This is the multi-page printable view of this section. Click here to print.

Return to the regular view of this page.

Component Implementation

Component Implementation

Component Documentation

1 - RamMem Peer Review Checklists

Overview

Summary Sheet
Synergy Project
Davinci Files
Src-RamMem
MDD
Src-RamMemNonRte
PolySpace

Sheet 1: Summary Sheet
























Rev 1.28-Jun-15

Peer Review Summary Sheet


























Synergy Project 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. CM103A_RamMem_Impl
Revision / Baseline:


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. CM103A_RamMem_Impl_3.0.0

























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. Avinash James
Work CR ID:


EA4#6658





























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:































YesMDD


YesSource Code


YesPolySpace









































YesIntegration Manual


YesDavinci Files








































































Comments:






























































































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 FDD Owner and Integrator 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.




















Sheet 2: Synergy Project

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:











































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:

Avinash James


Review Date :

08/25/16
































Lead Peer Reviewer:


Selva Sengottaiyan


Approved by Reviewer(s):



Yes































Other Reviewer(s):


Krishna Anne





































































Sheet 3: Davinci Files






















Rev 1.28-Jun-15
Peer Review Meeting Log (Davinci Review)


























Quality Check Items:




































Rationale is required for all answers of No










Only StdDef Port types are used








Yes
Comments:










































For components not using application data types, do all








Yes
Comments:



port interface names end in PortIf and a sequence number





























































Non-program-specific components saved








Yes
Comments:




in Autosar 4.0.3 format




































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








N/A
Comments:




change correctly




































*Cfg.h.TT: Verfied Davinci Configurator generates








N/A
Comments:










the configuration header(s) file correctly
kzshz2: Either a generic sandbox or a baselined integration project can be used to verify



























kzshz2: Either a generic sandbox or a baselined integration project can be used to verify
















All changed files have been compared against previous








Yes
Comments:




versions (If available)

kzshz2: 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 Rationale: This is helpful in identifying unapproved (intended or mistaken) changes.


































Automated validation check is performed








Yes
Comments:

























































Naming conventions followed. All names should








Yes
Comments:










match DataDict.m













































Sender/Receiver port properties match DataDict.m








Yes
Comments:










file (use .m file helper tool)













































Calibration port properties match DataDict.m








N/A
Comments:

No Cal Ports







file (use .m file helper tool)













































Components using application data types:























Sender/Receiver port initialization values match







N/A
Comments:










DataDict.m file














































Calibration port initialization values match







N/A
Comments:










DataDict.m file













































Components not using application data types:























Sender/Receiver port initialization values match







N/A
Comments:










DataDict.m file and have been converted to counts






















for fixed point types














































Calibration port initialization values match







N/A
Comments:

No Cal ports







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 direct








Yes
Comments:










read/writes(List justification if not)













































Runnable calling frequencies match FDD








N/A
Comments:

































DataDict.m display variables: created as








N/A
Comments:









PerInstanceMemory. Matches the FDD





































Component is correct component type








Yes
Comments:











































































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:

Avinash James
Review Date :

08/25/16
Component Type :


Complex Driver



























Lead Peer Reviewer:


Selva Sengottaiyan
Approved by Reviewer(s):



Yes

































Other Reviewer(s):


Krishna Anne





































































Sheet 4: Src-RamMem






















Rev 1.28-Jun-15
Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

























Source File Name:


CDD_RamMem.c

Source File Revision:


6
Header File Name:


CDD_RamMem.h

Header 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. 3

























MDD Name:

RamMem_Module Design Document

Revision:
2

























FDD/SCIR/DSR/FDR/CM Name:




CM103A_RamMem_Design

Revision:
3.0.1


























Quality Check Items:



































Rationale is required for all answers of No









Working EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:















































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.)




































All paths assign a value to outputs, ensuring








N/A
Comments:









all outputs are initialized prior to being written





































Requirements Tracability tags in code match the requirements tracability in the FDD








N/A
Comments:









requirements tracability in the FDD





































All variables are declared at the function level.








Yes
Comments:
























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.


Yes
Comments:



and Version Control version in file comment block





































Change log contains detailed description of changes








Yes
Comments:



and Work CR number





































Code accurately implements FDD (Document or Model)








Yes
Comments:










































Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings


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.





