Safety management update - Process #398

kroehnd · 2025-11-19T15:35:17Z

Addressed the findings in the ticket

github-actions · 2025-11-19T15:54:32Z

The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html

masc2023

Just a first rough walk through

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_workflow.rst

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst

process/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/guideline_safety_management.rst

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_getstrt.rst

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_workproducts.rst

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_workflow.rst

PandaeDo

Didn't check the links. Try to finalize the review until next Tuesday.

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_getstrt.rst

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst

PandaeDo · 2025-11-20T13:26:10Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst

+
+For the reporting (e.g. displaying the status of the work products) additional tooling is created.
+
+Guidance


Guidance might be deleted. It's visible in the index and have no additional information.

Guidance is still a part of the concept description

aschemmel-tech

See inline comments plus need to correct commit message.

process/process_areas/change_management/change_management_workproducts.rst

process/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/guideline_safety_management.rst

aschemmel-tech · 2025-11-21T09:08:39Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/guideline_safety_management.rst

   | **Scheduling of confirmation reviews, audit and assessment:**
   | Scheduling is done in the same way as for all work products definition by issues. The respective work products are :need:`wp__fdr_reports` and  :need:`wp__audit_report`
+   | A person responsible for carrying out the functional safety audit shall be appointed as part of the scheduling process. This person has to have the required skillset and knowledge.
+   | The functional safety assessor may appoint one or more assistants to support the assessment.


It is not planned to do an assessment, we only do an audit (see the wp__audit_report mentioned).

still assessment is mentioned. need to remove/reword

process/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/guideline_safety_management.rst

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_workflow.rst

process/roles/index.rst

aschemmel-tech · 2025-11-21T09:42:13Z

process/process_areas/change_management/guidance/change_management_feature_template.rst

   :id: gd_temp__change_feature_request
   :status: valid
-   :complies: std_req__aspice_40__SUP-10-BP1, std_req__aspice_40__SUP-10-BP2, std_req__aspice_40__SUP-10-BP3, std_req__aspice_40__SUP-10-BP5, std_req__aspice_40__iic-18-57, std_req__iso26262__support_8422, std_req__iso26262__support_8431, std_req__iso26262__support_8432
+   :complies: std_req__aspice_40__SUP-10-BP1, std_req__aspice_40__SUP-10-BP2, std_req__aspice_40__SUP-10-BP3, std_req__aspice_40__SUP-10-BP5, std_req__aspice_40__iic-18-57, std_req__iso26262__support_8422, std_req__iso26262__support_8431, std_req__iso26262__support_8432, std_req__iso26262__management_6431


No, we wanted to tailor impact analysis on item level, maybe you can link std_req__iso26262__management_644 - this tailoring should also be documented in the Platform Safety Plan (part of PMP, but not part of this PR) - this also applies to other mentions of these requirements (6431, 6432, 6333) below

replaced with 644, makes here more sense

6431, 6432, 6433 are still in "checklist_safety_plan" and "guideline_safety_management" (and not in Safety Plan of PMP).

- Fixed folder structure - Adapted roles in safety management - Added dedicated workflow for impact analysis of change requests

- [x] _Deviation_8: There is no role defined, which covers the Software Safety Analysis. The committer is intended to cover the Software Safety Analysis, but this is not part of the role description yet._ > Added workflow:: Perform Component Safety Analysis in safety_management_workflow.rst

Addressed the point: Are the standard requirements, work products complete, correct linked?

/home/runner/work/process_description/process_description/process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst:50: WARNING: unknown document: 'roles' [ref.doc]

masc2023 · 2025-11-26T08:51:58Z

process/folder_templates/modules/module_name/docs/manual/safety_manual.rst

 Assumptions on the User
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-| As there is no assumption on which specific OS and HW is used, the integration testing of the stakeholder and feature requirements is expected to be performed by the user of the platform SEooC. Tests covering all stakeholder and feature requirements performed on a reference platform (tbd link to reference platform specification), reviewed and passed are included in the platform SEooC safety case.
+| As there is no assumption on which specific OS and HW is used, the integration testing of the stakeholder and feature requirements is expected to be performed by the user of the platform SEooC. Tests covering all stakeholder and feature requirements performed on a reference platform (tbd link to reference platform specification), reviewed and passed are included in the platform SEooC safety package.


tbd should be resolved by adding a ticket addressing this missing specification

Reworded this to be in line with the general wording as we wanted to avoid the ISO naming Safety Case

