NxtrFil Review

Overview

Summary Sheet
Source Code - initial review
Source Code -rework review
QAC - initial review
QAC - rework review
Integration Manual

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet

Rev 6.0

28-Oct-14

Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Name:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should be the Module Short Name from Synergy Rationale: Required for traceability. It will help to ensure this form is not attaced to the the wrong change request. NxtrFil

Component Revision:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which Synergy revision of this component is being reviewed Rationale: Required for traceability. It will help to ensure this form is not attaced to the the wrong change request. 1.0.0

Change Owner:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) Rationale: A change request may have more than one resolver, this will help identify who made what change. Change owner identification may be required by indusrty standards. Kathleen Creager

Change Request ID:

EA4#166

kzshz2: Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed. Rationale: This will be good information to know when ensuring appropriate reviews have been completed. Modified File Types:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify who where the reviewers, what they reviewed, and if the reviewed changes have been approved to release the code for testing. Comments here should be at a highlevel, the specific comments should be present on the specific review form sheet. Rationale: Since this Form will be attached to the Change Request it will confirm the approval and provides feedback in case of audits. ADD DR Level Move reviewer and approval to individual checklist form Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

MDD

Source Code

Data Dictionary

QAC

Integration Manual

Davinci Files

Comments:

MDD not created -- design information will be in the AR104A_Design

integration manual not ready at initial peer review but is needed before final review

General Guidelines:
- The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request. (Note: If this peer review form was not
completed for pervious versions of this component, the Change Owner should review the entire component and complete the checklist in its entirety prior and check
the form into Syngery. This may be done prior to reviewing the modifications for this Change Result)
- The Change Owner shall responsible for completing the entire checklist (Pre and Group review items) prior holding the initial group review.
- New components should include FDD Owner and Intergator as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files)
- Select "Yes" and add "N/A" to the comments for checklist items that are not applicable for this change

Sheet 2: Source Code - initial review

Rev 6.0

28-Oct-14

Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which .asm, .c, or .h file is being reviewed Rationale: Required for traceability. It will help to ensure this sheet is not attached to the wrong design review form. NxtrFil.h

Source File Revision:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the source file is being review. Rationale: Required for traceability between source code and review. Auditors will likely require this. 1

Module Design Document Name:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the MDD this source file was written against. Rationale: Needed for traceability between source code and MDD NA

MDD Revision:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the MDD this source file was written against. Rationale: Needed for traceability between source code and MDD NA

Data Dictionary Revision:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the Data Dictionary was referenced for ranges during the source file review. Rationale: Needed for traceability between source code and DD NA

FDD/SER/CMS

and Revision:

nz63rn: Intended Use: Identify which version of which FDD/CMS/SER this source file was written against. Rationale: Needed for traceability between source code and FDD/CMS/SER AR104A design not yet created

Quality Check Items:

Yes

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Pre-review checklist for change owners

Software Naming Convention V1.2 followed:

for variable names

Comments:

EA4 naming conventions

for constant names

Comments:

EA4 naming conventions

for function names

Comments:

add _f32 to functions that return float32

for other names (component, memory

Comments:

memory names need NxtrFil instead of NXTRFIL

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

All buffered outputs written in every path, i.e. no

Comments:

N/A

possibility of an uninitialized value being written

Group-review Checklist (review board)

Synergy version matches change history

kzshz2: Intended Use: Indicate that the the versioning was confirmed by the peer reviewer(s). Rationale: There have been many occassions where versions were not updated in files and as a result Unit Test were referencing wrong versions. This often time leads to the need to re-run of batch tests.

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Comments:

and CR number

Code accurately implements FDD (Document or Model)

Comments:

FDD not created yet

implementation matches EA3 macro implementation

No Compiler Errors or Warnings verified

KMC: Intended Use: To confirm no compiler errors or warnings exist for the code under review (warnings from contract header files may be ignored). Rationale: This is needed to ensure there will be no errors discovered at the time of integration. A Sandox project should be used; QAC can find compiler errors but not warnings.

