine" Simulink state machine

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function StateMachineInit

Function Name	StateMachineInit	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	ErrMod_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	ErrIf_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwTarHwTqOvrlQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwDrvgDynFacQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTarSteerTqDrvrActrQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgStReq_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	MotTqCmdPwrLimdActvtUppr_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	MotTqCmdPwrLimdActvtLowr_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	N/A

Design Rationale

Implementation of INIT State

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function StateMachineIfAvl

Function Name	StateMachineIfAvl	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	ErrMod_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	ErrIf_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwTarHwTqOvrlQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwDrvgDynFacQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTarSteerTqDrvrActrQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgStReq_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	MotTqCmdPwrLimdDeactvtLowr_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	N/A

Design Rationale

Implementation of IF_AVL State

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function StateMachineIfActv

Function Name	StateMachineIfActv	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	ErrMod_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	ErrIf_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwTarHwTqOvrlQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwDrvgDynFacQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTarSteerTqDrvrActrQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgStReq_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	ErrIfTi_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	N/A

Design Rationale

Implementation of IF_ACTV State

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function StateMachineStbEpsSts

Function Name	StateMachineStbEpsSts	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	ErrMod_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	ErrIf_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwTarHwTqOvrlQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwDrvgDynFacQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTarSteerTqDrvrActrQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgStReq_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	Fac_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	MotTqCmdOvrlEquZero_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	MotTqCmdPwrLimdActvtUppr_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	N/A

Design Rationale

Implementation of STB_EPS_STS State

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function StateMachineEntry

Function Name	StateSrvNotAvlStbEpsSts	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	N/A
Return Value	DrvgDynActv_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	DrvgDynIfSt_Cnt_T_enum	enum	32	255
	OutpTqOvrlRampInEna_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "StateMachine" Entry sections

Processing

Refer FDD

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.01
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF089A_BmwDrvgDynStMac_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

2.3 - BmwDrvgDynStMac_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Source Code
PolySpace
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwDrvgDynStMac

Revision / Baseline:

CF089A_BmwDrvgDynStMac_Impl_1.1.0

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Work CR ID:

EA4#25416

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

N/A

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

N/A

Integration Manual

N/A

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0

0.5

0

1.5

Other reviewers:

0

0.5

0

Total hours

0.5

1.5

0

2

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

changes

Elements of .arxml content:

changes

Pages of documentation:

changes

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

06/28/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Mateusz Bartocha

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwDrvgDynStMac.c

Source File Revision:

2

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwDrvgDynStMac_MDD.docx

Revision:

1

SWC Design Name:

CF089A_BmwDrvgDynStMac_Design

Revision:

1.1.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

Yes

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

Yes

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

Yes

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

N/A

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Initial version

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

N/A

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

Initial version

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Yes

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

N/A

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

N/A

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Yes

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

Yes

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

06/28/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Mateusz Bartocha

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Comments:

Adrian Łęgowski

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwDrvgDynStMac.c

Source File Revision:

2

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.5.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

N/A

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Initial version

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

No

Comments:

carry over from the previous baseline

for all functions in the component per Design

Number of Function Parameters is higher than 5, but cannot be decrased because of complex state machine.

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

06/28/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Mateusz Bartocha

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 6: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

3 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

3.1 - BmwFltHndlg_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwFltHndlg

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 06-NOV-2017

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1.0	06-Nov-2017

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	01.01.00
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.1
3	CF070A_BmwFltHndlg_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
Dem	Dem.h

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwFltHndlgInit1	None	RTE (Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwFltHndlgPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

.

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwFltHndlg_STOP_SEC_CODE	Code	N/A

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A	-	-

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

*See DataDict.m

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

3.2 - BmwFltHndlg_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwFltHndlg

April 10, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial Version	Krzysztof Byrski	1	6-Nov-2017
Updated local constants	Krzysztof Byrski	2	10-Apr-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 4

1.1 Purpose 4

1.2 Scope 4

2 BmwFltHndlg & High-Level Description 5

3 Design details of software module 6

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwFltHndlg 6

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 6

3.2.1 Component level DFD 6

3.2.2 Function level DFD 6

4 Constant Data Dictionary 7

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 7

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 7

5 Software Component Implementation 8

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 8

5.1.1 Init: BmwFltHndlgInit1 8

5.1.2 Per: BmwFltHndlgPer1 8

5.2 Server Runables 8

5.3 Interrupt Functions 8

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 8

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 8

6 Known Limitations with Design 9

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 10

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 11

Appendix B Glossary 12

Appendix C References 13

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF070A_BmwFltHndlg_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwFltHndlg & High-Level Description

BMW Fault Handling function provides a functionality of requesting the lamp status whenever the proper indicator status is set to on.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwFltHndlg

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

None

Function level DFD

None

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
*

*Refer FDD for local constants

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: Init1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: Per1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

None

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

Communication with Dem is not going through RTE.

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

Create stub of Dem_GetIndicatorStatus() function.

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	01.00.01
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	01.01.00
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.1
5	CF070A_BmwFltHndlg_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

3.3 - BmwFltHndlg_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
PolySpace
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwFltHndlg

Revision / Baseline:

CF070A_BmwFltHndlg_Impl_2.0.0

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Work CR ID:

EA4#22087

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

N/A

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0

0.5

0

1.5

Other reviewers:

0

0.5

0

Total hours

0.5

1.5

0

2

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

Changes only

Elements of .arxml content:

Changes only

Pages of documentation:

Changes only

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/10/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

All changed files have been compared against previous

Yes

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

N/A

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

N/A for changes

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

N/A for changes

DataDict.m display variables: created as

N/A

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

N/A

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

N/A

Comments:

N/A for changes

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/10/2018

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwFltHndlg.c

Source File Revision:

2

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwFltHndlg_MDD.docx

Revision:

2

SWC Design Name:

CF070A_BmwFltHndlg_Design

Revision:

2.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

N/A

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

N/A

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

Yes

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Yes

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

N/A

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

N/A

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

N/A

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

N/A

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/10/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Comments:

Adrian Legowski

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwFltHndlg_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

2

Source File Name:

BmwFltHndlg.c

Source File Revision:

2

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

Yes

Comments:

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

N/A

Comments:

and reviewed

N/A for changes

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

N/A

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

N/A

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

N/A

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

N/A

Comments:

N/A for changes

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/10/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwFltHndlg.c

Source File Revision:

2

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.3.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

Yes

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

N/A

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/10/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 8: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

4 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

4.1 - BmwHaptcFb_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwHaptcFb

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 18-MAY-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1.0	18-May-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
3	CF020A_BmwHaptcFb_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwHaptcFbInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwHaptcFbPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
N/A

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

None

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

None

4.2 - BmwHaptcFb_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwHaptcFb

May 18, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1	18-May-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 4

1.1 Purpose 4

1.2 Scope 4

2 BmwHaptcFb & High-Level Description 5

3 Design details of software module 6

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwHaptcFb 6

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 6

3.2.1 Component level DFD 6

3.2.2 Function level DFD 6

4 Constant Data Dictionary 7

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 7

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 7

5 Software Component Implementation 8

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 8

5.1.1 Init: BmwHaptcFbInit1 8

5.1.2 Per: BmwHaptcFbPer1 8

5.2 Server Runables 8

5.3 Interrupt Functions 8

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 9

5.4.1 Local Function CalcBmwHaptcFbPatNr 9

5.4.2 Local Function CalcBmwHaptcFbIntenNr 9

5.4.3 Local Function CalcHwOscnEna 10

5.4.4 Local Function CalcAmpAndFrq 10

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 11

6 Known Limitations with Design 12

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 13

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 14

Appendix B Glossary 15

Appendix C References 16

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF020A_BmwHaptcFb_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwHaptcFb & High-Level Description

This function will alert the driver through handwheel haptic feedback if a lane departure is detected. This function accepts pulse pattern, amplitude, and frequency inputs from the customer and then provides an enable/disable signal.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwHaptcFb

Data Flow Diagram

Component level DFD

Refer FDD

Function level DFD

Refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
-

*Refer FDD for local constants

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: Init1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: Per1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

Local Function CalcBmwHaptcFbPatNr

Function Name	CalcBmwHaptcFbPatNr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwHaptcFbPatNr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	BmwHaptcFbPatNrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	HwOscnActv_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	BmwHaptcFbPatNr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	BmwHaptcFbPatNrLgc_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "CalcBmwHaptcFbPatNr" and "BmwHaptcFbPatNrLgc" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function CalcBmwHaptcFbIntenNr

Function Name	CalcBmwHaptcFbIntenNr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwHaptcFbIntenNr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	BmwHaptcFbIntenNrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	HwOscnActv_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	BmwHaptcFbIntenNr_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	BmwHaptcFbIntenNrLgc_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "CalcBmwHaptcFbIntenNr" and "BmwHaptcFbIntenNrLgc" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function CalcHwOscnEna

Function Name	CalcHwOscnEna	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	PatChgReq_Cnt_T_logl	float32	FALSE	TRUE
	ActvTi_MilliSec_T_f32	float32	0	60
	PasTi_MilliSec_T_f32	float32	0	3
Return Value	HwOscnEna_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "CalcHwOscnEna" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function CalcAmpAndFrq

Function Name	CalcAmpAndFrq	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	VehSpd_Kph_T_f32	float32	0	511
	HwTq_HwNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-10	10
Return Value	HwOscnMotAmp_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	0	10
	HwOscnFrq_Hz_T_f32	float32	10	50

Design Rationale

Implementation of "CalcAmpAndFrq" Simulink block

Processing

Refer FDD

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.01
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF020A_BmwHaptcFb_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

4.3 - BmwHaptcFb_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
PolySpace
Integration Manual
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwHaptcFb

Revision / Baseline:

CF020A_BmwHaptcFb_Impl_1.0.0

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Work CR ID:

EA4#16079

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

Yes

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0

0.5

0

1.5

Other reviewers:

0

0.5

0

Total hours

0.5

1.5

0

2

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

All

Elements of .arxml content:

All

Pages of documentation:

All

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/24/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

All changed files have been compared against previous

N/A

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

Initial version

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m display variables: created as

N/A

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/24/2018

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwHaptcFb.c

Source File Revision:

1

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwHaptcFb_MDD.docx

Revision:

1

SWC Design Name:

CF020A_BmwHaptcFb_Design

Revision:

1.1.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

Yes

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

Yes

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

Initial version

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

N/A

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

Initial version

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Yes

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

Yes

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

Yes

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Yes

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

Yes

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/24/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Comments:

Adrian Legowski

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwHaptcFb_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

1

Source File Name:

BmwHaptcFb.c

Source File Revision:

1

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

N/A

Comments:

Initial version

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

N/A

Comments:

Initial version

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

Yes

Comments:

and reviewed

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

Yes

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

Yes

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/24/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwHaptcFb.c

Source File Revision:

1

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.3.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

N/A

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Initial version

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

Cyclomatic complexity: 7, static path: 30.