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_roles.rst

masc2023 · 2025-11-26T08:54:55Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_workproducts.rst


-Work products
-------------
+Workproducts Safety Management


Please let it Work products, it is commonly used in all places, beside the sphinx-need id workproduct

Workproducts Requirements Engineering
Work Products Release Management
Workproducts (Quality)
Work Products Documentation Management
Work Products Configuration Management

Based on the above evidence I will change it to
Work Products Safety Management

aschemmel-tech · 2025-11-28T07:17:20Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/guideline_safety_management.rst

+
+
+
+   | **Overall safety management:**


Unclear why formatting is changed.

aschemmel-tech · 2025-11-28T07:18:13Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/guideline_safety_management.rst

+   | **Planning integration and verification:**
+   | Integration on the target hardware is not done in the scope of the SW platform project, but SW/SW integration up to the feature level is performed and its test results are part of the :need:`wp__verification_platform_ver_report`.
+   |
+   | The integration on the target hardware done by the distributor or OEM is supported by delivering a set of HW/SW integration tests which were already run successfully on a reference HW platform.


Replace "HW/SW integration" by "SW integration"

aschemmel-tech

still four open points (two old and two new) - "unresolved" these so they are visible.

PandaeDo

I would appreciate if you can update the description and use the same format for upper and lower case and also for enumerations.

Also we discussed in summer that we want to improve the documentation with one single source in the document management. Please check against it and use also the related issues. With this it might be needed to update the descriptions of the wf and wp and also the templates.

Still not checked the linked standards. Try to continue with this next week

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T08:25:47Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_getstrt.rst

+   :id: doc_getstrt__safety_management_process
+   :status: valid
+
+If you are appointed as a :need:`Safety Manager <rl__safety_manager>` by the :need:`Project Lead <rl__project_lead>` in the project:


Processes are not only relevant for the Safety Manager. Workflows are also related to Committer, Safety Engineer, External Auditor, Project Lead and all others that might be interested in Safety Management. I would appreciate to have a general getting started where it's described how you can start to discover Safety Management.

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T08:27:29Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst

+   :id: doc_concept__safety_management_process
+   :status: valid
+
+In this section a concept for the safety management will be discussed.


Suggested change

In this section a concept for the safety management will be discussed.

In this section a concept for the Safety Management will be discussed.

Would appreciate a common style in the complete process description.

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T08:28:37Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst

+Inputs
+^^^^^^
+
+#. Stakeholders for the safety management work products?


Would be easier when the headlines are the same as in the index.

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T08:33:33Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst

+
+   * planning of development for module and for platform projects
+
+#. :need:`Safety Manager <rl__safety_manager>`


I would think the Safety Manager is the most important Stakeholder. Also I would recommend to align the bullet point to the workflows / responsibilities they have. Which information`s do they need to do it?

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T08:34:28Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst

+#. :need:`Safety Manager <rl__safety_manager>`
+
+   * main responsible to ensure ISO 26262 compliance in the project
+   * role definition in :doc:`/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_roles`


This might be changed to information´s the Safety Manager needs.

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T09:05:12Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst

+* :need:`Formal Document Review Reports <wp__fdr_reports>` - on safety plan, safety package and safety analyses, according to ISO 26262 requirements
+* :need:`Safety Package <wp__platform_safety_package>` - the safety package does not contain the safety argumentation. By this the project ensures it does not take over liability for the SW platform (or its individual modules). But it enables the distributors to integrate the SW platform (or its individual modules) in their safety package.
+
+Safety Management Tooling


I think there a not really additional information's in this chapter. You might delete it.

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T09:08:15Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/guideline_safety_management.rst

 Safety Management Guideline
 ===========================

 .. gd_guidl:: Safety plan definitions


I think the name of this description shall be Safety Plan Guideline. Isn't it?

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T09:13:56Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_workproducts.rst


-Work products
-------------
+Work Products Safety Management


Description of Safety Plan WP seems to me outdated. One example is that there is no dates, milestones in the Safety Plan itself.

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T09:17:51Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/template_module_safety_plan.rst

   :status: valid
-   :complies: std_req__iso26262__management_6465, std_req__iso26262__management_6466, std_req__iso26262__management_6467, std_req__iso26262__management_6468, std_req__iso26262__management_6469, std_req__isopas8926__44341, std_req__isopas8926__44342, std_req__isopas8926__44611, std_req__isopas8926__4463
+   :complies: std_req__iso26262__management_5425, std_req__iso26262__management_5424, std_req__iso26262__management_6465, std_req__iso26262__management_6466, std_req__iso26262__management_6467, std_req__iso26262__management_6468, std_req__iso26262__management_6469, std_req__isopas8926__44341, std_req__isopas8926__44342, std_req__isopas8926__44611, std_req__isopas8926__4463, std_req__iso26262__management_5427, std_req__iso26262__management_6421



Shall be aligned to https://eclipse-score.github.io/score/main/platform_management_plan/quality_management.html as discussed. Only references to Document Management Plan, no link to Issues etc.

PandaeDo · 2025-11-28T09:19:44Z

process/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/template_safety_manual.rst

   :status: valid
-   :complies: std_req__iso26262__system_6411, std_req__iso26262__system_6412, std_req__iso26262__system_6413, std_req__iso26262__system_6414, std_req__iso26262__system_6421, std_req__iso26262__system_6422, std_req__iso26262__software_641, std_req__iso26262__software_642, std_req__iso26262__software_645, std_req__iso26262__support_12421
+   :complies: std_req__iso26262__management_5425, std_req__iso26262__system_6411, std_req__iso26262__system_6412, std_req__iso26262__system_6413, std_req__iso26262__system_6414, std_req__iso26262__system_6421, std_req__iso26262__system_6422, std_req__iso26262__software_641, std_req__iso26262__software_642, std_req__iso26262__software_645, std_req__iso26262__support_12421



Sorry, only able to add here comments. Related to "gd_temp__component_classification" this shall be aligned to "https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description/pr-398/process_areas/safety_management/guidance/template_feature_safety_wp.html". The template is available in the templates folder.

kroehnd requested review from PandaeDo, PhilipPartsch, aschemmel-tech, masc2023 and pahmann as code owners November 19, 2025 15:35

masc2023 requested changes Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

masc2023 reviewed Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_getstrt.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

masc2023 reviewed Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_getstrt.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

masc2023 reviewed Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_getstrt.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

masc2023 reviewed Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_getstrt.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

masc2023 reviewed Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

masc2023 reviewed Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

masc2023 reviewed Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

masc2023 reviewed Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_workproducts.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

masc2023 reviewed Nov 19, 2025

View reviewed changes

process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_workflow.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

PandaeDo requested changes Nov 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

aschemmel-tech requested changes Nov 21, 2025

View reviewed changes

kroehnd added 5 commits November 25, 2025 05:02

Fixes eclipse-score#60

242be60

- Fixed folder structure - Adapted roles in safety management - Added dedicated workflow for impact analysis of change requests

https://github.com/eclipse-score/process_description/issues/60

fb1d682

Addressed the point: Are the standard requirements, work products complete, correct linked?

Final adpatations made to adress eclipse-score#78

033af31

Fixed build error:

84aa78b

/home/runner/work/process_description/process_description/process/process_areas/safety_management/safety_management_concept.rst:50: WARNING: unknown document: 'roles' [ref.doc]

kroehnd force-pushed the kroehnd_safety_management_update branch from b4265ac to 84aa78b Compare November 25, 2025 04:22

Fixed review findings

35bf3bc

masc2023 reviewed Nov 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

Fixed review findings

84dd817

aschemmel-tech reviewed Nov 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

aschemmel-tech mentioned this pull request Nov 28, 2025

Safety management update - PMP eclipse-score/score#2215

Merged

aschemmel-tech changed the title ~~Safety management update https://github.com/eclipse-score/process_description/issues/60~~ Safety management update Nov 28, 2025

aschemmel-tech requested changes Nov 28, 2025

View reviewed changes

aschemmel-tech changed the title ~~Safety management update~~ Safety management update - Process Nov 28, 2025

PandaeDo reviewed Nov 28, 2025

View reviewed changes


		For the reporting (e.g. displaying the status of the work products) additional tooling is created.

		Guidance

	In this section a concept for the safety management will be discussed.
	In this section a concept for the Safety Management will be discussed.


		* planning of development for module and for platform projects

		#. :need:`Safety Manager <rl__safety_manager>`

Safety management update - Process #398

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Safety management update - Process #398

Uh oh!

Conversation

kroehnd commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Nov 19, 2025

Uh oh!

masc2023 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

PandaeDo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aschemmel-tech left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

aschemmel-tech left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

aschemmel-tech left a comment •

edited

Loading