Yes
Comments:
















































Component.h is included








Yes
Comments:
























All other includes are actually needed. (System includes








N/A
Comments:









only allowed in Nexteer library components)











N/A for this Change
























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 execution-order-dependent code can be







Yes
Comments:










recognized by the compiler: [N80]





































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-unsiged 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







N/A
Comments:










defined in the FDD DataDict.m file : [N53]





































All code is mapped with FDD (all FDD







Yes
Comments:










subfunctions and/or model blocks identified













with code comments; all code corresponds to






















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













































Review did not identify violations of other








Yes
Comments:









coding standard rules





































Anomaly or Design Work CR created








N/A
Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers









for any FDD corrections needed































































General Notes / Comments:



















































Reviewed only for the changes




























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:

Avinash James


Review Date :

08/25/16
































Lead Peer Reviewer:


Selva Sengottaian


Approved by Reviewer(s):



Yes































Other Reviewer(s):









































































Sheet 5: MDD






















Rev 1.28-Jun-15
Peer Review Meeting Log (MDD Review)


























MDD Name:





RamMem_Module Design Document









MDD Revision:

2


























Source File Name:


CDD_RamMem.c











Source File Revision:


5

Source File Name:


CDD_RamMemNonRte.c











Source File Revision:


4

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








Yes
Comments:











data not communicated through RTE ports, per














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















































All implementation details that differ from the FDD are








Yes
Comments:











noted and explained in Design Rationale






































All Unit Test Considerations have been described








N/A
Comments:



















































General Notes / Comments:























Reviewed only for the changes


































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:

Selva Sengottaiyan


Review Date :

07/01/16
































Lead Peer Reviewer:


Avinash James


Approved by Reviewer(s):



Yes































Other Reviewer(s):









































































Sheet 6: Src-RamMemNonRte






















Rev 1.28-Jun-15
Peer Review Meeting Log (Source Code Review)

























Source File Name:


CDD_RamMemNonRte.c

Source File Revision:


5
Header File Name:


CDD_RamMem.h

Header 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. 3

























MDD Name:

RamMem_Module Design Document

Revision:
NA

























FDD/SCIR/DSR/FDR/CM Name:




CM103A_RamMem_Design

Revision:
3.0.1


























Quality Check Items:



































Rationale is required for all answers of No









Working EA4 Software Naming Convention followed:















































for variable names







N/A
Comments:

















































for constant names







N/A
Comments:

















































for function names







N/A
Comments:

















































for other names (component, memory







N/A
Comments:










mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)




































All paths assign a value to outputs, ensuring








N/A
Comments:









all outputs are initialized prior to being written





































Requirements Tracability tags in code match the requirements tracability in the FDD








N/A
Comments:









requirements tracability in the FDD





































All variables are declared at the function level.








N/A
Comments:
























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.


Yes
Comments:



and Version Control version in file comment block





































Change log contains detailed description of changes








Yes
Comments:



and Work CR number





































Code accurately implements FDD (Document or Model)








Yes
Comments:










































Verified no Compiler Errors or Warnings


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.





Yes
Comments:
















































Component.h is included








Yes
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







Yes
Comments:










is per standard





































All execution-order-dependent code can be







N/A
Comments:










recognized by the compiler: [N80]





































All loops have termination conditions that ensure







Yes
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-unsiged 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







N/A
Comments:










defined in the FDD DataDict.m file : [N53]





































All code is mapped with FDD (all FDD







Yes
Comments:










subfunctions and/or model blocks identified













with code comments; all code corresponds to






















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













































Review did not identify violations of other








Yes
Comments:









coding standard rules





































Anomaly or Design Work CR created








N/A
Comments: List Anomaly or CR numbers









for any FDD corrections needed































































General Notes / Comments:
















































Reviewed only for the changes











































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:

Avinash James


Review Date :

08/25/16
































Lead Peer Reviewer:


Selva Sengottaiyan


Approved by Reviewer(s):



Yes































Other Reviewer(s):


Krishna Anne





































































Sheet 7: PolySpace






















Rev 1.28-Jun-15
Peer Review Meeting Log (QAC/PolySpace Review)


























Source File Name:


CDD_RamMem.c











Source File Revision:


6

Source File Name:


CDD_RamMemNonRte.c











Source File Revision:


5

Source File Name:















Source File Revision:






























EA4 Static Analysis Compliance Guideline version:








01.01.00













Poly Space version:


Windows User: eg. 2013b 2013b
Polyspace sub project version:




Windows User: eg. TL108a_PolyspaceSuprt_1.0.0 NA

QAC version:


Windows User: eg 8.1.1-R 8.1.1-R
QAC sub project version:




Windows User: eg. TL_100A_1.1.0 1.2.0


























Quality Check Items:




































Rationale is required for all answers of No



































Contract Folder's header files are appropriate and





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.