Comments:

FDD test points exist as display variables: declared

Comments:

N/A

static volatile, written once and never used, names

match the FDD

Software Design and Coding Standards V2.0 followed:

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

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

Comments:

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

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Comments:

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

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

All variables and constants defined at module

Comments:

N/A

level are included in appropriate MemMap

section: [N25] and Naming Conventions

All execution-order-dependent code can be

Comments:

N/A

recognized by the compiler: [N80]

No possibility of a non-terminating loop: [N63]

Comments:

N/A

No possibility of divide by zero: [N65]

Comments:

logic prevents divide by zero

All integer division and modulus operations

Comments:

N/A

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

Comments:

N/A

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

No possibility of converting a negative floating

Comments:

N/A

point value to an unsigned type: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Comments:

N/A

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

No possibility of dereferencing a null

Comments:

design limitation - pointer parameters

pointer: [N70]

must have non-null values

Global outputs (RTE and Non-RTE) Initialized:

Comments:

N/A

[N24]

Module outputs are limited to the legal range

Comments:

N/A

defined in the FDD Data dictionary: [N53]

All code is mapped with FDD (all FDD

Comments:

to be added in later rev, after FDD and

subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

FRs are created

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some FDD subfunction and/or model block): [N40]

Struct types used for NvM have

Comments:

N/A

elements declared in decreasing order by size

and are not nested or used in arrays: [N84], [N85]

No violations of other coding standard rules

Comments:

identified during review

General Notes / Comments:

LN: Intended Use: Identify who were the reviewers and if the reviewed changes have been approved. Rationale: Since this Form will be attached to the Change Request it will confirm the approval and provides feedback in case of audits. KMC: Group Review Level removed in Rev 4.0 since the design review is not checked in until approved, so it would always be DR4. Review Board:

Change Owner:

Kathleen Creager

Review Date :

02/27/15

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Kevin Smith

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Other Reviewer(s):

Lucas Wendling

Sheet 3: Source Code -rework review

Rev 6.0

28-Oct-14

Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

Source File Name:

Source File Revision:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the source file is being review. Rationale: Required for traceability between source code and review. Auditors will likely require this. 1

Module Design Document Name:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the MDD this source file was written against. Rationale: Needed for traceability between source code and MDD NA

MDD Revision:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the MDD this source file was written against. Rationale: Needed for traceability between source code and MDD NA

Data Dictionary Revision:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the Data Dictionary was referenced for ranges during the source file review. Rationale: Needed for traceability between source code and DD NA

FDD/SER/CMS

and Revision:

Quality Check Items:

Yes

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Pre-review checklist for change owners

Software Naming Convention V1.2 followed:

for variable names

Comments:

EA4 naming conventions

for constant names

Comments:

EA4 naming conventions

for function names

Comments:

for other names (component, memory

Comments:

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

All buffered outputs written in every path, i.e. no

Comments:

N/A

possibility of an uninitialized value being written

Group-review Checklist (review board)

Synergy version matches change history

Comments:

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Comments:

and CR number

Code accurately implements FDD (Document or Model)

Comments:

FDD not created yet

implementation matches EA3 macro implementation

No Compiler Errors or Warnings verified

Comments:

FDD test points exist as display variables: declared

Comments:

N/A

static volatile, written once and never used, names

match the FDD

Software Design and Coding Standards V2.0 followed:

Code comments are clear, correct, and adequate

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

Comments:

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

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Comments:

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Comments:

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

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Comments:

"magic numbers": [N12]

All variables and constants defined at module

Comments:

N/A

level are included in appropriate MemMap

section: [N25] and Naming Conventions

All execution-order-dependent code can be

Comments:

N/A

recognized by the compiler: [N80]

No possibility of a non-terminating loop: [N63]

Comments:

N/A

No possibility of divide by zero: [N65]

Comments:

logic prevents divide by zero

All integer division and modulus operations

Comments:

N/A

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

Comments:

N/A

including all use of fixed point macros and

timer functions, is correct and has no possibility

of unintended overflow or underflow: [N66]

No possibility of converting a negative floating

Comments:

N/A

point value to an unsigned type: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Comments:

N/A

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

No possibility of dereferencing a null

Comments:

documented in usage notes

pointer: [N70]

no run-time check for throughput reasons

Global outputs (RTE and Non-RTE) Initialized:

Comments:

N/A

[N24]

Module outputs are limited to the legal range

Comments:

N/A

defined in the FDD Data dictionary: [N53]

All code is mapped with FDD (all FDD

Comments:

to be added in later rev, after FDD and

subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

FRs are created

with code comments; all code corresponds to

some FDD subfunction and/or model block): [N40]

Struct types used for NvM have

Comments:

N/A

elements declared in decreasing order by size

and are not nested or used in arrays: [N84], [N85]

No violations of other coding standard rules

Comments:

identified during review

General Notes / Comments:

reviewed after rework from initial review (rework done: _f32 added to function names of functions that return float32; capitalization corrected on memory mapping

names; design limitation regarding no checking for null pointers added as usage note in function comment blocks, to be added to design component when created)

Change Owner:

Kathleen Creager

Review Date :