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/24/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: Integration Manual

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Integration Manual Review)

Integration Manual Name:

BmwHaptcFb_IntegrationManual.doc

Integration Manual Revision:

1

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches header

Yes

Comments:

Latest template used

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

N/A

Comments:

Initial version

Changes Highlighted (for Integrator)

N/A

Comments:

Initial version

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/24/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 8: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 9: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

5 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

5.1 - BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn

VERSION: 3.0

DATE: 13-Jan-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1.0	25-Oct-2017
2	Configuration parameters	Krzysztof Byrski	2.0	30-Nov-2017
3	Updated Configuration Parameters list	Matthew Leser	3.0	13-Jan-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	01.01.00
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.1
3	CF071A_BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None	-

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_Cfg.h

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
BMWHWAGARBNANDEOTPOSN_NTCHWAGSNSRNOTTRIM_CNT_ENUM (BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn\BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosnGeneral\NTCHWAGSNSRNOTTRIM)	Ntc Handwheel Angle Sensor Not Trim	CF071A


BMWHWAGARBNANDEOTPOSN_NTCLOSSOFPINIOINAGZEROSPD_CNT_ENUM (BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn\BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosnGeneral\NTCLOSSOFPINIOINAGZEROSPD)	Ntc Loss of Pinion Angle Zero Speed	CF071A
BMWHWAGARBNANDEOTPOSN_NTCLOSSOFPINIONAG_CNT_ENUM (BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn\BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosnGeneral\NTCLOSSOFPINIONAG)	Ntc Loss of Pinion Angle	CF071A

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosnInit1	None	RTE (Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosnPer1	None	RTE(2ms)
ClrBmwRackCentrToVehCentrOffs_Oper	None	RTE(Event)
ClrVehCentrPosn_Oper	None	RTE(Event)
SetVehCentrPosn_Oper	None	RTE(Event)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_START_SEC_CODE	Code	N/A

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

*See DataDict.m

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

5.2 - BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn

12-Jul-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial Version	Krzysztof Byrski	1	25-Oct-2017
Updated Local Functions arguments	Krzysztof Byrski	2	08-Nov-2017
Updated Diagram and Function Inputs	Matthew Leser	3	16-Jan-2018
Updated to Design version 3.0.0	Krzysztof Byrski	4	15-Mar-2018
Updated to Design version 5.1.0	Marek Brykczyński	5	29-Jun-2018
Updated graphic to include 2 new inputs, modified and added functions	Shawn Penning	6	12-Jul-2018

Table of Contents

T

1 Introduction 5

1.1 Purpose 5

1.2 Scope 5

2 BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn & High-Level Description 6

3 Design details of software module 7

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn 7

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 8

3.2.1 Component level DFD 8

3.2.2 Function level DFD 8

4 Constant Data Dictionary 9

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 9

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 9

5 Software Component Implementation 10

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 10

5.1.1 Init: BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosnInit1 10

5.1.2 Per: BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosnPer1 10

5.2 Server Runables 11

5.2.1 ClrBmwRackCentrToVehCentrOffs_Oper 11

5.2.2 ClrVehCentrPosn_Oper 11

5.2.3 SetVehCentrPosn_Oper 11

5.3 Interrupt Functions 11

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 12

5.4.1 HwAgSnsrNotTrimNTC 12

5.4.2 HwPosnFltDetn 12

5.4.3 PinionAgFltTmr 12

5.4.4 OffsCorrnTmr 13

5.4.5 InitTmr 13

5.4.6 CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnSt 13

5.4.7 CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStOffsCmpd 14

5.4.8 CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStSubVal 14

5.4.9 CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStTmpCmpd 14

5.4.10 CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStOffsCorrn 15

5.4.11 CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStSigInvld 15

5.4.12 CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStIni 15

5.4.13 BmwMotAgOffsSelnStTranCase 16

5.4.14 ChkNrcvrlFlt 16

5.4.15 TurnCntrCorrlnStsTmr 16

5.4.16 ChkTurnCntrCorrlnStsCdn 16

5.4.17 ProcessBmwQuadRotorOffs1 16

5.4.18 ProcessBmwQuadRotorOffs2 17

5.4.20 ProcessBmwQuadOffsSts 17

5.4.21 ActvtLpFil 17

5.4.22 CalcBmwPinionAgOffs 17

5.4.23 BmwMotAgSelnStOffsCmpd 18

5.4.24 BmwMotAgSelnStSigInvld 19

5.4.25 PinionAgCalc 19

5.4.26 ClrNotCmplPinionAgFlg 19

5.4.27 CalcEot 20

5.4.28 SetBmwRackCentrToVehCentrOffs 20

5.4.29 HndlgNTC 21

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 22

6 Known Limitations with Design 23

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 24

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 25

Appendix B Glossary 26

Appendix C References 27

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF071A_BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn & High-Level Description

This function will be responsible for determining the hand wheel position using the motor position to provide an estimate of the hand wheel position.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

N/A

Function level DFD

N/A

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

None

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: Init1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: Per1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

ClrBmwRackCentrToVehCentrOffs_Oper

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

ClrVehCentrPosn_Oper

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

SetVehCentrPosn_Oper

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

HwAgSnsrNotTrimNTC

Function Name	HwAgSnsrNotTrimNTC	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	None
Return Value	HwAgSnsrNotTrimFlt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

HwPosnFltDetn

Function Name	HwPosnFltDetn	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	MotAgVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	HwAgSnsrNotTrimFlt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	PinionAgFltTmrElpd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

PinionAgFltTmr

Function Name	PinionAgFltTmr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	HwAgSnsrNotTrimFlt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	PinionAgFltTmrElpd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

OffsCorrnTmr

Function Name	OffsCorrnTmr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	None
Return Value	OffsCorrnTmrElpd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

InitTmr

Function Name	InitTmr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	None
Return Value	AllwExitFromInit_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnSt

Function Name	CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnSt	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	TurnCntrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwQuadOffsSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	PinionAgFltTmrElpd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	OffsCorrnTmrElpd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	HwAgNotVldFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwExitFromInit_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStOffsCmpd

Function Name	CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStOffsCmpd	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	TurnCntrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwQuadOffsSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	HwAgNotVldFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStSubVal

Function Name	CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStSubVal	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwQuadOffsSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	HwAgNotVldFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStTmpCmpd

Function Name	CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStTmpCmpd	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwQuadOffsSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	HwAgNotVldFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStOffsCorrn

Function Name	CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStOffsCorrn	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	OffsCorrnTmrElpd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	HwAgNotVldFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStSigInvld

Function Name	CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStSigInvld	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	TurnCntrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	PinionAgFltTmrElpd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	HwAgNotVldFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStIni

Function Name	CalcBmwMotAgOffsSelnStIni	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	TurnCntrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	HwAgNotVldFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwExitFromInit_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTran_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

BmwMotAgOffsSelnStTranCase

Function Name	BmwMotAgOffsSelnStTranCase	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwQuadOffsSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	HwAgSnsrNotTrimFlt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	MotAgTurnCntrDeg_MotDeg_T_f32	float32	-82944000	83008800
	TurnCntrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	PrevLoopBmwMotAgSelnSt_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	BmwQuadRotorOffs_MotRev_T_s08	sint8	-127	127
	MotAgCumvAlgnMrf_MotDeg_T_f32	float32	-262144	262143.9998
Return Value	PinionAgTarConf_Uls_T_f32	float32	0	1
	MotPosnDegArbd_MotDeg_T_f32	float32	- 83206144	83270944>

ChkNrcvrlFlt

Function Name	ChkNrcvrlFlt	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	Ntc8CSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	2
	Ntc8ESts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	2
Return Value	-	-	-	-

TurnCntrCorrlnStsTmr

Function Name	TurnCntrCorrlnStsTmr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	TurnCntrCorrlnSts_Cnt_T_u08	enum	0	3
Return Value	-	-	-	-

ChkTurnCntrCorrlnStsCdn

Function Name	ChkTurnCntrCorrlnStsCdn	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	TurnCntrCorrlnSts_Cnt_T_u08	enum	0	3
Return Value	-	-	-	-

ProcessBmwQuadRotorOffs1

Function Name	ProcessBmwQuadRotorOffs	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwQuadOffsSts_Cnt_T_enum, ,	Enum	0	15
	BmwQuadRotorOffs_MotRev_T_s08	sint8	-127	127
	ChgdValDetd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	-	-	-	-

ProcessBmwQuadRotorOffs2

Function Name	ProcessBmwQuadRotorOffs	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwQuadOffsSts_Cnt_T_enum, ,	Enum	0	15
	BmwQuadRotorOffs_MotRev_T_s08	sint8	-127	127
	ChgdValDetd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	-	-	-	-

ProcessBmwQuadOffsSts

Function Name	ProcessBmwQuadOffsSts	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwQuadOffsSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	15
	ChgdValDetd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	-	-	-	-

ActvtLpFil

Function Name	ActvtLpFil	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	-	-	-	-
Return Value	-	-	-	-

CalcBmwPinionAgOffs

Function Name	CalcBmwPinionAgOffs	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwPinionAgOffs_HwDeg_T_f32	float32	-45	45
	BmwPinionAgOffsSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	4
Return Value	-BmwPinionAgOffsOutp_HwDeg_T_f32	float32	-1440	1440

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

BmwMotAgSelnStOffsCmpd

Function Name	BmwMotAgSelnStOffsCmpd	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwQuadRotorOffs_MotRev_T_s08	sint8	-127	127
Return Value	PinionAgTarConf_Uls_T_f32	float32	0	1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

BmwMotAgSelnStSigInvld

Function Name	BmwMotAgSelnStSigInvld	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	TurnCntrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	PrevLoopBmwMotAgSelnSt_Cnt_T_enum	enum	2	15
	HwAgSnsrNotTrimFlt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	MotAgTurnCntrDeg_MotDeg_T_f32	float32	-82944000	83008800
Return Value	PinionAgTarConf_Uls_T_f32	float32	0	0

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

PinionAgCalc

Function Name	PinionAgCalc	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	OffsCpmpdMotPosn_MotDeg_T_f32	float32	-82989720	83054520
	CmplncErrMotToPinion_HwDeg_T_f32	float32	-5	5
Return Value	BmwPinionAg_HwDeg_T_f32	float32	-1440	1440

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

ClrNotCmplPinionAgFlg

Function Name	ClrNotCmplPinionAgFlg	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	LongTermRackCentrCmpl_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

CalcEot

Function Name	CalcEot	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	TotRackTrvl_HwDeg_T_f32	float32	-2880	2880
	LongTermRackCentrCmpl_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	HwAgEotCw_HwDeg_T_f32	float32	360	900
	HwAgEotCcw_HwDeg_T_f32	float32	-900	-360
	HwAgCwDetd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	HwAgCcwDetd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

SetBmwRackCentrToVehCentrOffs

Function Name	SetBmwRackCentrToVehCentrOffs	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	LongTermRackCentrCmpl_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	RackCentrPinionAg_HwDeg_T_f32	float32	-1440	1440
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

HndlgNTC

Function Name	HndlgNTC	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	VehSpdVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	VehSpd_Kph_T_f32	float32	0	350
	BmwVehSpdSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	DiKineIntegrityTest_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	01.00.01
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	01.01.00
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.1
5	CF071A_BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

