1 / 14

Honeywell Display Testing

Group Members: Jeremy Pager Ryan Hernandez Matt Lombardo Michael Santa Cruz Brad Simons. Honeywell Display Testing. Current Progress. Documentation (Matt Lombardo) SRS, SRDD, Test Plan Server (Ryan Hernandez) HGL CRC Communication Client (Jeremy Pager). Project Overview / Reminder.

hovan
Télécharger la présentation

Honeywell Display Testing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Group Members: Jeremy Pager Ryan Hernandez Matt Lombardo Michael Santa Cruz Brad Simons Honeywell Display Testing

  2. Current Progress • Documentation (Matt Lombardo) • SRS, SRDD, Test Plan • Server (Ryan Hernandez) • HGL • CRC • Communication • Client (Jeremy Pager)

  3. Project Overview / Reminder • The purpose – • Make sure primitives are being drawn correctly on flight display units with Honeywell’s new graphics module • The approach – • Setting up a client-server network between a remote PC and the graphics module • From the remote PC we can tell the graphics module to draw shapes and retrieve checksums to verify correctness

  4. Documentation • Honeywell’s protocol for doing documentation: • Requirements: SRS (System Requirement Specification) • Design: SRDD (System Requirement Design Document) • Testing: Test Plan • Goal: • Lower levels of documentation trace back to higher levels of documentation for requirement verification • Test Plan test cases -> SRDD requirements -> SRS requirements

  5. SRS - Overview • The SRS focuses on the system-level requirements (the “what”), non implementation specific. • System Overview • General System Requirements • Quality Requirements • System Interface Requirements • Hardware • Power-Up Processing, Built In Test, and Safety Requirements

  6. SRS – General System Requirements • Main focus of SRS: general system requirements • Provide abstract non implementation specific description of each requirement • Provide test cases for each requirement • Represented by “shall” statements, must be testable • Each “shall” statement has a trace tag

  7. SRDD - Overview • SRDD focuses on the lower-level implementation -specific requirements (the “how”) • It is a list of methods and classes that will eventually be implemented • Specific enough to explain exactly what a function does • Abstract enough so the programmer can implement the code anyway they want

  8. SRDD – Example Function • setPrimitive tells the AGM-200 which drawing mode to be in. • SRDD “shall” statements trace back to SRS

  9. Test Plan • We have not begun the test plan yet. • The format is not as rigid as the SRS and SRDD • All “shall” statements in the SRDD must be tested.

  10. Server – CRC Thread • Two Server Threads • CRC Calculation • Drawing HGL Primitives & Client Communication • Thread Communication • Mailboxes (interrupt driven) • Currently not working • CRC Thread Design • Continuously Calculate CRC • Send envelope reporting change in CRC calc.

  11. Server – HGL Thread • HGL Thread Design • Draw requested HGL primitive • Listen for CRC response • Check for inconsistencies • Report Errors and CRC calculation to client • Current Tasks • Working on dynamically drawing HGL primitives • Thread communication

  12. Server – Communication • TCP • Not working • Switching to UDP • Communication with HGL/CRC • Not working • Pack / Unpack RPCs • It compiles! • Who knows if it’s working?

  13. Client • Due to our TCP issues, we’ve decided to use UDP instead. • Will require network layer in Java program to be rewritten. • Luckily, it’s a layered design, so changing the protocol won’t take much effort.

  14. Summary • All our issues are environment related • Visual Studio build path / linking • Setting up the AGM’s process database • Other AGM environmental factors • Last week, we couldn’t get code working that we have seen previously working. • Our mentor: “My project was way easier”

More Related