Skip to content

Commit d71605d

Browse files
PandaeDoPandaeDo
committed
update templates acc template folder
1 parent 7b9ae11 commit d71605d

11 files changed

Lines changed: 353 additions & 94 deletions

File tree

‎docs/persistency/docs/release/release_note.rst‎

Lines changed: 84 additions & 54 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -23,57 +23,87 @@ Release Note
2323
:realizes: wp__module_sw_release_note
2424
:tags: persistency
2525

26-
| Module Name: Persistency
27-
| Release Tag: vX.Y.Z
28-
| Release Commit Hash: a1b2c3d4e5f6g7h8i9j0
29-
| Release Date: YYYY-MM-DD
30-
|
31-
| Overview
32-
| --------
33-
|
34-
| This document provides an overview of the changes, improvements, and bug fixes included in the software module release version vX.Y.Z.
35-
|
36-
| New Features
37-
| ------------
38-
|
39-
| - **Feature 1**: Brief description of the new feature.
40-
| - **Feature 2**: Brief description of the new feature.
41-
| - **Feature 3**: Brief description of the new feature.
42-
|
43-
| Improvements
44-
| ------------
45-
|
46-
| - **Improvement 1**: Brief description of the improvement.
47-
| - **Improvement 2**: Brief description of the improvement.
48-
| - **Improvement 3**: Brief description of the improvement.
49-
|
50-
| Bug Fixes
51-
| ---------
52-
|
53-
| - **Bug 1**: Brief description of the bug fix.
54-
| - **Bug 2**: Brief description of the bug fix.
55-
| - **Bug 3**: Brief description of the bug fix.
56-
|
57-
| Compatibility
58-
| -------------
59-
|
60-
| - **Dependencies**: List any dependencies and their versions.
61-
|
62-
| Known Issues
63-
| ------------
64-
|
65-
| - **Issue 1**: Brief description of the known issue. Justification regarding safety impact.
66-
| - **Issue 2**: Brief description of the known issue. Justification regarding safety impact.
67-
| - **Issue 3**: Brief description of the known issue. Justification regarding safety impact.
68-
|
69-
| Upgrade Instructions
70-
| --------------------
71-
|
72-
| 1. **Step 1**: Description of the first step.
73-
| 2. **Step 2**: Description of the second step.
74-
| 3. **Step 3**: Description of the third step.
75-
|
76-
| Contact Information
77-
| -------------------
78-
|
79-
| For any questions or support, please contact the *Project lead* or raise an issue/discussion.
26+
27+
| **Module Name:** Persistency
28+
| **Release Tag:** vX.Y.Z
29+
| **Origin Release Tag:** vU.V.W
30+
| **Release Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
31+
32+
33+
Overview
34+
^^^^^^^^
35+
36+
This document provides an overview of the changes, improvements, and bug fixes included in the software module release version vX.Y.Z
37+
as compared to the module's origin release (which is usually the previous release).
38+
39+
Disclaimer
40+
----------
41+
42+
This release note does not "release for production", as it does not come with a safety argumentation and a performed safety assessment.
43+
The work products compiled in the safety package are created with care according to a process satisfying standards, but the as the project,
44+
being a non-profit and open source organization, can not take over any liability for its content.
45+
46+
Changes to the Module
47+
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
48+
49+
New Features
50+
------------
51+
52+
- **Feature 1:** Brief description of the new feature.
53+
- **Feature 2:** Brief description of the new feature.
54+
- **Feature 3:** Brief description of the new feature.
55+
56+
Improvements
57+
------------
58+
59+
- **Improvement 1:** Brief description of the improvement.
60+
- **Improvement 2:** Brief description of the improvement.
61+
- **Improvement 3:** Brief description of the improvement.
62+
63+
Bug Fixes
64+
---------
65+
66+
- **Bug 1:** Brief description of the bug fix.
67+
- **Bug 2:** Brief description of the bug fix.
68+
- **Bug 3:** Brief description of the bug fix.
69+
70+
Other changes by Label
71+
----------------------
72+
73+
- **Label 1/Refactor 1:** Brief description of the change.
74+
- **Label 2/Refactor 2:** Brief description of the change.
75+
- **Label 3/Refactor 3:** Brief description of the change.
76+
77+
Compatibility
78+
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
79+
80+
- **Dependencies:** List any dependencies and their versions.
81+
82+
Performed Verification
83+
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
84+
85+
This release note is based on the verification as documented in module verification report
86+
:need:`doc__persistency_verification_report_v2`.
87+
88+
Known Issues
89+
------------
90+
91+
- **Issue 1:** Brief description of the known issue. Justification regarding safety impact.
92+
- **Issue 2:** Brief description of the known issue. Justification regarding safety impact.
93+
- **Issue 3:** Brief description of the known issue. Justification regarding safety impact.
94+
95+
Known Vulnerabilities
96+
---------------------
97+
98+
- **CVE 1:** Brief description of the known CVE. Justification regarding security impact.
99+
- **CVE 2:** Brief description of the known CVE. Justification regarding security impact.
100+
- **CVE 3:** Brief description of the known CVE. Justification regarding security impact.
101+
102+
Upgrade Instructions
103+
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
104+
105+
1. **Step 1:** Description of the first step.
106+
2. **Step 2:** Description of the second step.
107+
3. **Step 3:** Description of the third step.
108+
109+
For any questions or support, please contact the *Project lead* or raise an issue/discussion.