5.3 - BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_Review

Overview

Cover Page
Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
PolySpace
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Cover Page

	Nexteer Automotive Confidential Proprietary Information Do Not Copy/Distribute Without Prior Permission


EA4 Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Checklist
For
BMW FAAR WE














Prepared By:
Software Development Team
Nexteer Automotive
Tychy, Poland

EA4 Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Checklist Version: 2.02 Date: 28-Jun-2018 © Nexteer Automotive

Sheet 2: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.02

27-Jun-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn

Revision / Baseline:

CF071A_BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_Design_6.3.0

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Work CR ID:

EA4#26164

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

N/A

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

N/A

Auto Code

N/A

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

N/A

SIL Testing

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0.5

0

2

Other reviewers:

0

Total hours

1

0

2

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

changes

Elements of .arxml content:

changes

Pages of documentation:

changes

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 3: Synergy Project

Rev 2.02

27-Jun-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

07/25/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Davinci Files

Rev 2.02

27-Jun-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments: N/A for changes

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments: N/A for changes

the configuration header file(s) correctly

All changed files have been compared against previous

N/A

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

N/A

Comments: N/A for changes

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments: N/A for changes

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

N/A

Comments:N/A for changes

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

N/A

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

N/A

Comments: N/A for changes

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments: N/A for changes

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments: N/A for changes

DataDict.m display variables: created as

N/A

Comments: N/A for changes

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

N/A

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

07/25/18

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Krzysztof Byrski

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: Source Code

Rev 2.02

27-Jun-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn.c

Source File Revision:

13

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_MDD.docx

Revision:

6

SWC Design Name:

CF071A_BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn_Design

Revision:

6.3.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version:

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version:

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

Yes

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

Yes

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

Yes

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

N/A

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version:

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Yes

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

Yes

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

Yes

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

Yes

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Yes

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

Yes

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

07/25/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Patryk Kołacki

Comments:

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Krzysztof Byrski

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.02

27-Jun-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwHwAgArbnAndEotPosn.c

Source File Revision:

13

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.5.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

N/A

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

MISRA AGC guidelines selected for Polyspace (N/A for hand

N/A

Comments:

coded components)

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

07/17/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 8: Version History



Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released
2.02	Added a new tab for auto code as well as SIL testing Corrected some of the missing hyperlinks and formatting Added referencing for items under Reviewed in Summary Sheet tab	SW Engineering team	27-Jun-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath PCWG	28-Jun-18	Released

6 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

6.1 - BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 13-APR-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1.0	17-Apr-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
3	CF089A_BmwDrvgDynStMac_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwHwTqOvrlArbnInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwHwTqOvrlArbnPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
N/A

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

None

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

6.2 - BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn

April 17, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1	18-Oct-2017

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 4

1.1 Purpose 4

1.2 Scope 4

2 BmwHwTqOvrlArbn & High-Level Description 5

3 Design details of software module 6

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwHwTqOvrlArbn 6

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 6

3.2.1 Component level DFD 6

3.2.2 Function level DFD 6

4 Constant Data Dictionary 7

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 7

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 7

5 Software Component Implementation 8

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 8

5.1.1 Init: BmwHwTqOvrlArbnInit1 8

5.1.2 Per: BmwHwTqOvrlArbnPer1 8

5.2 Server Runables 8

5.3 Interrupt Functions 8

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 9

5.4.1 Local Function FctlErr 9

5.4.2 Local Function HwTqOvrlArbn 9

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 10

6 Known Limitations with Design 11

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 12

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 13

Appendix B Glossary 14

Appendix C References 15

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF101A_BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn & High-Level Description

The BMW Handwheel Torque Overlay Arbitration arbitrates Input Torque Overlay based on current driving conditions, driving dynamics interface state and provided qualifiers.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwHwTqOvrlArbn

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

Refer FDD

Function level DFD

Refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
*

*Refer FDD for local constants

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: BmwHwTqOvrlArbnInit1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: BmwHwTqOvrlArbnPer1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

Local Function FctlErr

Function Name	FctlErr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	HwTqOvrlAvl_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	VehSpd_Kph_T_f32	float32	0	511
	BmwTarHwTqOvrl_HwNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-10	10
Return Value	Rte_Pim_FctlErrActv	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Implementation of "FctlErr" Simulink block.

Processing

Refer FDD

Local Function HwTqOvrlArbn

Function Name	HwTqOvrlArbn	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	FctlErr_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	HwTqOvrl_HwNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-10	10
	HwTqOvrlAvl_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	ArbdHwTqOvrl_HwNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-10	10

Design Rationale

Implementation of "HwTqOvrlArbn" Simulink block.

Processing

Refer FDD

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

Due to optimization reasons:

• Function FctlErr will not be fully executed when PIM FctlErrActv is set to TRUE.

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.01
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF101A_BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

6.3 - BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
PolySpace
Integration Manual
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn

Revision / Baseline:

CF101A_BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_Impl_1.0.0

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Work CR ID:

EA4#22038

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

Yes

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

*Intagrator was unavailable

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0

0.5

0

1.5

Other reviewers:

0

Total hours

0.5

1

0

1.5

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

All

Elements of .arxml content:

All

Pages of documentation:

All

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

All changed files have been compared against previous

N/A

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

Initial version

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m display variables: created as

Yes

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/14/2018

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Intagrator was unavailable

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn.c

Source File Revision:

1

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_MDD.docx

Revision:

1

SWC Design Name:

CF101A_BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_Design

Revision:

1.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

Yes

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

Yes

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

N/A

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Initial version

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

N/A

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

Initial version

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Yes

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

Yes

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

N/A

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

N/A

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

N/A

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Comments:

Patryk Kołacki

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

1

Source File Name:

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn.c

Source File Revision:

1

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

N/A

Comments:

Initial version

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

N/A

Comments:

Initial version

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

Yes

Comments:

and reviewed

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

Yes

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

Yes

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn.c

Source File Revision:

1

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.3.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

N/A

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Initial version

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

Cyclomatic complexity: 6, static path: 10.

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: Integration Manual

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Integration Manual Review)

Integration Manual Name:

BmwHwTqOvrlArbn_IntegrationManual.doc

Integration Manual Revision:

1

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches header

Yes

Comments:

Latest template used

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

N/A

Comments:

Initial version

Changes Highlighted (for Integrator)

N/A

Comments:

Initial version

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

04/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Intagrator was unavailable

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 8: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 9: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

7 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

7.1 - BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwMotTqOvrlArbn

VERSION: 2.0

DATE: 04-APR-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1.0	28-Feb-2018
2	Updated dependencies	Krzysztof Byrski	2.0	04-Apr-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
3	CF083A_BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
Dcm	Dcm_GetSesCtrlType

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwMotTqOvrlArbnInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwMotTqOvrlArbnPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_START_SEC_CODE	Code

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

None

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

7.2 - BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwMotTqOvrlArbn

July 03, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1	28-Feb-2018
Updated graphical representation as per Design 2.0.0	Krzysztof Byrski	2	04-Apr-2018
Updated unit test considerations	Krzysztof Byrski	3	22-Jun-2018
Updated graphical representation as per Design 3.0.0	Krzysztof Byrski	4	03-Jul-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 4

1.1 Purpose 4

1.2 Scope 4

2 BmwMotTqOvrlArbn & High-Level Description 5

3 Design details of software module 6

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwMotTqOvrlArbn 6

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 6

3.2.1 Component level DFD 6

3.2.2 Function level DFD 6

4 Constant Data Dictionary 7

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 7

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 7

5 Software Component Implementation 8

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 8

5.1.1 Init: BmwMotTqOvrlArbnInit1 8

5.1.2 Per: BmwMotTqOvrlArbnPer1 8

5.2 Server Runables 8

5.3 Interrupt Functions 8

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 9

5.4.1 Local Function ChkForFctlErr 9

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 9

6 Known Limitations with Design 10

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 11

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 12

Appendix B Glossary 13

Appendix C References 14

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF083A_BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwMotTqOvrlArbn & High-Level Description

This function accepts multiple torque overlay commands and based on other supplied signals, it decides which of provided torque overlays should be used as torque overlay command. It also sets torque overlay command to zero if safety related conditions occur.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwMotTqOvrlArbn

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

Refer FDD

Function level DFD

Refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
CNVMILLISECTOCNT_CNTPERMILLISEC_U16	1	CntPerMilliSec	10
TWENTYCNT_CNT_U32	1	Cnt	20
ZERO_MOTNWTMTR_F32	Single Precision Float	MotNwtMtr	0

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: Init1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

None

Per: Per1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

Local Function ChkForFctlErr

Function Name	ChkForFctlErr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	MfgModActv_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwNearStillVehSpdSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	12	15
	VehSpd_Kph_T_f32	float32	0	511
	MfgModCmd_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8
Return Value	N/A

Design Rationale

Implementation of “ChkForFctlErr” Simulink block.

Processing

Refer FDD

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.01
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF083A_BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

7.3 - BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
PolySpace
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwMotTqOvrlArbn

Revision / Baseline:

CF083A_BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_Impl_3.0.0

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Work CR ID:

EA4#25257

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

N/A

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0

0.5

0

1.5

Other reviewers:

0

Total hours

0.5

1

0

1.5

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

Changes only

Elements of .arxml content:

Changes only

Pages of documentation:

Changes only

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

07/03/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczynski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

All changed files have been compared against previous

Yes

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

N/A for changes

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m display variables: created as

N/A

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

N/A for changes

Per Instance Memory names and data types

N/A

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

N/A for changes

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

07/11/2018

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczynski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwMotTqOvrlArbn.c

Source File Revision:

4

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_MDD.docx

Revision:

4

SWC Design Name:

CF083A_BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_Design

Revision:

3.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

N/A

Comments:

N/A for changes

for function names

N/A

Comments:

N/A for changes

for other names (component, memory

N/A

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

N/A for changes

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

Yes

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Yes

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

N/A

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

N/A

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

N/A

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

N/A

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

07/03/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczynski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Comments:

Wojciech Janusz

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwMotTqOvrlArbn_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

4

Source File Name:

BmwMotTqOvrlArbn.c

Source File Revision:

4

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

Yes

Comments:

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

Yes

Comments:

and reviewed

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

N/A

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

N/A

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

N/A

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

07/03/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczynski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwMotTqOvrlArbn.c

Source File Revision:

4

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.5.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

Yes

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

07/03/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczynski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 8: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

8 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

8.1 - BmwPwrPrkgDampg_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwPwrPrkgDampg

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 08-JAN-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1.0	08-Jan-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
3	CF082A_BmwPwrPrkgDampg_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwPwrPrkgDampgInit1	None	RTE (Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwPwrPrkgDampgPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwPwrPrkgDampg_START_SEC_CODE	Code

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

None

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

8.2 - BmwPwrPrkgDampg_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwPwrPrkgDampg

April 18, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Tychy, Poland
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial Version	Krzysztof Byrski	1	08-Jan-2018
Updates accordingly to the Design 2.0.0 (enabling/disabling functionality through a coding bit has been introduced)	Marek Brykczyński	2	18-Apr-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 4