Yes
Comments:




function prototypes match the latest component version







































100% Compliance to the EA4 Static AnalysisYes
Comments:

see comments below


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






































Cyclomatic complexity and Static path count OK






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

Yes
Comments:

see comments below


for all functions in the component per Design














and Coding Standards rule [N47]

































































































General Notes / Comments:























orange check for possible uninitialized variable on *Rte_Pim_LclRamWordLineRead() = *(uint32 *)WordLineAdr_Cnt_T_u32; -- this is intentional in this case

Red Check for NxtSwrRst is ok.






























































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:

Avinash James


Review Date :

08/25/16
































Lead Peer Reviewer:


Selva Sengottaiyan


Approved by Reviewer(s):



Yes































Other Reviewer(s):









































































2 - RamMem_Integration Manual

Integration Manual

For

RamMem

VERSION: 2

DATE: 08/20/16

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.DescriptionAuthorVersionDate
1Initial versionSelva Sengottaiyan1.004/11/16
2Uodated to design version 3.0.1Avinash James2.008/23/16

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 8

4.1 Build Time Config 8

4.2 Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project 8

4.3 Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes 8

4.4 DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes 8

4.5 Manual Configuration Changes 8

5 Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS 9

5.1 Required Global Data Inputs 9

5.2 Required Global Data Outputs 9

5.3 Specific Include Path present 9

6 Runnable Scheduling 10

7 Memory Map REQUIREMENTS 11

7.1 Mapping 11

7.2 Usage 11

7.3 NvM Blocks 11

8 Compiler Settings 12

8.1 Preprocessor MACRO 12

8.2 Optimization Settings 12

9 Appendix 13

Abbrevations And Acronyms

AbbreviationDescription

References

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

Sr. No.TitleVersion

Dependencies

SWCs

ModuleRequired Feature

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

RamMemLclRamSngBitEcc – – Callout function for Non-Rte Server Interface , Call back functions for MCU ECM Error Source RAM Memory single bit ECC.

Configuration REQUIREMeNTS

Build Time Config

ModulesNotes

Configuration Files to be provided by Integration Project

N/A

Da Vinci Parameter Configuration Changes

ParameterNotesSWC

/Renesas/EcucDefs_Mcu/Mcu/McuModuleConfiguration

/McuEcmErrorSourcesCfg/McuEcmErrorSource34

Call back function name is “RamMemLclRamSngBitEcc”. Refer the CM104A Integration manual for the configuration of the error source. (Type of the error, classification of the error eg FENMI or EI information) .

DaVinci Interrupt Configuration Changes

ISR NameNotes

Manual Configuration Changes

ConstantNotesSWC

Integration DATAFLOW REQUIREMENTS

Required Global Data Inputs

Required Global Data Outputs

Specific Include Path present

Yes

Runnable Scheduling

API usage and scheduling of BSW components expected to be captured at a project architectural level and is beyond the scope of this document. Third party documentation can be referenced as needed.

InitScheduling RequirementsTrigger
RamMemInit1RTE initializatonRTE initialization
Scheduling RequirementsTrigger
RamMemPer12ms

.

Memory Map REQUIREMENTS

Mapping

Memory SectionContentsNotes

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

Usage

FeatureRAMROM

NvM Blocks

Compiler Settings

Preprocessor MACRO

Optimization Settings

Appendix

None

3 - RamMem_Module Design Document

Module Design Document

For

RamMem

Aug 23, 2016

Prepared For:

Software Engineering

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA

Prepared By:

Software Group,

Nexteer Automotive,

Saginaw, MI, USA
Change History

DescriptionAuthorVersionDate
Initial VersionSelva Sengottaiyan104/06/16
Created local functions for reducing cyclometric complexitySelva Sengottaiyan206/26/2016
Changed SPI ECC handling from interrupt to pollingAvinash James308/23/2016