‎docs/persistency/docs/safety_mgt/index.rst‎

Lines changed: 1 addition & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ Safety Management
1919
:titlesonly:
2020

2121
module_codeowners
22+
module_safety_analysis_fdr
2223
module_safety_plan
2324
module_safety_plan_fdr
2425
module_safety_package_fdr

‎docs/persistency/docs/safety_mgt/module_safety_analysis_fdr.rst‎

Lines changed: 91 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
1+
..
2+
# *******************************************************************************
3+
# Copyright (c) 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
4+
#
5+
# See the NOTICE file(s) distributed with this work for additional
6+
# information regarding copyright ownership.
7+
#
8+
# This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the
9+
# terms of the Apache License Version 2.0 which is available at
10+
# https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
11+
#
12+
# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
13+
# *******************************************************************************
14+
15+
16+
Safety Analysis Checklist
17+
=========================
18+
19+
.. document:: Persistency Safety Analysis Checklist
20+
:id: doc__persistency_safety_analysis_fdr_v2
21+
:status: draft
22+
:safety: ASIL_B
23+
:security: YES
24+
:realizes: wp__fdr_reports
25+
26+
27+
**Purpose**
28+
29+
The purpose of this Safety Analysis (DFA and FMEA) checklist template is to collect the topics to be checked during verification of the Safety Analysis.
30+
31+
**Conduct**
32+
33+
As described in :need:`wf__p_formal_rv`, the formal document review is performed by an "external" safety manager:
34+
35+
- reviewer: <committer with safety manager skills explicitly named here>
36+
37+
**Checklist**
38+
39+
Please note that the "passed" column must contain "yes" or "no" for each checklist item. Additionally, the remarks column must explain why item passed or did not passed. In case of "no" an issue link to the issue tracking system has to be added in the last column. See also :ref:`review_concept` for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular.
40+
41+
.. list-table:: Safety Analysis Checklist
42+
:header-rows: 1
43+
:widths: 10,10,30,30,20
44+
45+
* - ID
46+
- Safety analysis activity
47+
- Compliant to ISO 26262?
48+
- Reference
49+
- Comment
50+
51+
* - 1
52+
- Is it plausible that each potential identified dependent failure that has been identified, will lead to a dependent failure which cause a violation of FFI?
53+
- [YES | NO ]
54+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_742>`
55+
- <Rationale for result>
56+
57+
* - 2
58+
- Are the failure initiators :need:`[[title]] <gd_guidl__dfa_failure_initiators>` / fault models :need:`[[title]] <gd_guidl__fault_models>` applied?
59+
- [YES | NO ]
60+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_744>`
61+
- <Rationale for result>
62+
63+
* - 3
64+
- Are measures defined to resolute the identified potential dependent failures?
65+
- [YES | NO ]
66+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_746>`, :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_747>`
67+
- <Rationale for result>
68+
69+
* - 4
70+
- Is the result of the safety analysis indicate if the safety requirements are complied?
71+
- [YES | NO ]
72+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_842>`
73+
- <Rationale for result>
74+
75+
* - 5
76+
- Are for all not complied safety requirements mitigations defined to resolute the non-compliance? The mitigations shall have a direct influence on the violation by prevention, detection or mitigation to reduce the risk to an acceptable level.
77+
- [YES | NO ]
78+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_843>`
79+
- <Rationale for result>
80+
81+
* - 6
82+
- Are the mitigations effective and implemented?
83+
- [YES | NO ]
84+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_844>`
85+
- <Rationale for result>
86+
87+
* - 7
88+
- Are the templates for DFA and/or FMEA used? See :ref:`dfa_templates` / :ref:`FMEA_templates` and also :ref:`process_requirements_safety_analysis`
89+
- [YES | NO ]
90+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_748>`, :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_849>`, :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__analysis_8410>`
91+
- <Rationale for result>

‎docs/persistency/docs/safety_mgt/module_safety_package_fdr.rst‎

Lines changed: 18 additions & 4 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -23,41 +23,55 @@ Safety Package Formal Review Report
2323
:realizes: wp__fdr_reports
2424
:tags: persistency
2525

26-
**1. Purpose**
26+
**Purpose**
2727

2828
The purpose of this review checklist is to report status of the formal review for the safety package.
2929

30-
**2. Checklist**
30+
**Conduct**
31+
As described in :need:`wf__p_formal_rv`, the formal document review is performed by an "external" safety manager:
32+
33+
- reviewer: <committer with safety manager skills explicitly named here>
34+
35+
**Checklist**
36+
37+
See also :ref:`review_concept` for further information about reviews in general and inspection in particular.
3138

3239
.. list-table:: Safety Package Checklist
3340
:header-rows: 1
3441

3542
* - Id
3643
- Safety package activity
3744
- Compliant to ISO 26262?
45+
- Reference
3846
- Comment
3947

4048
* - 1
41-
- Is a safety package provided which matches the safety plan (i.e. all planned workproducts referenced)?
49+
- Is a safety package provided which matches the safety plan (i.e. all planned work products referenced)?
4250
- [YES | NO ]
51+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__management_6481>`
4352
- <Rationale for result>
4453

4554
* - 2
4655
- Is the argument how functional safety is achieved, provided in the safety package, plausible and sufficient?
4756
- NO
48-
- The argument is intentionally not provided by S-CORE.
57+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__management_6481>`
58+
- The argument is intentionally not provided by the project.
4959

5060
* - 3
5161
- Are the referenced work products available?
5262
- [YES | NO ]
63+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__management_6482>`
5364
- <Rationale for result>
5465

5566
* - 4
5667
- Are the referenced work products in released state, including the process safety audit?
5768
- [YES | NO ]
69+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__management_6482>`
70+
:need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__management_6469>`
5871
- <Rationale for result>
5972

6073
* - 5
6174
- If safety related deviations from the process or safety concept are documented, are these argued understandably?
6275
- [YES | NO ]
76+
- :need:`[[title]] <std_req__iso26262__management_6481>`
6377
- <Rationale for result>

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)