Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Linux Safety Architecture methodology #9

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
17 changes: 17 additions & 0 deletions methodology/architecture.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
# Kernel Safety Architecture Methodology
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

from Gab: I think we need to align this methodology with the pull request: #3


## Goals

* Provide an architectural break down and description of the Kernel in supporting an allocated top level requirement
* Enable and execute an STPA safety analysis to verify Linux to be capable and fit to meet an allocated top level safety requirement

## Flow of Analysis

* Safety Requirement Definition: an initial safety requirement must be allocated to the Kernel as a whole from the safety concept of domain specific WGs.
* Scope Identification: given a safety requirement, the code functionally supporting such requirement must be comprehensively identified
* Initial partitioning into functional blocks: one or more functional blocks in the scope of the code above must be identified and for each of these blocks we should describe:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

from Gab: is the name "functional block" correct or it should be replaced by "controllers" (to meet the STPA terminology)?

* Interfaces with the other blocks (NOTE: only interfaces that are meaningful in functionally supporting the allocated requirement)
* Functionalities allocated to each functional block (NOTE: only functionalities that are meaningful for fulfilling the allocated requirement)
* For each of the identified functionalities the role of the interfaces shall be described (under which conditions they are invoked)
* Safety Analysis: Do an STPA analysis and define derived safety requirements for each of the functional blocks as in 3)
* Iterate: Evaluate functional blocks complexity vs allocated safety requirements and eventually iterate back in 1) or stop here if not needed (complexity is acceptable)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

From Gab: the stop criteria should be rephrased as "the are comprehensive and complete architectural mitigation measure to satisfy the allocated safety requirement or the complexity is acceptable"