This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

CONTROLSUITE: Do the controlSUITE device_support files adhere to all of the MISRA-C guidelines?

Part Number: CONTROLSUITE
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: C2000WARE

Hi experts, 

The customer did a MISRA-C:2012 compliance test (static analysis) on our device_support files by using ParaSoft C/C++ Test tool. And they found a lot of violations. 

Do we have released peripheral-driver lib or files that are totally adhere to the MISRA-C guidelines? Or do we have certificates that prove our device_support files are valid for safety, security, portability, and reliability. 

Thanks

-Will

  • Will,

    controlSUITE is our legacy software package. Our latest software is in C2000Ware. Please check out that package for the latest and greatest software package.

    As far as our safety offering, please check out C2000Tm SafeTITm Enablers (Rev. C) document for an overview of our functional safety offering.

    Here are some other resources:

    Safety Diagnostic Software Library — C2000Tm Software Guide

    C2000-SAFETI-DIAGNOSTICS-LIB Driver or library | TI.com

    Regards,

    Ozino

  • Hi Ozino, 

    The customer used bitfield lib to configure the peripherals. The device_support files (bitfield lib) in controlSUITE and C2000Ware are same. 

    Actually the customer has not yet verified the functional safety, but in current phase they need to verify the code itself meeting the MISRA-C: 2012 standard or not. So they want a MISRA-C: 2012 compliant bitfield lib. Can we provide this? 

    If we don't have a MISRA-C: 2012 compliant bitfield lib, the certificate authority will also pass the customer if we provide documents about the maturity or safety of our released bitfield lib, as the customer said. Do we have related documents? 

    Regards.

    -Will

  • Will,

    I'm forwarding this post to our functional safety experts in our team to further respond about availability of compliant software.

    Regards,

    Ozino

  • Will,

    At the moment we the contents of C2000Ware are not checked for MISRA-C compliance. The expectation at the moment is that customers will do the analysis and make the updates to parts of the C2000Ware files they use themselves if MISRA-C compliance is needed.

    What device is the customer using?

    Whitney

  • Hi Whitney, 

    They are using F28377S and the corresponding bitfield peripheral drivers. Do we have plan to check if the C2000Ware is compliant with MISRA-C?

    The customer is in a hurry for passing the MISRA-C compliance and they said some documents that proves the bitfield peripheral drivers are mature and safety for usage are also OK for them to pass the MISRA-C compliance. 

    Regards,

    -Will

  • Hi Will,

    If we do start running MISRA-C checks in the future, it will likely be on the driverlib and not the device_support headers/functions. It's something we've discussed doing but we don't have a timeline just yet.

    I can't think of any existing documentation that would help prove this unfortunately. F2837x device_support has been available for quite a few years, but we do still occasionally make updates to the code. As I said before, we generally expect customers to do these checks themselves for safety projects.

    Whitney