1.1 Purpose 4

1.2 Scope 4

2 BmwPwrPrkgDampg & High-Level Description 5

3 Design details of software module 6

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwPwrPrkgDampg 6

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 6

3.2.1 Component level DFD 6

3.2.2 Function level DFD 6

4 Constant Data Dictionary 7

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 7

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 7

5 Software Component Implementation 8

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 8

5.1.1 Init: BmwPwrPrkgDampgInit1 8

5.1.2 Per: BmwPwrPrkgDampgPer1 8

5.2 Server Runables 8

5.3 Interrupt Functions 8

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 8

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 8

6 Known Limitations with Design 9

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 10

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 11

Appendix B Glossary 12

Appendix C References 13

Introduction

Purpose

MDD for CF082A_BmwPwrPrkgDampg_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwPwrPrkgDampg & High-Level Description

The subject function can be activated or deactivated through a coding bit. This function is responsible for determining the amount of additional motor torque damping during parking, getting to the point the power pack cannot provide the full assist anymore. The function will avoid any hard change of assist comparable to the EOT damping. The function is primarily derived from the handwheel velocity, the pinion angle and it is scaled by the vehicle velocity.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwPwrPrkgDampg

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

Refer FDD

Function level DFD

Refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
ZERO_MOTNWTMTR_F32	Single	MotNwtMtr	0

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: BmwPwrPrkgDampgInit1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: BmwPwrPrkgDampgPer1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

None

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF082A_BmwPwrPrkgDampg_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

8.3 - BmwPwrPrkgDampg_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Source Code
PolySpace
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwPwrPrkgDampg

Revision / Baseline:

CF082A_BmwPwrPrkgDampg_Impl_3.0.0

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Work CR ID:

EA4#23370

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

N/A

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

N/A

Integration Manual

N/A

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0.5

0

2

Other reviewers:

0

Total hours

1

0

2

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

changes only

Elements of .arxml content:

changes only

Pages of documentation:

changes only

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwPwrPrkgDampg.c

Source File Revision:

3

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwPwrPrkgDampg_MDD.docx

Revision:

2

SWC Design Name:

CF082A_BmwPwrPrkgDampg_Design

Revision:

3.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version:

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version:

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

Yes

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

N/A

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

Yes

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Yes

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

Yes

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

Yes

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Yes

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

Yes

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

05/16/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Grzegorz Szafranski

Comments:

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwPwrPrkgDampg.c

Source File Revision:

2

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.4.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

Yes

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

Yes

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

05/16/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 5: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

9 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

9.1 - BmwSplyCurrLim_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwSplyCurrLim

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 24-MAY-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Tychy, Poland

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Marek Brykczyński	1.0	24-May-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
3	CF045A_BmwSplyCurrLim_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwSplyCurrLimInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwSplyCurrLimPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwSplyCurrLim_START_SEC_CODE	Code	N/A

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

N/A

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

9.2 - BmwSplyCurrLim_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwSplyCurrLim

May 24, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Tychy, Poland
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Marek Brykczyński	1	24-May-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 4

1.1 Purpose 4

1.2 Scope 4

2 BmwSplyCurrLim & High-Level Description 5

3 Design details of software module 6

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwSplyCurrLim 6

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 6

3.2.1 Component level DFD 6

3.2.2 Function level DFD 6

4 Constant Data Dictionary 7

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 7

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 7

5 Software Component Implementation 8

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 8

5.1.1 Init: BmwSplyCurrLimInit1 8

5.1.2 Per: BmwSplyCurrLimPer1 8

5.2 Server Runables 8

5.3 Interrupt Functions 8

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 9

5.4.1 VltgDptCurrLim 9

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 9

6 Known Limitations with Design 10

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 11

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 12

Appendix B Glossary 13

Appendix C References 14

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF045A_BmwSplyCurrLim_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwSplyCurrLim & High-Level Description

The BMW Supply Current Limit function specifies the supply current limit based on operating conditions of the vehicle. The supply current limit is a function of vehicle speed, supply voltage measurement, customer serial communication messages and motor start stop (MSA). The function arbitrates between limits specified for each interface to meet the requirements provided by the customer.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwSplyCurrLim

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

Refer FDD

Function level DFD

Refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
-

Refer FDD for local constants.

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: Init1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: Per1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

VltgDptCurrLim

Function Name	VltgDptCurrLim	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	RemCtrlPrkgEna_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BrdgVltg_Volt_T_u6p10	uint16	6144	27136
Return Value	A result of a conversion of fixed-point to float32	float32	0	120

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.01
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF045A_BmwSplyCurrLim_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

9.3 - BmwSplyCurrLim_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Source Code
PolySpace
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwSplyCurrLim

Revision / Baseline:

CF045A_BmwSplyCurrLim_Impl_1.0.1

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Work CR ID:

EA4#24631

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

N/A

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

N/A

Integration Manual

N/A

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0.5

0

1

Other reviewers:

1

0

Total hours

2

0

2

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

changes only

Elements of .arxml content:

changes only

Pages of documentation:

N/A

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

06/06/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwSplyCurrLim.c

Source File Revision:

2

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwSplyCurrLim_MDD.docx

Revision:

1

SWC Design Name:

CF045A_BmwSplyCurrLim_Design

Revision:

1.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

N/A

Comments:

for changes

for constant names

N/A

Comments:

for changes

for function names

N/A

Comments:

for changes

for other names (component, memory

N/A

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

N/A

Comments:

for changes

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

Yes

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

N/A

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

Yes

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

N/A

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

Yes

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Yes

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

Yes

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

06/06/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Tomasz Lukomski

Comments:

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwSplyCurrLim.c

Source File Revision:

2

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.5.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

Yes

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

06/06/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 6: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

10 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

10.1 - BmwStReqMgr_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwStReqMgr

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 24-OCT-2017

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1.0	24-Oct-2017

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	01.01.00
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.1
3	CF069A_BmwStReqMgr_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwStReqMgrInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwStReqMgrPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

.

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwStReqMgr_START_SEC_CODE	Code	-

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

*See DataDict.m

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

10.2 - BmwStReqMgr_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwStReqMgr

May 22, 2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial Version	Krzysztof Byrski	1	24-Oct-2017
Update to FDD 2.0.0	Mateusz Bartocha	2	14-Nov-17
Updated Diagram	Matthew Leser	3	10-Jan-18
Updated TargetECUState function inputs	Matthew Leser	4	23-Feb-18
Updated local functions	Krzysztof Byrski	5	22-Mar-2018
Update to FDD 4.0.0	Krzysztof Byrski	6	22-May-2018

Table of Contents1 Introduction 4

1.1 Purpose 4

1.2 Scope 4

2 BmwStReqMgr & High-Level Description 5

3 Design details of software module 6

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwStReqMgr 6

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 6

3.2.1 Component level DFD 6

3.2.2 Function level DFD 6

4 Constant Data Dictionary 7

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 7

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 7

5 Software Component Implementation 8

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 8

5.1.1 Init: BmwStReqMgrInit1 8

5.1.2 Per: BmwStReqMgrPer1 8

5.2 Server Runables 8

5.3 Interrupt Functions 8

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 9

5.4.1 Local Function Override 9

5.4.2 Local Function CalcOfStsSteerAssiAndEpsFctSts 9

5.4.3 Local Function StsDrvrActvyTmr 10

5.4.4 Local Function AssiOnToOffFlg 10

5.4.5 Local Function AllwToOff 11

5.4.6 Local Function TargetECUState 11

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 12

6 Known Limitations with Design 13

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 14

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 15

Appendix B Glossary 16

Appendix C References 17

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF069A_BmwStReqMgr_Impl

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwStReqMgr & High-Level Description

This function will be responsible for requesting transitions between the states and modes of the steering system based on vehicle signals.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwStReqMgr

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

None

Function level DFD

None

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
-

*Refer FDD for local constants

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: Init1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: Per1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

Local Function Override

Function Name	Override	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwVehCdnVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwVehCdn_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
Return Value	BmwVehCdnVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwVehCdn_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Implementation of Simulink block Override

Local Function CalcOfStsSteerAssiAndEpsFctSts

Function Name	CalcOfStsSteerAssiAndEpsFctSts	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	SysSt_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	3
	ThermRednFac_Uls_T_f32	float32	0	1
	RcvrlFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	DiagcStsNonRcvrlReqDiFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	PwrLimrRednFac_Uls_T_f32	float32	0	1
Return Value	StsSteerAssi_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	1
	BmwEpsFctSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	96	224

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Implementation of Simulink block DeterminationOfStatusSteeringAssistAndEpsFctSts

Local Function StsDrvrActvyTmr

Function Name	StsDrvrActvyTmr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	HwTq_HwNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-10	10
Return Value	StsDrvrActvy_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Implementation of Simulink block StsDrvrActvyTmr

Local Function AssiOnToOffFlg

Function Name	AssiOnToOffFlg	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	DiagcStsNonRcvrlReqDiFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwVehCdnVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwVehSpdSts_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	VehSpd_Kph_T_f32	float32	0	350
	BmwVehCdn_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	StsDrvrActvy_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	1
Return Value	AssiOnToOffFlg_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Implementation of Simulink block AssiOnToOffFlg

Local Function AllwToOff

Function Name	AllwToOff	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwVehCdn_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	IgnLine_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	AllwToOff_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Implementation of Simulink block AllwToOff

Local Function TargetECUState

Function Name	TargetECUState	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	DiagcStsNonRcvrlReqDiFltPrsnt_Cnt_T_logl	enum	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwVehCdn_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	AssiOnToOffFlg_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwTranToDi_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	IgnLine_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	AllwToOff_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	TarEcuSt_Cnt_T_enum	enum	0	3
	PwrSplyEnaReq_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	SysStReqEna_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	SysOperMotTqCmdSca_Uls_T_f32	float	0	1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Implementation of Simulink block TargetECUState

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.01
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF069A_BmwStReqMgr_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

10.3 - BmwStReqMgr_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
PolySpace
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwStReqMgr

Revision / Baseline:

CF069A_BmwStReqMgr_Impl_4.0.0

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Work CR ID:

EA4#22918

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

N/A

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0

0.5

0

1.5

Other reviewers:

0

Total hours

0.5

1

0

1.5

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

Changes only

Elements of .arxml content:

Changes only

Pages of documentation:

Changes only

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/22/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

All changed files have been compared against previous

Yes

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m display variables: created as

N/A

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/25/2018

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwStReqMgr.c

Source File Revision:

7

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwStReqMgr_MDD.docx

Revision:

6

SWC Design Name:

CF069A_BmwStReqMgr_Design

Revision:

4.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

Yes

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

N/A

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

Yes

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Yes

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

N/A

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

N/A

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

N/A

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

N/A

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/22/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Comments:

Grzegorz Szafranski

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwStReqMgr_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

6

Source File Name:

BmwStReqMgr.c

Source File Revision:

7

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

Yes

Comments:

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

Yes

Comments:

and reviewed

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

N/A

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

N/A

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

N/A

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

N/A

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/22/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwStReqMgr.c

Source File Revision:

7

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.5.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

Yes

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/22/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 8: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

11 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

11.1 - BmwSwFctDi_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwSwFctDi

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 28-JUL-2018

Prepared By:

Akilan Rathakrishnan,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Revision History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Akilan Rathakrishnan	1.0	28-Jul-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions.doc	01.00.00
2	Software Design and Coding Standards.doc	2.1
3	CF108A_BmwSwFctDi _Design	See Synergy subproject version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

See DataDict.m file

Required Global Data Outputs

See DataDict.m file

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwSwFctDiInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwSwFctDiPer1	None	RTE(10ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwSwFctDi_START_SEC_CODE

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

None

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

11.2 - BmwSwFctDi_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwSwFctDi

July 28, 2018

Prepared By:

Akilan Rathakrishnan,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, USA
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Akilan Rathakrishnan	1.0	28-Jul-2018
Updated Design rationale for periodic and init runnables	Akilan Rathakrishanan	2.0	30-Jul-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 5

1.1 Purpose 5

1.2 Scope 5

2 BmwSwFctDi High-Level Description 6

3 Design details of software module 7

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwVehSpd 8

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 9

3.2.1 Component level DFD 9

3.2.2 Function level DFD 9

4 Constant Data Dictionary 10

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 10

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 10

5 Software Component Implementation 11

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 11

5.1.1 BmwSwFctDiInit1 11

5.1.1.1 Design Rationale 11

5.1.1.2 Module Outputs 11

5.1.2 BmwSwFctDiPer1 11

5.1.2.1 Design Rationale 11

5.1.2.2 Module Outputs 11

5.2 Server Runnables 11

5.3 Interrupt Functions 11

5.3.1 Interrupt Function Name 11

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 11

5.4.1 UpdCodingBits 11

5.4.2 ReadCodingData 11

5.4.3 PullCmpCmdDiBmwOvrd 12

5.4.4 InertiaCmpVelCmdDiBmwOvrd 12

5.4.5 ClsdLoopHysEna 12

5.4.6 CtrldVelRtnEna 12

5.4.7 OvrdCmdEna 12

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 12

6 Known Limitations with Design 13

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 14

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 15

Appendix B Glossary 16

Appendix C Please references 17

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF0108A_BmwSwFctDi_Impl

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwSwFctDi High-Level Description

This is BMW specific and will allow features to be disabled per customer requirements without altering multiple SF''s. It will also take a client call from the BAC module coding and output Boolean logic to allow BMW to disable the required features. This client call will be changing over time from BMW and this function allows change to happen in one component instead of adjusting all the CF components that need and output from this.

Design details of software module

Please refer FDD

Graphical representation of BmwVehSpd

Data Flow Diagram

Please refer FDD

Component level DFD

Please refer FDD

Function level DFD

Please refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
Please refer .m file for constants

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

BmwSwFctDiInit1

Design Rationale

Implementation of the init runnable differs from design due to the way this component need to interact with BMW BAC Coding component.

Module Outputs

None

BmwSwFctDiPer1

Design Rationale

Implementation of the periodic differs from design due to the way this component need to interact with BMW BAC Coding component.

Module Outputs

None

Server Runnables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Interrupt Function Name

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

UpdCodingBits

Function Name	UpdCodingBits	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	CodingDataMode_Cnt_T_u08	Uint8	0	5
Return Value	None	-	-	-

ReadCodingData

Function Name	ReadCodingData	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	CodingDataMode_Cnt_T_u08	uint8	0	5
Return Value	None	-	-	-

PullCmpCmdDiBmwOvrd

Function Name	VehSpdRateLim	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	PullCmpCmdDi_Cnt_T_logl	Boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	PullCmpCmdDiBmwOvrd_Cnt_T_logl	Boolean	FALSE	TRUE

InertiaCmpVelCmdDiBmwOvrd

Function Name	InertiaCmpVelCmdDiBmwOvrd	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	InertiaCmpVelCmdDi_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	InertiaCmpVelCmdDiBmwOvrd_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

ClsdLoopHysEna

Function Name	ClsdLoopHysEna	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	HwTqCmdHys_HwNwtMtr_T_f32	Float32	-10	10
Return Value	HwTqCmdHysBmwOvrd_HwNwtMtr_T_f32	Float32	-10	10

CtrldVelRtnEna

Function Name	CtrldVelRtnEna	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	CtrldVelRtnCmd_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	Float32	-8.8	8.8
Return Value	CtrldVelRtnCmdBmwOvrd_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	Float32	-8.8	8.8

OvrdCmdEna

Function Name	ProcessFourthAndGateState	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	OvrdCal_Cnt_T_u08	Uint8	0	255
	CodingBit_Cnt_T_u08	Uint8	0	255
Return Value	OvrlCmdEna_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None.

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

Client calls to BMW BAC Coding component are not listed in the design since this will require modeling 3^rd party software.

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Please reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

Please references

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.3.0 R4.0 Rev 2
2	MDD Guideline	EA4 01.00.00
3	Software Naming Conventions.doc	1.0
4	Software Design and Coding Standards.doc	2.1
5	FDD: CF108A_BmwSwFctDi_Design	See Synergy subproject version

11.3 - BmwSwFctDi_ReviewChecklist

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
Integration Manual
PolySpace
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwSwFctDi

Revision / Baseline:

CF108A_BmwSwFctDi_Impl_0.0.1

Change Owner:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Work CR ID:

EA4#26426

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

Yes

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

2

1

0

Component developer reviewers:

0

1

0

4

Other reviewers:

Total hours

0

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

1032

Elements of .arxml content:

Pages of documentation:

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

No

Comments:

Design not baselined due to logic change in the implementation

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Review Date :

07/30/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Matt Leser

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

No

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

BAC Coding "Data" port and "Coding_DataMode" ports are added in the component. These ports are not required to be part of StdDef since both of them are customer specific.

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

All changed files have been compared against previous

N/A

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

Initial Version

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

No

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

Design to be updated to match implementation

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

No

Comments:

Additional calibrations are added during implementation.

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

No

Comments:

BAC Coding component port accesses are not listed in the design

DataDict.m display variables: created as

N/A

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

No

Comments:

Additional PIMs are needed

match DataDict.m file

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Review Date :

07/30/18

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Matt Leser

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwSwFctDi.c

Source File Revision:

2

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwSwFctDi_MDD.docx

Revision:

2

SWC Design Name:

CF108A_BmwSwFctDi_Design

Revision:

TBD

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01.00

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.02.00

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

N/A

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

N/A

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

No

Comments:

This components makes client calls to BAC Coding component interfaces.

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

N/A

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

Initial Version

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Yes

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

Yes

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

Yes

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

N/A

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

Yes

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

No

Comments:

This components makes client calls to BAC Coding component interfaces.

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments:

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Review Date :

07/30/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Matt Leser

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Comments:

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwSwFctDi_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

2

Source File Name:

BmwSwFctDi.c

Source File Revision:

2

Source File Name:

Source File Revision:

Source File Name:

Source File Revision:

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

Yes

Comments:

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

Yes

Comments:

and reviewed

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

Yes

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

N/A

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Review Date :

07/30/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Matt Leser

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: Integration Manual

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Integration Manual Review)

Integration Manual Name:

BmwSwFctDi_IntegrationManual.docx

Integration Manual Revision:

1

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches header

Yes

Comments:

Latest template used

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Integrator)

N/A

Comments:

Initial Version

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Review Date :

07/30/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Matt Leser

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwSwFctDi.c

Source File Revision:

2

Source File Name:

Source File Revision:

Source File Name:

Source File Revision:

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

01.04.00

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.5.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

N/A

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Akilan Rathakrishnan

Review Date :

07/30/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Matt Leser

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 8: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 9: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

12 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

12.1 - BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 26-APR-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Tychy, Poland

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Marek Brykczyński	1.0	17-Apr-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
3	CF011A_BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFacInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFacPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_START_SEC_CODE	Code	N/A

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

N/A

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

12.2 - BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac

April 26, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Tychy, Poland
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Marek Brykczyński	1	26-Apr-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 5

1.1 Purpose 5

1.2 Scope 5

2 BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac & High-Level Description 6

3 Design details of software module 7

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac 7

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 7

3.2.1 Component level DFD 8

3.2.2 Function level DFD 8

4 Constant Data Dictionary 9

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 9

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 9

5 Software Component Implementation 10

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 10

5.1.1 Init: BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFacInit1 10

5.1.2 Per: BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFacPer1 10

5.2 Server Runables 10

5.3 Interrupt Functions 10

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 11

5.4.1 CalcCdndTqOvrl 11

5.4.2 CalcnDampgCmdSca 11

5.4.3 CalcnEffortCmdSca 11

5.4.4 CalcnLimdCdndTqOvrl 11

5.4.5 CalcnRtnCmdSca 12

5.4.6 StTranDetn 12

5.4.7 TqOvrlCdng 12

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 12

6 Known Limitations with Design 14

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 15

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 16

Appendix B Glossary 17

Appendix C References 18

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF040A_BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac & High-Level Description

The BMW Torque Overlay Conditioning And Driving Dynamic Factor function handles the filtering and ramping of the BMW Output Torque Overlay Command functionality and conditioning of the BMW Driving Dynamic Factors for Effort/Assist, Return and Damping.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

Refer FDD

Function level DFD

Refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
-

Refer FDD for local constants.

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFacInit1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFacPer1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

CalcCdndTqOvrl

Function Name	CalcCdndTqOvrl	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	FildBmwTarSteerTqDrvrActr_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8
	BmwTarSteerTqDrvrActr_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8
	BmwDrvgDynErrIfActv_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	CdndTqOvrl_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8

CalcnDampgCmdSca

Function Name	CalcnDampgCmdSca	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	DrvgDynActv_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	ReqdDampgCmdSca_Uls_T_f32	float32	0	1
	DrvgDynActvTrig_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	-	-	-	-

CalcnEffortCmdSca

Function Name	CalcnEffortCmdSca	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	DrvgDynActv_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	ReqdEffortCmdSca_Uls_T_f32	float32	1	2
	DrvgDynActvTrig_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	-	-	-	-

CalcnLimdCdndTqOvrl

Function Name	CalcnLimdCdndTqOvrl	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	CdndTqOvrl_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8
	VehSpd_Kph_T_u9p7	uint16	0	68408
Return Value	-	-	-	-

CalcnRtnCmdSca

Function Name	CalcnRtnCmdSca	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	DrvgDynActv_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	ReqdRtnCmdSca_Uls_T_f32	float32	0	1
	DrvgDynActvTrig_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	-	-	-	-

StTranDetn

Function Name	StTranDetn	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	DrvgDynIfSt_Cnt_T_u08	uint8	32	255
	BmwTarSteerTqDrvrActr_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8
	FildBmwTarSteerTqDrvrActr_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8
Return Value	OutpRstTrig_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

TqOvrlCdng

Function Name	TqOvrlCdng	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	DrvgDynIfSt_Cnt_T_u08	uint8	32	255
	BmwTarSteerTqDrvrActr_MotNwtMtr_T_f32	float32	-8.8	8.8
	VehSpd_Kph_T_u9p7	uint16	0	68408
	BmwDrvgDynErrIfActv_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	OutpRstTrig_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.01
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF011A_BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

12.3 - BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
PolySpace
Integration Manual
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac

Revision / Baseline:

CF040A_BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_Impl_1.0.0

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Work CR ID:

EA4#21202

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

Yes

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0.5

0

1

Other reviewers:

0

Total hours

1

0

1

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

all

Elements of .arxml content:

all

Pages of documentation:

N/A

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/26/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

N/A for changes

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

N/A for changes

All changed files have been compared against previous

Yes

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

N/A for changes

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m display variables: created as

Yes

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

N/A

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

N/A for changes

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/26/18

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac.c

Source File Revision:

1

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_MDD.docx

Revision:

1

SWC Design Name:

CF040A_BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_Design

Revision:

1.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

Yes

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

N/A

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

Yes

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

N/A

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

Yes

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

N/A

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

Yes

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Yes

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

Yes

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/26/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Patryk Kołacki

Comments:

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

1

Source File Name:

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac.c

Source File Revision:

1

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

Yes

Comments:

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

Yes

Comments:

and reviewed

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

N/A

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

N/A

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

N/A

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

N/A

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/26/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac.c

Source File Revision:

1

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.3.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

Yes

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/26/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: Integration Manual

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Integration Manual Review)

Integration Manual Name:

BmwTqOvrlCdngAndDrvgDynFac_IntegrationManual.doc

Integration Manual Revision:

1

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches header

Yes

Comments:

Latest template used

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

N/A

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Integrator)

N/A

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/26/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 8: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 9: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

13 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

13.1 - BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 17-APR-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Tychy, Poland

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Marek Brykczyński	1.0	17-Apr-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
3	CF011A_BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_START_SEC_CODE	Code	N/A

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

N/A

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

13.2 - BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg

April 17, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Tychy, Poland
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Marek Brykczyński	1	17-Apr-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 4

1.1 Purpose 4

1.2 Scope 4

2 BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg & High-Level Description 5

3 Design details of software module 6

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg 6

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 6

3.2.1 Component level DFD 6

3.2.2 Function level DFD 6

4 Constant Data Dictionary 7

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 7

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 7

5 Software Component Implementation 8

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 8

5.1.1 Init: BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgInit1 8

5.1.2 Per: BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgPer1 8

5.2 Server Runables 8

5.3 Interrupt Functions 8

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 9

5.4.1 CalcnTrfcJamAssiSt 9

5.4.2 ProcessBmwTrfcJamAssiDampgErr 9

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 9

6 Known Limitations with Design 10

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 11

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 12

Appendix B Glossary 13

Appendix C References 14

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF011A_BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg & High-Level Description

The BMW Traffic Jam Assist Damping provides a traffic jam assist damping functionality.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

Refer FDD

Function level DFD

Refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
-

Refer FDD for local constants.

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: Init1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: Per1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

CalcnTrfcJamAssiSt

Function Name	CalcnTrfcJamAssiSt	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgStReq_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgScaReqVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgStReqVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	BmwTrfcJamAssiSt_T_Cnt_enum	enum	1	15

ProcessBmwTrfcJamAssiDampgErr

Function Name	ProcessBmwTrfcJamAssiDampgErr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgStReq_Cnt_T_enum	enum	1	15
	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgScaReqVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgStReqVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	BmwTrfcJamAssiDampgErr_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Processing

Refer FDD

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.01
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF011A_BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

13.3 - BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
PolySpace
Integration Manual (Template)
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg

Revision / Baseline:

CF011A_BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_Impl_1.0.0

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Work CR ID:

EA4#20924

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

Yes

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0.5

0

1

Other reviewers:

0

Total hours

1

0

1

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

all

Elements of .arxml content:

all

Pages of documentation:

N/A

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/17/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

N/A for changes

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

N/A for changes

All changed files have been compared against previous

Yes

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

N/A for changes

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m display variables: created as

Yes

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

N/A

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

N/A for changes

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/17/18

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg.c

Source File Revision:

1

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_MDD.docx

Revision:

1

SWC Design Name:

CF011A_BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_Design

Revision:

1.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

Yes

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

N/A

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

Yes

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

N/A

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

Yes

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

N/A

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

Yes

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Yes

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

Yes

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/17/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Patryk Kołacki

Comments:

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

1

Source File Name:

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg.c

Source File Revision:

1

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

Yes

Comments:

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

Yes

Comments:

and reviewed

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

N/A

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

N/A

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

N/A

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

N/A

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/17/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg.c

Source File Revision:

1

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.3.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

Yes

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/17/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: Integration Manual (Template)

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Integration Manual Review)

Integration Manual Name:

BmwTrfcJamAssiDampg_IntegrationManual.doc

Integration Manual Revision:

1

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches header

Yes

Comments:

Latest template used

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

N/A

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Integrator)

N/A

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

04/17/18

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 8: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 9: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

14 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

14.1 - BmwTunSetHndlr_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwTunSetHndlr

VERSION: 2.0

DATE: 17-MAY-2018

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Location: The official version of this document is stored in the Nexteer Configuration Management System.

Revision History

Sl. No.	Description	Author	Version	Date
1	Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1.0	27-Mar-2018
2	Updated to Design 3.0.0	Krzysztof Byrski	2.0	17-May-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document
FDD	Functional Design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.02
2	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
3	CF081A_BmwTunSetHndlr_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

BmwTunSetHndlr_Cfg.h

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter

Notes

SWC

BMWTUNSETHNDLR_DESININIDXNOTPRSNT_CNT_ENUM

(BmwTunSetHndlr\BmwTunSetHndlrGeneral\DESININIDXNOTPRSNT)

NTC “Desired Initialization Index Not Present”

CF081A

BMWTUNSETHNDLR_DESININOPTSETAISXNOTPRSNT_CNT_ENUM (BmwTunSetHndlr\BmwTunSetHndlrGeneral\DESININOPTSETAISXNOTPRSNT)

NTC “Desired Initialization Index Not Present”

CF081A

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Refer FDD

Required Global Data Outputs

Refer FDD

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwTunSetHndlrInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwTunSetHndlrPer1	None	RTE(10ms)
TunVrntRead_Oper	None	RTE(Event)
TunVrntWr_Oper	None	RTE(Event)
MotVrntRead_Oper	None	RTE(Event)
MotVrntWr_Oper	None	RTE(Event)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwTunSetHndlr_START_SEC_CODE	Code	N/A

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM
N/A

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

*See DataDict.m

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

14.2 - BmwTunSetHndlr_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwTunSetHndlr

May 17, 2018

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Krzysztof Byrski	1	27-Mar-2018
Updates per design 2.0.0	Marek Brykczyński	2	10-Apr-2018
Updates per design 3.0.0	Krzysztof Byrski	3	17-May-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 4

1.1 Purpose 4

1.2 Scope 4

2 BmwTunSetHndlr & High-Level Description 5

3 Design details of software module 6

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwTunSetHndlr 6

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 6

3.2.1 Component level DFD 6

3.2.2 Function level DFD 6

4 Constant Data Dictionary 7

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 7

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 7

5 Software Component Implementation 8

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 8

5.1.1 Init: BmwTunSetHndlrInit1 8

5.1.2 Per: BmwTunSetHndlrPer1 8

5.2 Server Runables 9

5.2.1 TunVrntRead_Oper 9

5.2.2 TunVrntWr_Oper 9

5.2.3 MotVrntRead_Oper 9

5.2.4 MotVrntWr_Oper 9

5.3 Interrupt Functions 10

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 10

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 10

6 Known Limitations with Design 11

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 12

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 13

Appendix B Glossary 14

Appendix C References 15

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF081A_BmwTunSetHndlr_Impl.

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwTunSetHndlr & High-Level Description

The BMW Tuning Set Handler provides a desired Runtime Index of an integer type. As the input, the function receives the desired Runtime Index. If a received value is valid then the function maps it to one of three defined values. If the proper calibration is set then the function allows overriding the output to a calibratable value. The function provides two server runnables in order to write to and to read from the NVM. During the initialization, it evaluates if the NVM is valid, if the NVM is detected invalid then it stores a predefined constant.

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of BmwTunSetHndlr

Data Flow Diagram

Refer FDD

Component level DFD

Refer FDD

Function level DFD

Refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
-

Refer FDD for local constants.

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

The sub-module functions are grouped based on similar functionality that needs to be executed in a given “State” of the system (refer States and Modes). For a given module, the MDD will identify the type and number of sub-modules required. The sub-module types are described below.

Init: BmwTunSetHndlrInit1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Per: BmwTunSetHndlrPer1

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

Store Module Inputs to Local copies

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Store Local copy of outputs into Module Outputs

Refer FDD

Server Runables

TunVrntRead_Oper

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

TunVrntWr_Oper

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

MotVrntRead_Oper

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

MotVrntWr_Oper

Design Rationale

Refer FDD

(Processing of function)………

Refer FDD

Interrupt Functions

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

None

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description
FDD	Functional Design Document. (See references)

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.4.0 R4.0 Rev 3
2	MDD Guideline EA4	1.02
3	EA4 Software Naming Conventions	1.01
4	Software Design and Coding Standards	2.01
5	CF081A_BmwTunSetHndlr_Design	See Synergy Sub Project Version

14.3 - BmwTunSetHndlr_Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
PolySpace
Integration Manual
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwTunSetHndlr

Revision / Baseline:

CF081A_BmwTunSetHndlr_Impl_3.0.0

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Work CR ID:

EA4#22925

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

Yes

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0

0.5

0

1.5

Other reviewers:

0

0.5

0

Total hours

0.5

1.5

0

2

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

Changes only

Elements of .arxml content:

Changes only

Pages of documentation:

Changes only

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

Yes

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

Yes

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

All changed files have been compared against previous

Yes

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m display variables: created as

N/A

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/17/2018

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwTunSetHndlr.c

Source File Revision:

3

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwTunSetHndlr_MDD.docx

Revision:

3

SWC Design Name:

CF081A_BmwTunSetHndlr_Design

Revision:

3.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 1.02

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

N/A

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

Yes

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

Yes

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

N/A

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

N/A

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

N/A

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

N/A

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

Yes

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

Yes

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Comments:

Patryk Kołacki

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Joe Hagan

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwTunSetHndlr_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

3

Source File Name:

BmwTunSetHndlr.c

Source File Revision:

3

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

Yes

Comments:

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

Yes

Comments:

and reviewed

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

Yes

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

N/A

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwTunSetHndlr.c

Source File Revision:

3

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

Source File Name:

-

Source File Revision:

-

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

1.04

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.3.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

Yes

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: Integration Manual

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Integration Manual Review)

Integration Manual Name:

BmwTunSetHndlr_IntegrationManual.doc

Integration Manual Revision:

2

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches header

Yes

Comments:

Latest template used

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Integrator)

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Krzysztof Byrski

Review Date :

05/17/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Marek Brykczyński

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 8: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 9: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released

15 - Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

15.1 - BmwVehSpd_IntegrationManual

Integration Manual

For

BmwVehSpd

VERSION: 1.0

DATE: 27-FEB-2018

Prepared By:

Matthew Leser,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Revision History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Matthew Leser	1.0	27-Feb-2018

Table of Contents

1 Abbrevations And Acronyms 4

2 References 5

3 Dependencies 6

3.1 SWCs 6

3.2 Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project 6

4 Configuration REQUIREMeNTS 7

4.1 Build Time Config 7

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 7

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 7

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 7

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 7

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 8

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 8

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 8

5.3 Specific Include Path present 8

6 Runnable Scheduling 9

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 10

7.1 Mapping 10

7.2 Usage 10

7.3 NvM Blocks 10

8 Compiler Settings 11

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 11

8.2 Optimization Settings 11

9 Appendix 12

Abbrevations And Acronyms

Abbreviation	Description
DFD	Design functional diagram
MDD	Module design Document

References

This section lists the title & version of all the documents that are referred for development of this document

Sr. No.	Title	Version
1	EA4 Software Naming Conventions.doc	01.00.00
2	Software Design and Coding Standards.doc	2.1
3	CF080A_BmwVehSpd_Design	See Synergy subproject version

Dependencies

SWCs

Module	Required Feature
None

Note : Referencing the external components should be avoided in most cases. Only in unavoidable circumstance external components should be referred. Developer should track the references.