Table of Contents

1 Introduction 5

1.1 Purpose 5

1.2 Scope 5

2 RamMem & High-Level Description 6

3 Design details of software module 7

3.1 Graphical representation of RamMem 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: RamMemInit1 9

5.1.1.1 Design Rationale 9

5.1.1.2 Module Outputs 9

5.1.2 Per: RamMemPer1 9

5.1.2.1 Design Rationale 9

5.1.2.2 Module Outputs 9

5.2 Server Runables 9

5.2.1 SpiDblBitEcc 9

5.2.1.1 Design Rationale 9

5.2.1.2 Processing 9

5.2.2 RamMemLclRamSngBitEcc 9

5.2.2.1 Design Rationale 9

5.2.2.2 Processing 9

5.3 Interrupt Functions 9

5.4 Module Internal (Local) Functions 10

5.4.1 Local Function #1 10

5.4.1.1 Design Rationale 10

5.4.1.2 Processing 10

5.4.2 Local Function #2 10

5.4.2.1 Design Rationale 10

5.4.2.2 Processing 10

5.4.3 Local Function #3 10

5.4.3.1 Design Rationale 10

5.4.3.2 Processing 10

5.4.4 Local Function #4 11

5.4.4.1 Design Rationale 11

5.4.4.2 Processing 11

5.4.5 Local Function #5 11

5.4.5.1 Design Rationale 11

5.4.5.2 Processing 11

5.5 GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions 11

5.5.1 GLOBAL Function #1 11

5.5.1.1 Design Rationale 11

5.5.1.2 Processing 11

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

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.

RamMem & High-Level Description

See FDD

Design details of software module

Graphical representation of RamMem

Data Flow Diagram

Component level DFD

N/A

Function level DFD

N/A

Constant Data Dictionary

Program (fixed) Constants

Embedded Constants

Local Constants

Constant NameResolutionUnitsValue
LCLRAMBASADR_CNT_U321Cnt0xFEB80000U
VLDADRTESTBITMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0xFFFE0000U
VLDADRTESTRES_CNT_U321Cnt0x00060000U
WORDLINEADRMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0xFFFFFF1FU
BNK0ERRCLRMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0x00000001U
BNK1ERRCLRMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0x00000002U
BNK2ERRCLRMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0x00000004U
BNK3ERRCLRMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0x00000008U
BNK0SNGBITERRMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0x00000001U
BNK1SNGBITERRMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0x00000100U
BNK2SNGBITERRMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0x00010000U
BNK3SNGBITERRMASK_CNT_U321Cnt0x01000000U

Software Component Implementation

Sub-Module Functions

Init: RamMemInit1

Design Rationale

Module Outputs

Refer to FDD

Per: RamMemPer1

Design Rationale

Module Outputs

Refer to FDD

Server Runables

RamMemLclRamSngBitEcc

Design Rationale

Refer the FDD

Processing

Refer the FDD

Interrupt Functions

Module Internal (Local) Functions

Local Function #1

Function NameRamFailrModClassnChkTypeMinMax
Arguments PassedNone
Return Value

Design Rationale

Refer the FDD

Processing

Refer the FDD

Local Function #2

Function NameRamMemLclRamFailrChkTypeMinMax
Arguments PassedLclRamFailrAdr_Cnt_T_u32uint3204294967295
Return Value

Design Rationale

Refer the FDD

Processing

Refer the FDD

Local Function #3

Function NameSpiEccErrTypeMinMax
Arguments PassedNone
Return Value

Design Rationale

Refer the FDD

Processing

Refer the FDD

Local Function #4

Function NameFrEccErrTypeMinMax
Arguments PassedNone
Return Value

Design Rationale

Refer the FDD

Processing

Refer the FDD

Local Function #5

Function NameCanEccErrTypeMinMax
Arguments PassedNone
Return Value

Design Rationale

Refer the FDD

Processing

Refer the FDD

GLOBAL Function/Macro Definitions

GLOBAL Function #1

Function Name(Exact name used)TypeMinMax
Arguments PassedNone<Refer MDD guidelines[1]><Refer MDD guidelines[1]><Refer MDD guidelines[1]>
Return Value

Design Rationale

Processing

Known Limitations with Design

Local RAM Single bit PIM for address store will be overwritten for each banks which can be avoided by defining Pims for each memory block. Will be reviewed POST IVER build

UNIT TEST CONSIDERATION

None

Abbreviations and Acronyms

Abbreviation or AcronymDescription

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

TermDefinitionSource
MDDModule Design Document
DFDData Flow Diagram

References

Ref. #TitleVersion
1AUTOSAR Specification of Memory Mapping (Link:AUTOSAR_SWS_MemoryMapping.pdf)v1.3.0 R4.0 Rev 2
2MDD GuidelineEA4 01.00.01
3Software Naming Conventions.doc1.0
4Software Design and Coding Standards.doc2.1