Fee_Review_Checklists

Overview

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. Fee

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. Fee_03.01.00_01.23.03

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. Kevin Smith

Change Request ID:

EA3#10168

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:

Source files are provided by third party, which will make majority of the items in the checklist not applicable.

Review consisteted of insuring all files provided by outside parties were included in the baseline.

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

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. N/A

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. N/A

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 N/A

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 N/A

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 N/A

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 N/A

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:

See comments at end of form

for constant names

Comments:

See comments at end of form

for function names

Comments:

See comments at end of form

for other names (component, memory

Comments:

See comments at end of form

mapping handles, typedefs, etc.)

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

Comments:

See comments at end of form

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:

See comments at end of form

and Version Control version in file comment block

Change log contains detailed description of changes

Comments:

See comments at end of form

and CR number

Code accurately implements FDD (Document or Model)

Comments:

See comments at end of form

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:

See comments at end of form

FDD test points exist as display variables: declared

Comments:

See comments at end of form

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:

See comments at end of form

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:

See comments at end of form

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

Function comment blocks are per standards and

Comments:

See comments at end of form

contain correct information: [N43]

Code formatting (indentation, placement of

Comments:

See comments at end of form

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

[N57], [N58], [N59]

Embedded constants used per standards; no

Comments:

See comments at end of form

"magic numbers": [N12]

All variables and constants defined at module

Comments:

See comments at end of form

level are included in appropriate MemMap

section: [N25] and Naming Conventions

All execution-order-dependent code can be

Comments:

See comments at end of form

recognized by the compiler: [N80]

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

Comments:

See comments at end of form

No possibility of divide by zero: [N65]

Comments:

See comments at end of form

All integer division and modulus operations

Comments:

See comments at end of form

handle negative numbers correctly: [N76]

All typecasting and fixed point arithmetic,

Comments:

See comments at end of form

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:

See comments at end of form

point value to an unsigned type: [N67]

All conversions between signed and unsigned

Comments:

See comments at end of form

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

No possibility of dereferencing a null

Comments:

See comments at end of form

pointer: [N70]

Global outputs (RTE and Non-RTE) Initialized:

Comments:

See comments at end of form

[N24]

Module outputs are limited to the legal range

Comments:

See comments at end of form

defined in the FDD Data dictionary: [N53]

All code is mapped with FDD (all FDD

Comments:

See comments at end of form

subfunctions and/or model blocks identified

with code comments; all code corresponds to

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

Struct types used for NvM have

Comments:

See comments at end of form

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:

See comments at end of form

identified during review

General Notes / Comments:

Code is provided by TI for the FEE driver, which they do not follow our same coding standards and conventions. The review consisted of ensuring that

files provided with version 1.23.3 of the FEE driver were captured in the baseline for the FEE component.

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:

Kevin Smith

Review Date :

08/08/16

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Ramanujan V.

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Sheet 3: QAC

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. N/A

Source File Revision:

N/A

Module

Compliance Guidelines Version:

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):

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:

See comment section below

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:

See comment section below

Group-review Checklist (review board)

100% Compliance to the MISRA Compliance Guidelines

Comments:

See comment section below

Cyclomatic complexity and Static path count ok per

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

Comments:

See comment section below

Design and Coding Standards rule [N47]

General Notes / Comments:

While QAC was performed on all the source files from TI, none of the warnings were corrected

We verified that there were no QAC warnings for changed lines of code

Change Owner:

Kevin Smith

Review Date :

08/08/16

Lead Peer Reviewer:

Ramanujan V.

Approved by Reviewer(s):

Yes

Other Reviewer(s):

Last modified October 12, 2025: Initial commit (0347a62)