Global Functions(Non RTE) to be provided to Integration Project

None

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

Modules	Notes
None

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

None

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

Parameter	Notes	SWC
None

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR Name	VIM #	Priority Dependency	Notes
None

Manual Configuration Changes

Constant	Notes	SWC
None

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

See DataDict.m file

Required Global Data Outputs

See DataDict.m file

Specific Include Path present

No

Runnable Scheduling

This section specifies the required runnable scheduling.

Init	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwVehSpdInit1	None	RTE(Init)

Runnable	Scheduling Requirements	Trigger
BmwVehSpdPer1	None	RTE(2ms)

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory Section	Contents	Notes
BmwVehSpd_START_SEC_CODE

* Each …START_SEC… constant is terminated by a …STOP_SEC… constant as specified in the AUTOSAR Memory Mapping requirements.

Usage

Feature	RAM	ROM

Table 1: ARM Cortex R4 Memory Usage

NvM Blocks

None

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

None

Optimization Settings

None

Appendix

15.2 - BmwVehSpd_MDD

Module Design Document

For

BmwVehSpd

June 22, 2018

Prepared By:

Marek Brykczyński,

Nexteer Automotive,

Tychy, Poland
Change History

Description	Author	Version	Date
Initial version	Matthew Leser	1.0	27-Feb-2018
Updated according to design 3.0.0	Marek Brykczyński	2.0	25-Jun-2018

Table of Contents

1 Introduction 5

1.1 Purpose 5

1.2 Scope 5

2 BmwVehSpd High-Level Description 6

3 Design details of software module 7

3.1 Graphical representation of BmwVehSpd 7

3.2 Data Flow Diagram 7

3.2.1 Component level DFD 7

3.2.2 Function level DFD 7

4 Constant Data Dictionary 8

4.1 Program (fixed) Constants 8

4.1.1 Embedded Constants 8

5 Software Component Implementation 9

5.1 Sub-Module Functions 9

5.1.1 BmwVehSpdInit1 9

5.1.1.1 Design Rationale 9

5.1.1.2 Module Outputs 9

5.1.2 BmwVehSpdPer1 9

5.1.2.1 Design Rationale 9

5.1.2.2 Module Outputs 9

5.2 Server Runnables 9

5.3 Interrupt Functions 9

5.3.1 Interrupt Function Name 9

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 9

5.4.1 Cntr 9

5.4.2 VehSpdVldCalcn 10

5.4.3 VehSpdRateLim 10

5.4.4 ProcessSecondAndGateState 10

5.4.5 ProcessThirdAndGateState 10

5.4.6 ProcessSixthAndGateState 10

5.4.7 ProcessFourthAndGateState 11

5.4.8 ProcessThridConditionOfOrGate 11

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 11

6 Known Limitations with Design 12

7 UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION 13

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms 14

Appendix B Glossary 15

Appendix C Please references 16

Introduction

Purpose

Module Design Document for CF080A_BmwVehSpd_Impl

Scope

The following definitions are used throughout this document:

Shall: indicates a mandatory requirement without exception in compliance.
Should: indicates a mandatory requirement; exceptions allowed only with documented justification.
May: indicates an optional action.

BmwVehSpd High-Level Description

The BmwVehSpd software component is responsible for determining the Vehicle Speed.

Design details of software module

Please refer FDD

Graphical representation of BmwVehSpd

Data Flow Diagram

Please refer FDD

Component level DFD

Please refer FDD

Function level DFD

Please refer FDD

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant Name	Resolution	Units	Value
Please refer .m file for constants

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

BmwVehSpdInit1

Design Rationale

Please refer FDD

Module Outputs

None

BmwVehSpdPer1

Design Rationale

Please refer FDD.

Module Outputs

None

Server Runnables

None

Interrupt Functions

None

Interrupt Function Name

None

Module Internal (Local) Functions

Cntr

Function Name	Cntr	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	CntrTrigInp_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	SigValVld_Cnt_T_logl	const pointer to boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	CdnDurnSigValVld_Cnt_T_logl	const pointer to boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	None	-	-	-

VehSpdVldCalcn

Function Name	VehSpdVldCalcn	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwSecurVehSpdSts_Cnt_T_enum	uint8	1	15
Return Value	VehSpdVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

VehSpdRateLim

Function Name	VehSpdRateLim	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwSecurVehSpdSts_Cnt_T_enum	uint8	1	15
	IntEpsVehSpd_Kph_T_f32	float32	0	350
Return Value	*Rte_Pim_VehSpdLimPrev()	float32	0	511

ProcessSecondAndGateState

Function Name	ProcessSecondAndGateState	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwCogVehSpdVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwCogVehSpdQlfrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwCogVehSpdQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	uint8	1	15
Return Value	SecondAndGateEval_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

ProcessThirdAndGateState

Function Name	ProcessThirdAndGateState	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwCogVehSpdVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwCogVehSpdQlfrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwCogVehSpdQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	uint8	1	15
Return Value	ThirdAndGateEval_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

ProcessSixthAndGateState

Function Name	ProcessSixthAndGateState	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwPinionAgQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	SixthAndGateEval_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

ProcessFourthAndGateState

Function Name	ProcessFourthAndGateState	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	ThirdAndGateEval_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	SixthAndGateEval_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
Return Value	function’s return value	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

ProcessThridConditionOfOrGate

Function Name	ProcessThridConditionOfOrGate	Type	Min	Max
Arguments Passed	BmwCogVehSpdQlfrVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	CdnDurnSigValVld_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE
	BmwCogVehSpdQlfr_Cnt_T_enum	uint8	1	15
Return Value	LogicResult_Cnt_T_logl	boolean	FALSE	TRUE

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

None

Known Limitations with Design

None.

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or Acronym	Description

Glossary

Note: Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” take precedence over all other definitions of the same term. Terms and definitions from the source “Nexteer Automotive” are formulated from multiple sources, including the following:

ISO 9000
ISO/IEC 12207
ISO/IEC 15504
Automotive SPICE® Process Please reference Model (PRM)
Automotive SPICE® Process Assessment Model (PAM)
ISO/IEC 15288
ISO 26262
IEEE Standards
SWEBOK
PMBOK
Existing Nexteer Automotive documentation

Term	Definition	Source
MDD	Module Design Document
DFD	Data Flow Diagram

Please references

Ref. #	Title	Version
1	AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)	v1.3.0 R4.0 Rev 2
2	MDD Guideline	EA4 01.00.00
3	Software Naming Conventions.doc	1.0
4	Software Design and Coding Standards.doc	2.1
5	FDD: CF080A_BmwVehSpd_Design	See Synergy subproject version

15.3 - BmwVehSpd_ReviewChecklist

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Source Code
MDD
PolySpace
help
Version History

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer EA4 SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

BmwVehSpd

Revision / Baseline:

CF080A_BmwVehSpd_Impl_3.0.0

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Work CR ID:

EA4#24330

Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

Yes

MDD

Yes

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

N/A

Integration Manual

Yes

Davinci Files

All required reviewers participated

Yes

Comments:

Time spent ( to the nearest half hour)

review preparation

review meeting

review follow-up

Change owner:

0.5

0

Component developer reviewers:

0.5

0

1.5

Other reviewers:

0

Total hours

1

0.5

0

1.5

Content reviewed

Lines of code:

changes only

Elements of .arxml content:

changes only

Pages of documentation:

changes only

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request.
- New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed.
- To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file.
- .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file.

Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Save in the doc folder of the component implementation, with the file name in the format SWCShortName_Review.xlsx. If the existing review in Synergy has a different name, the name must be changed IN SYNERGY (rather than by syncing in a new file with the new name) so that the file history will be properly maintained.

Before the peer review, the change owner shall: (NOTE - time for completing these items is to be counted as the Change Owner Review Prep Time)
o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet.
o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues,
because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct.
o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate)
o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review
meeting.

During the peer review meeting:
o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to
blank if it is found that the item does apply.
o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as
"No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated.
o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section
of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.

Sheet 2: Synergy Project

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Peer Review Meeting Log (Component Synergy Project Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

New baseline version name from Summary Sheet follows

Yes

Comments:

naming convention

Project contains necessary subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Project contains the correct version of subprojects

Yes

Comments:

Design subproject is correct version

Yes

Comments:

.gpj file in tools folder matches .gpj generated by TL109 script

Yes

Comments:

File/folder structure is correct per documentation in

Yes

Comments:

TL109A_SwcSuprt

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

25/6/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 3: Davinci Files

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Only StdDef Port interfaces and datatypes are used

Yes

Comments:

(compare against TL107B to ensure only implementation

data types are used)

OBSOLETE/OBSELETE doesn’t appear in any arxml file

Yes

Comments:

Do all port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence

Yes

Comments:

number

Non-program-specific components saved

Yes

Comments:

in Autosar 4.0.3 format

For components with generated configurable content:

N/A

Comments:

*Cfg.arxml.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator imported the

change correctly

*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates

N/A

Comments:

the configuration header file(s) correctly

All changed files have been compared against previous

N/A

Comments:

versions (If available) and changes match changes

Initial Version

needed as described by the work CR(s), all parent CRs

and parent anomalies, and the SWC Design change log.

Davinci files accurately implement SWC Design (DataDict.m

Yes

Comments:

file) in all areas where arxml was changed and/or the

DataDict.m file was changed as shown by

comparing the DataDict.m from the current SWC Design

with the DataDict.m used in the previous implementation.

(This is NOT always the predecessor.)

Automated validation check is performed with no issues found

Yes

Comments:

Naming conventions followed. All names should

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m

Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type, direction)

Calibration port properties match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

(name, data type)

Sender/Receiver port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Calibration port initialization values match

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts

for fixed point types

Mapping set and all unused items have been

Yes

Comments:

removed

All sender/receiver port read/writes using "Write (explicit)"

Yes

Comments:

and "Read (explicit by argument)"(List justification if not)

Runnable calling frequencies match DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

Runnable port access matches the DataDict.m file

Yes

Comments:

DataDict.m display variables: created as

N/A

Comments:

PerInstanceMemory. Name and data type match DataDict.m file.

