Skip to content

Fix implementation of gd_req__saf_linkage_status_check #528

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
PandaeDo wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
+8 −2
Open

Fix implementation of gd_req__saf_linkage_status_check #528

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
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
10 changes: 8 additions & 2 deletions src/extensions/score_metamodel/metamodel.yaml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1047,7 +1047,13 @@ graph_checks:
saf_linkage_safety:
needs:
include: feat_saf_fmea, comp_saf_fmea, plat_saf_dfa, feat_saf_dfa, comp_saf_dfa
condition: safety == ASIL_B
condition:
and:
- safety == ASIL_B
- status == valid
check:
mitigated_by: safety != QM
mitigated_by:
and:
- safety != QM
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@MaximilianSoerenPollak MaximilianSoerenPollak May 5, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is mittigated_by here the only thing that can have linked requirements?

According to the text it says that all linkages must fulfill this.
Cant check the code atm on phone. So if this is correct then looks good.

- status == valid
explanation: An ASIL_B safety requirement must link to a ASIL_B requirement. Please ensure that the linked requirements safety level is not QM and it's status is valid.
Loading