The DO-178B and DO-178C standards are also published by the European Organisation for Civil Aviation Equipment (EUROCAE) as ED-12B and ED-12C respectively. The standards are identical in content and are hereafter only referred to using the DO-178 references.
DO-178B was published in 1992 and was superseded in 2011 by DO-178C, together with an additional standard DO-330 Software Tool Qualification Considerations.
The DO-178 standards requires that all airborne software is assigned a Design Assurance Level (DAL) according to the effects of a failure condition in the system. These levels range from the lowest E ‘No Effect’ to the highest A ‘Catastrophic’. The standards document a number of process objectives which vary according to the software level.
Testing tools for compliance with DO-178B and DO-178C objectives
QA Systems enables organisations to accelerate achieving DO-178B and DO-178C testing objectives with automated static analysis and software testing tools:
STATISCHE ANALYSE
INTEGRIERTE STATISCHE ANALYSE
Automatisierte Analyse mit Cantata synchronisiert
CANTATA TEST ARCHITECT
Software-Architektur: verstehen, definieren und kontrollieren
SOURCE-CODE-METRIKEN
Automatisierte Source-Code-Metriken für C/C++
SOFTWARE TESTS
CANTATA
Automatisierte Unit- und Integrationstests für C/C++-Code
CANTATA TEAM REPORTING
Add-on für die Zusammenarbeit von verteilten Teams
ADATEST 95
Automatisierte Unit- und Integrationstests für Ada-Code
Tool qualification
The DO-178 standards do not permit pre-certification of tools (such as the standards for which Cantata is certified by SGS-TÜV). On each project a DO-178 certification applicant must qualify the tools to be used on that particular project. QA Systems Dynamic and Static Analysis tools are categorized as DO-178 software verification tools.
The tool qualification process differs somewhat between DO-178B, and DO-178C (and its referenced standard DO-330 Software Tool Qualification Considerations).
Tool qualification kits for DO-178B and DO-178C are available to ease our customers’ path to certification. These kits provide the necessary qualification data and evidence required for qualification of Cantata for Software Levels E to A, together with guidance on the tool qualification process.
Please contact us for more information about tool qualification kits.
Verification for DO-178 compliance
DO-178 recommends low-level [unit] tests, Software Integration Tests and Hardware-Software Integration tests. Cantata enables developers to verify DO-178 compliant C and C++ code on host native and embedded target platforms.
Cantata helps accelerate compliance with the standard’s verification requirements by automating:
Our DO-178B and DO-178C Standard Briefings trace the verification objectives DO-178B and DO-178C, identifying the scope of those which are supported by Cantata and how the objectives are supported by Cantata.
Please contact us for more information on Cantata for DO-178B or DO-178C.
The DO-178C verification objectives by Level and where these are supported by Cantata are summarised in the tables below:
DO-178C Table A.6 Testing Outputs of Integration Process
| Objective | A | B | C | D | Cantata |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1: Executable Object code complies with high level requirements | S | S | S | S | Yes |
| 2: Executable Object Code is robust with high-level requirements | S | S | S | S | Yes |
| 3: Executable Object code complies with low level requirements | SI | SI | S | Yes | |
| 4: Executable Object code complies with low level requirements | SI | S | S | Yes | |
| 5: Executable Object Code is compatible with the target computer | S | S | S | S | Yes |
DO-178C Table A.7 Verification of the Verification Process Results
| Objective | A | B | C | D | Cantata |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1: Test procedures are correct | SI | S | S | Yes | |
| 2: Test Results are correct and discrepancies explained | SI | S | S | Yes | |
| 3: Test coverage of high level requirements is achieved | SI | S | S | S | Yes |
| 4: Test coverage of low level requirements is achieved | SI | S | S | Yes | |
| 5: Test coverage of software structure (modified condition/decision) | SI | Yes | |||
| 6: Test coverage of software structure (decision coverage) | SI | S | Yes | ||
| 7: Test coverage of software structure (statement coverage) | SI | S | S | Yes | |
| 8: Test coverage of software structure (data & control coupling) | SI | S | S | Yes |
| Key | |
|---|---|
| The objective should be satisfied with independence | SI |
| The objective should be satisfied | S |
Static Analysis for DO-178 compliance
The DO-178C Source Code analysis in Table A.5 are summarized in the table below:
DO-178C Table A.5 Verification if Outputs of Software Coding & Integration Processes
| Objective | A | B | C | D |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Source Code complies with low level requirements | SI | SI | S | – |
| 2. Source Code complies with software architecture | SI | S | S | – |
| 3. Source Code is verifiable | S | S | – | – |
| 4. Source Code conforms to standards | S | S | S | |
| 5. Source Code is traceable to low-level requirements | S | S | S | – |
| 6. Source Code is accurate and consistent | SI | S | S | – |
| 7. Output of software integration process is complete and correct | S | S | S | – |
| 8. Parameter Data Item File is correct and complete | SI | SI | S | S |
| 9. Verification of Parameter Data Item File is achieved | SI | SI | S | – |
| Key | |
|---|---|
| The objective should be satisfied with independence | SI |
| The objective should be satisfied | S |