03/03/15

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Kevin Smith

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Sheet 4: QAC - initial review

Rev 6.0

28-Oct-14

Peer Review Meeting Log (QAC Review)

Module Name:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which .c file is being analyzed Rationale: Required for traceability. It will help to ensure this sheet is not attached to the wrong design review form. NxtrFil.h

Source File Revision:

Module

Compliance Guidelines Version:

EA4 working

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify specific changes in results (new violation present, previous violation corrected, etc.). Changes to the version of the tool or the way the results were gathered should be described here also. This should be filled out prior to the review by the change owner. Rationale: Gives reviewers an what needs to be focused on. Forces the change owner to compare with previous results to catch any differences that may otherwise go unoticed Brief Summary of Changes (In Results or Tool):

Used NxtrFil_TestHarness.c (in tools folder) for QAC and Polyspace analysis of the NxtrFil.h file.

Quality Check Items:

Yes

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Pre-review
checklist for change owners

QAC version is correct and did not change (List version)

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the QAC Subproject was used and if any of the personalities may have changed. Rationale: Will help ensure this is factored into evaluating the results

Comments:

1.0.0

component-specific QAC and Polyspace files needed

in order to see warnings on this library header file

(see tools folder)

Contract Folder's header files are appropriate

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify that the contract folder contains only the information required for this component. All other variables, constants, function prototypes, etc. should be removed. Rationale: This will help avoid unit testers having to considers object not used. It will also avoid having other files required for QAC.

Comments:

needs rework due to function name changes

Group-review Checklist (review board)

100% Compliance to the MISRA Compliance Guidelines

Comments:

Polyspace gives MISRA warning 21.1

for possible null pointer dereference; see comments below

Cyclomatic complexity and Static path count ok per

Creager, Kathleen: use Browse Function Metrics, STCYC and STPTH

Comments:

Design and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

waiting for Polyspace guidelines before using deviation comments for Polyspace-only MISRA warnings. The null pointer warning should not show up when running

Polyspace on an integration project.

Change Owner:

Kathleen Creager

Review Date :

02/27/15

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Kevin Smith

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Other Reviewer(s):

Lucas Wendling

Sheet 5: QAC - rework review

Rev 6.0

28-Oct-14

Peer Review Meeting Log (QAC Review)

Module Name:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which .c file is being analyzed Rationale: Required for traceability. It will help to ensure this sheet is not attached to the wrong design review form. NxtrFil.h

Source File Revision:

Module

Compliance Guidelines Version:

EA4 working

Used NxtrFil_TestHarness.c (in tools folder) for QAC and Polyspace analysis of the NxtrFil.h file.

Quality Check Items:

Yes

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Pre-review
checklist for change owners

QAC version is correct and did not change (List version)

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the QAC Subproject was used and if any of the personalities may have changed. Rationale: Will help ensure this is factored into evaluating the results

Comments:

1.0.0

component-specific QAC and Polyspace files needed

in order to see warnings on this library header file

(see tools folder)

Contract Folder's header files are appropriate

Comments:

Group-review Checklist (review board)

100% Compliance to the MISRA Compliance Guidelines

Comments:

Polyspace gives MISRA warning 21.1

for possible null pointer dereference; see comments below

Cyclomatic complexity and Static path count ok per

Creager, Kathleen: use Browse Function Metrics, STCYC and STPTH

Comments:

Design and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

re-run and re-reviewed after source code and contract folder file rework from initial review

waiting for Polyspace guidelines before using deviation comments for Polyspace-only MISRA warnings. The null pointer warning should not show up when running

Polyspace on an integration project. Usaage notes in function comment blocks document the design limitation.

Change Owner:

Kathleen Creager

Review Date :

03/03/15

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Kevin Smith

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Sheet 6: Integration Manual

Rev 6.0

28-Oct-14

Peer Review Meeting Log (Integration Manual Review)

Integration Manual Name:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which file is being reviewed Rationale: Required for traceability. It will help to ensure this sheet is not attached to the wrong design review form. NxtrFil Integration Manual

Integration Manual Revision:

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify which version of the integration manual has been reviewed. Rationale: Required for traceability between the MDD and review. Auditors will likely require this. 1

Quality Check Items:

Yes

Rationale is required for all answers of No

Group-review Checklist (review board)

Synergy version matches header

Comments:

Latest template used

Comments:

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Comments:

Changes Highlighted (for Integrator)

Comments:

General Notes / Comments:

Change Owner:

Kathleen Creager

Review Date :

03/03/15

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Kevin Smith

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Last modified October 12, 2025: Initial commit (af72ad2)