Per Instance Memory names and data types

Yes

Comments:

match DataDict.m file

NVM blocks match DataDict.m file

N/A

Comments:

(Named per naming convention. Default block

used if specified in DataDict.m file. Data type

matches DatatDict.m file)

Component is correct component type

Yes

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

25/6/2018

Component Type :

Application

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 4: Source Code

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

BmwVehSpd.c

Source File Revision:

2

Header File Name:

-

Header File Revision:

-

MDD Name:

BmwVehSpd_MDD.docx

Revision:

2

SWC Design Name:

CF080A_BmwVehSpd_Design

Revision:

3.0.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

EA4 Common Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.01.00

EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:

Version: 01.02.00

for variable names

Yes

Comments:

for constant names

Yes

Comments:

for function names

N/A

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

N/A

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

Verified no possibility of uninitialized variables being

Yes

Comments:

written to component outputs or IRVs

Any requirements traceability tags have been removed

N/A

Comments:

from at least the changed areas of code

All variables are declared at the function level.

Yes

Comments:

Synergy version matches change history

Yes

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

(including any anomaly number(s) being fixed) and

Work CR number

Code accurately implements SWC Design (Document

Yes

Comments:

or Model) in all areas where code was changed and/or

Simulink model was color-coded as changed and/or

mentioned in SWC Design change log.

Code comparison against previous version matches

N/A

Comments:

changes needed as described by the work CR(s), all

Initial Version

parent CRs and parent anomalies, and the SWC

Design change log.

Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings

Yes

Comments:

(and verified for all possible combinations

of any conditionally compiled code)

Component.h is included

N/A

Comments:

All other includes are actually needed. (System includes

Yes

Comments:

only allowed in Nexteer library components)

Software Design and Coding Standards followed:

Version: 2.1

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

Yes

Comments:

and have been updated for the change: [N40] and

all other rules in the same section as rule [N40],

plus [N75], [N12], [N23], [N33], [N37], [N38],

[N48], [N54], [N77], [N79], [N72]

Source file (.c and .h) comment blocks are per

Yes

Comments:

standards and contain correct information: [N41], [N42]

Function comment blocks are per standards and

N/A

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Yes

Comments:

braces, etc.) is per standards: [N5], [N55], [N56],

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Yes

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

Memory mapping for non-RTE code

N/A

Comments:

is per standard

All access of motor control loop data uses macros

N/A

Comments:

generated by the motor control manager

All loops have termination conditions that ensure

N/A

Comments:

finite loop iterations: [N63]

All divides protect against divide by zero

N/A

Comments:

if needed: [N65]

All integer division and modulus operations

N/A

Comments:

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

N/A

Comments:

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

All float-to-unsigned conversions ensure the.

N/A

Comments:

float value is non-negative: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

N/A

Comments:

types handle msb==1 as intended: [N78]

All pointer dereferencing protects against

N/A

Comments:

null pointer if needed: [N70]

Component outputs are limited to the legal range

Yes

Comments:

defined in the SWC Design DataDict.m file : [N53]

All code is mapped with SWC Design (all SWC

Yes

Comments:

Design subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some SWC Design subfunction and/or model block):

[N40]

Any other violations of design and coding

N/A

Comments:

standards noticed during the review are noted in the

comments section for rework.

Anomaly or Design Work CR created

N/A

Comments:

for any SWC Design corrections needed

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

25/6/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

SWC owner and/or
SWC Design author:

Adrian Legowski

Comments:

Integrator and or
SW lead:

Comments:

Unit test co-ordinator:

Comments:

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 5: MDD

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)

MDD Name:

BmwVehSpd_MDD.docx

MDD Revision:

2

Source File Name:

BmwVehSpd.c

Source File Revision:

2

Source File Name:

Source File Revision:

Source File Name:

Source File Revision:

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Synergy version matches document

Yes

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Yes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Unit Tester)

Yes

Comments:

Diagrams have been included per MDD Guideline

Yes

Comments:

and reviewed

All Design Exceptions and Limitations are listed

N/A

Comments:

Design rationale given for all global

N/A

Comments:

data not communicated through RTE ports, per

Design and Coding Standards rules [N9] and [N10].

All implementation details that differ from the SWC

N/A

Comments:

Design are noted and explained in Design Rationale

All Unit Test Considerations have been described

N/A

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

25/6/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 6: PolySpace

Rev 2.01

21-Feb-18

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Meeting Log (PolySpace Review)

Source File Name:

BmwVehSpd.c

Source File Revision:

2

Source File Name:

Source File Revision:

Source File Name:

Source File Revision:

EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:

01.04.00

Poly Space version:

2013b

TL109A sub project version:

2.5.0

Quality Check Items:

Rationale is required for all answers of No

tools/local folders' header files are appropriate and

Yes

Comments:

function prototypes match the latest component version

100% Compliance to the EA4 Static Analysis

Yes

Comments:

Compliance Guideline

Are previously added justification and deviation

N/A

Comments:

comments still appropriate

Do all MISRA deviation comments use approved

Yes

Comments:

deviation tags

For any component source files (.c, .h, generated Cfg.c and Cfg.h)

N/A

Comments:

with conditional compilation, has Polyspace been run with all

combinations of build constants that can be used together in a build?

(Note which conditional compilation results have been archived)

Codemetrics count OK

Yes

Comments:

for all functions in the component per Design

and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

Review Board:

Change Owner:

Marek Brykczyński

Review Date :

25/6/2018

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Krzysztof Byrski

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Rationale/justification for items marked "No" approved by:

Sheet 7: help

Summary sheet:

Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed.

Source code:

This item includes looking at all layers of Simulink model for possible color coding not reflected at a higher level, and includes looking at any intermediate SWC Design versions between the version being implemented and the version that was included as a subproject in the previous implementation.

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified
file in the working project)

Intended Use: Synergy version number of the file being reviewed. (Version number that Synergy displays on the checked out or unmodified file in the working project)

Intended Use: For SWC Designs, list the Synergy baseline number (just the number part of the Synergy baseline name) of the SWC Design baseline being implemented. E.g., for SF001A_Assi_Design_1.3.1, this field would say "1.3.1"

Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s).

Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored).

Intended Use: list version/revision of latest released Software Design and Coding Standards document.

Davinci Files

Intended Use: Identify if previous version was compared and only the expected change(s) was present. This is for text files only, not binary or GUIs

Polyspace

eg. 2013b

Integration manual

Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed

Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed.

Synergy

Refer to EA4 Common Naming Conventions document, section “Synergy Baseline Names for core components”

The following subprojects should be included for all component implementations:
• AR200A_ArSuprt_Impl
• AR201A_ArCplrSuprt_Impl
• TL101A_CptRteGen
• TL103A_CplrSuprt
• TL109A_SwcSuprt
• Corresponding _Design project used for the implementation

The following subprojects should be included as needed by each component:
• AR10xx_Nxtr*_Impl library components as needed by each component
• AR202x_MicroCtrlrSuprt_Impl as needed (for register header files for components making direct register access)[add notes about when to add a stub header file]
• Xx999x_xxxxGlbPrm_Impl as needed by each component
• TL105A_Artt for components with generated content

The following should NOT be included as subprojects:
• TL107x_DavinciSuprt (aka StdDef)
• TL100A_QACSuprt (QAC subproject was previously included but should be removed going forward)
• Any other component (not mentioned anywhere above) whose .h file is needed. For these components, a “stub” .h file should be created, containing only the multiple include protection and the definitions and function prototypes actually needed by the component with the #include, and placed in the “including” component’s local\include folder.

misc in Summary sheet

(integrator, designer, unit test coordinator, etc.)

For a new component, use number of lines in all source files reviewed, including files in the src and include folders and any generated cfg.h and cfg.c files. For a changed component, try to add up how many lines, including comments and blank lines, were in the changed areas that were reviewed. Not just the actual changed lines, but the number of lines in the blocks of code you had to look at to review the change.

add up the number of ports, number of PIM variables, number if IRVs, number of runnables, number of NVM blocks in the component (all of them for review of a new component, the new and modified ones for review of a change)

add the number of pages in the MDD and integration manual for a new component; for a modified component, count the number of pages that contained a change.

Reviewer

Required attendance for this type of change

Review spreadsheet tab(s)

Component group peer

All

Component owner and/or SWC Design author

*Initial creation of any new component
*Simulink model changes (any change to the model other than just updating the change log)

Source

Integrator and/or SW lead of first program planning to use the component

*Initial creation of any new component
*new or changed NVM blocks, NVM datatypes, or NVM usage (added or removed or changed NVM API calls in any runnable)
*Major rev (X changed in the X.Y.X design baseline number; means there was a component interface change)
*new or changed config params
*all MM component changes

Davinci files, Integration manual, source for NVM changes and for all MM component changes.

Unit test coordinator

Fixes for coverage issues

Source

SQA

None

For each reviewer category listed on each tab, there should either be
• the name of the reviewer who attended
or
• a comment indicating
o why that reviewer was not required for this change
or
o who approved holding the review without that required reviewer (approval must
be from the software manager or a software supervisor)

Sheet 8: Version History



File Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
						Draft/ Released










Template Version History
Version	Description	Author(s)	Revision Date	Approved By	Approved Date	Status
1.0	Initial Version	SW Engineering team	24-May-15	NA	NA	Released
1.01	Changed name to be EA4 specific	SW Engineering team	25-Jun-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Modified Summary Sheet General Guidelines, Clarified wording on first item in Synergy project sheet.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	Made corrections and clarifications to Source Code check list.	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.02	updated Davinci, MDD, and Polyspace/QAC tabs	SW Engineering team	30-Jul-15	NA	NA	Released
1.03	Aligned to portal version guidelines	Umesh Sambhari	21-Nov-17	NA	NA	Released
2.00	Summary sheet template: Changed title to indicate Implementation Peer Review Corrected and/or clarified mouse hover comments, added instructions, renamed some fields. Changed the default setting to "No" on the items reviewed	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	NA	Released
	Source code template: Removed hyperlink for naming conventions, corrected name of naming conventions document, added version field for naming conventions document. Changed item about requirements tags to reflect that they should be removed Added clarification that all combinations of conditionally compiled code must be checked Item about accurately implementing SWC Design is modified and a new item added, both to clarify where to look when determining needed changes. Added point for version of common naming conventions Reworded multiple items for clarity	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Synergy project template: added items for file/folder structure added point on .gpj file in tools folder	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	Davinci files template: Clarified the StdDef item Added new item for OBSOLETE Clarified item on datadict.m comparison Removed the references to .m file helper tool Updated to reflect that all component should now use only implementation data types Added points on PIMs and NVMs	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
	All template tabs: Added/clarified/removed mouse hover comments. Updated Review Board section Removed the gridlines from all tabs Updated titles to say "Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review" Changed all occurences of "FDD" to "SWC Design"	SW Engineering team	29-Nov-17
2.01	Added a help tab and appropriate links Added field on Summary sheet to report hours spent and content reviewed Changed wording in an item in Polyspace tab and Source code tab	SW Engineering team	21-Feb-18	Lonnie Newton, Steven Horwath, Kevin Smith, Lucas Wendling, Vinod Shankar	21-Feb-18	Released