Want to get involved?
Contactinfo @ open-do.org
Category Archives: Open-DO News
By Jamie Ayre | September 10, 2013
Sparkel is a new parallel programming language inspired by the SPARK subset of Ada, and designed to support the development of inherently safe and secure, highly parallel applications that can be mapped to multicore, manycore, heterogeneous, or distributed architectures. To learn more about Sparkel and to follow the project, please visit http://www.sparkel.org
By Jamie Ayre | July 23, 2013
This document will present the Ada language using terminology and examples that are familiar to developers that understand the C++ or Java languages.
To download the booklet, please visit this page
By Yannick Moy | April 11, 2013
David Mentré from Mitsubishi Electric R&D Centre Europe has produced a very interesting report on his use of GNATprove (the formal verification tool we develop for the next version of SPARK) on a case-study from the Open-ETCS European project, to develop the tools for the future European Train Control Systems.
Although David asked me to mention this is highly experimental (neither fully proved nor fully tested), I think it shows quite well what one can do with formal verification. The report contains inlined code showing how some units were specified using preconditions/postconditions and annotated with assertions for proofs. You can also download the code from github, or browse it online.
David will present this model at an internal Open-ETCS meeting next Monday, I’ll ask him to post the conclusion of his presentation!
By Jamie Ayre | February 23, 2013
This talk was given by Cyrille Comar at the recent SPARK User Group. This talk reviews the prominent place and role testing holds in Safety Standards. It compares the strengths and weaknesses of testing with an alternative verification technique based on formal methods. It then explores specific instances where a combination of both approaches makes sense and can bring significant cost savings, without forcing dramatic changes in internal development procedures.
By Jamie Ayre | February 23, 2013
Stuart Mathews gave this talk at the recent SPARK User Group. In it he presents the next generation of the SPARK language which will extend the range of programs that can be automatically verified and provides an innovative means for combing formal verification and testing.
By Jamie Ayre | February 22, 2013
Rod Chapman, Altran Praxis, gave this talk at the recent SPARK User Group. This talk reflected on our experiences with building secure systems with SPARK and other formal methods, including the lessons learned from the MULTOS CA, Tokeneer and SPARKSkein projects, and the relationship between safety- and security-critical development. In recent years, there has been a huge resurgence in interest in static analysis of software, largely driven by the perception of “security vulnerabilities” in both specific systems and programming languages in general. This talk also considered the trends emerging in this market, both good and bad, and proposed one view of what the future might hold for secure systems development.
By Jamie Ayre | January 25, 2013
As part of the DO-178C/ED-12C revision effort, a new document Software Tools Qualification Considerations (DO-330/ED-215) was developed. Its goal is both to replace the software tool qualification guidance of DO-178B/ED-12B and also to enable and encourage the use of this “mature” guidance outside the airborne domain. Since it may be used independently, DO-330/ED-215 is not considered as a supplement to DO-178C/ED-12C; it is thus titled differently from the specialized technology supplements.
The purpose of this document is to describe how DO-330/ED-215 impacts the current tool qualification approach of DO-178B/ED-12B and how it provides more relevant guidance for both tool users and tool providers.
We first review the rationale for a Tool Qualification document. But before the application of DO-330/ED-215, a fundamental pre-condition is to establish for the project the tool qualification criteria and the Tool Qualification Levels (TQLs). As an example, we show how DO-178C/ED-12C determines the criteria and TQLs for the airborne domain. In this domain, the criteria are based on the possible impact of a tool error on the software life cycle processes.
We then highlight the main impact of DO-330/ED-215 on current practice, and provide the relevant information to help the reader to apply this new guidance.
Some supporting information is provided in an appendix of DO-330/ED-215. We describe one of the most important topics, addressing the possible certification credit when using a qualified AutoCode Generator (ACG).
The author, Frédéric Pothon ACG Solutions, and several of the contributors and reviewers participated in the DO-178C/ED-12C working group and subcommittees.
© Frédéric Pothon, 2012
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
By Jamie Ayre | March 19, 2012
This paper was presented by Jerome Guitton at the recent ERTS 2012 conference:
This paper presents formal results derived from the COUVERTURE project, whose goal was to develop tools to support structural coverage analysis of unin- strumented safety-critical software. After briefly introducing the project context and explaining the need for formal foundations, we focus on the relationships between machine branch coverage and the DO-178B Modified Condition/Decision Coverage (MCDC) criterion. A thorough understanding of those relationships is important, since it provides the foundation for knowing where efficient execution trace techniques can be used to demonstrate compliance with the MCDC criterion. We first present several conjectures that were tested using Alloy models, then provide a formally verified characterization of the situations when coverage of object control-flow edges implies MCDC compliance.The full paper can de downloaded here.
By Jamie Ayre | March 19, 2012
This is the paper that Yannick Moy presented at the recent ERTS 2012 conference:
Verification activities mandated for critical software are essential to achieve the required level of confidence expected in life-critical or business-critical software. They are becoming increasingly costly as, over time, they require the development and maintenance of a large body of functional and robustness tests on larger and more complex applications. Formal program verification offers a way to reduce these costs while providing stronger guarantees than testing. Addressing verification activities with formal verification is supported by upcoming standards such as do-178c for software development in avionics. In the Hi-Lite project, we pursue the integration of formal verification with testing for projects developed in C or Ada. In this paper, we discuss the conditions under which this integration is at least as strong as testing alone. We describe associated costs and benefits, using a simple banking database application as a case study. The full paper can de downloaded here.
By Jamie Ayre | January 31, 2012
Many thanks to the organisers of the ERTS 2012 (Embedded Real-Time Software and Systems) conference for including a session linked to the Open-DO initiative. There will be 4 talks on the morning of Thursday February 2: