Dynamic BIST Configuration for Automotive Safety Compliance
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional solutions face challenges in configuring and performing built-in self-tests (BISTs) for safety-critical automotive systems, particularly in achieving parallelism and ensuring compliance with stringent safety requirements like ASIL-D.
Innovation Solution
The implementation of a dynamically configurable hierarchical safety supervisor model, which includes a local supervisor and a global supervisor, dynamically determines the required coverage level and parallelism for BISTs on subsystems, and performs these tests at power-on, power-off, or runtime to verify compliance with safety standards.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If conventional BIST configuration methods are used, then safety compliance can be achieved, but testing parallelism and efficiency are limited
Solution Approach 1:
The system is divided into multiple independent supervisor components (local supervisors and a global supervisor) that can operate autonomously and in parallel. Each supervisor manages specific subsystems, allowing concurrent execution of multiple BIST operations across different subsystems, thereby improving testing efficiency while maintaining manageable complexity through modular organization.
Solution Approach 2:
The BIST configuration is made dynamic through runtime determination of coverage levels and parallelism degrees. The supervisor components can adaptively adjust testing parameters based on system state, safety requirements, and resource availability, enabling efficient parallel testing without requiring complex static configuration for all possible scenarios.
2Reliability
If comprehensive BIST coverage is implemented, then safety requirement compliance improves, but boot time and testing duration increase
Solution Approach 1:
The system implements dynamic coverage level determination that applies partial testing actions based on actual safety requirements. Rather than uniformly applying maximum coverage to all subsystems, the supervisor components selectively determine appropriate coverage levels for each subsystem, achieving necessary safety compliance while reducing unnecessary testing time during boot and operation.
Solution Approach 2:
The testing parameters (coverage levels, parallelism degree, testing depth) are made changeable at runtime based on system state and safety requirements. This allows the system to adjust testing intensity dynamically, performing comprehensive tests when safety demands it while reducing testing scope when acceptable, thereby balancing reliability requirements with time constraints during boot and operation.
3Productivity
If dynamic configuration of BIST parameters is implemented, then testing efficiency improves, but control and configuration complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The supervisor components autonomously determine and configure BIST parameters (coverage levels, parallelism degree, testing timing) based on system state and safety requirements, without requiring manual configuration for each scenario. This self-service capability enables dynamic adaptation to different operating conditions while simplifying operation, as the system automatically manages the complexity of parameter configuration.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback mechanisms where supervisor components monitor system state, safety requirement compliance, and testing results, then use this information to dynamically adjust BIST configuration. This closed-loop control enables efficient adaptive testing while managing configuration complexity through automated decision-making based on real-time system feedback rather than manual intervention.
Data Source
AI summary
Various embodiments include components (e.g., a processor in a vehicle advanced driver assistance system) configured to identify subsystems that require testing in order to verify their compliance with a safety requirement. The components may determine whether verification of compliance requires that the subsystems be tested at PON, at POFF, during runtime or a combination thereof, dynamically determine the achievable parallelism for testing the identified subsystems, dynamically determine coverage level requirements for performing or executing built in self tests (BISTs) on each identified subsystem, and perform or execute the BISTs on the subsystems at the determined level of parallel and at the determined coverage level.