Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Metrics and Criteria for Quality Assessment of Testable Hw/Sw Systems Architectures

  • Published:
Journal of Electronic Testing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to present a novel methodology for assessing the quality of architecture solutions of hw/sw systems, with particular emphasis on testability. Criteria and metrics for quality assessment are proposed and used to assist the design team in selecting a ‘best-fitted’ architecture that satisfies not only functional requirements, but also test requirements. The methodology makes use of object-oriented modeling techniques. Near-optimum clustering of methods and attributes into objects is carried out, in such a way that objects with moderate complexity, low coupling and high functional autonomy, result. The main features of the methodology are ascertained through a case study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. D.D. Gajski et al., Specification and Design of Embedded Systems, Prentice Hall, 1994.

  2. L. Lavagno, A. Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, and H. Hsieh, Embedded System Codesign: Synthesis and Verification, Nato ASI-Series, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 213–242, 1996.

  3. M. Calha, J.P. Teixeira, and I.C. Teixeira, “HW/SW Specification Using OOM Techniques,” Proc. of 7th IEEE Int. Workshop on Rapid Systems Prototyping, 1996, pp. 96–101.

  4. J. Rumbaugh, “What is a Method?,” Oct. 95, http://www.rational.com/support/techpapers/omt/joop95 10.html.

  5. R. Gupta, C.N. Coelho, and G. De Michelli, “Program Implementation Schemes for Hw/Sw Systems,” IEEE Design and Test of Computers, Vol. 27, No. 1, Jan. 1994.

  6. W. Wolf, “Hardware/Software Co-Design of Embedded Systems,” Proc. IEEE, Vol. 82, No. 7, 1994.

  7. J.M. Daveau, G.F. Marchioro, T.B. Ismail, and A. Jerraya, “COSMOS: An SDL Based Hw/Sw Codesign Environment,” Current Issues in Elect. Mod., Vol. 8, Co-design and Coverification, Dec. 1996.

  8. K. Buchenrieder and C. Veith, “CODES: A Practical Concurrent Design Environment,” Int. Workshop on HW/SW Codesign, Oct. 1992.

  9. P.H. Chou, R.B. Ortega, and G. Borrielo, “The CHINOOK Hw/Sw Co-Synthesis System,” Proc. ISSS, Sept. 1995.

  10. R. Camposano, D. Knapp, and D. MacMillen, A Review of Hw Synthesis Techniques, Nato ASI-Series, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 367–396, 1996.

  11. H.P.E. Vranken, M.F. Wittman, and R.C. van Wuijtswinkel, “Design for Testability in Hardware-Software Systems,” IEEE Design & Test, Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 79–87, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  12. K. Thearling and J. Abraham, “An Easily Functional Level Testability Measure,” IEEE Int. Test Conference, 1989, pp. 381–390.

  13. X. Gu, K. Kuchcinski, and Z. Peng, “Testability Analysis and Improvement from VHDL Behavioral Specifications,” Proc. EuroDAC, 1994, pp. 644–649.

  14. Chung-Hsing and D.G. Saab, “A Novel Behavioral Testability Measure,” IEEE Trans. on Computer Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, Vol. 12, Dec. 1993.

  15. M. Vahid and A. Orailoglu, “Testability Metrics for Synthesis of Self-Testable Designs and Effective Test Plans,” IEEE; VLSI Test Symposium, 1995, pp. 170–175.

  16. C. Papachristou and J. Carletta, “Test Synthesis in the Behavioral Domain,” Proc. Int. Test Conference, 1995, pp. 693–702.

  17. M.H. Gentil, D. Crestani, A. El Rhalibi, and C. Durant, “A New Testability Measure: Description and Evaluation,” IEEE VLSI Test Symposium, 1994, pp. 421–426.

  18. V. Chickermane et al., “Addressing Design for Testability at the Architectural Level,” IEEE Transactions on CAD of Int. Circs. and Syst., Vol. 13, No. 7, 1994.

  19. J.R. Wallack and R. Dandapani, “Coverage Metrics for Functional Tests,” Proc. IEEE VLSI Test Symposium, 1994, pp. 176–181.

  20. Y. Le Traon and C. Robach, “From Hardware to Software Testability,” Proc Int. Test Conference, 1995, pp. 710–719.

  21. R.S. Pressman, Software Engineering: A Practitioner' Approach, McGrawHill, 1997.

  22. ”Software Quality Metrics for Object-Oriented System Environments,” Software Assurance Technology Center (SATC), 1997, http://www.satc.gsfc.24.gov/SACT/PAPERS.

  23. B. Kitchenham and S.L. Pfleeger, “Software Quality: The Elusive Target,” IEEE Software, pp. 12–21, Jan. 1996.

  24. G. Booch, Object-Oriented Design with Applications, The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Co., Inc., 1991.

  25. J. Rumbaugh, M. Blaha, W. Premerlani, F. Eddy, and W. Lorensen, Object-Oriented Modeling and Design, Prentice Hall, 1991.

  26. ”System Design Technology Roadmap,” Europe' Road to the Future, Version Final, EDAA, Jan. 1998.

  27. L.H. Goldstein, “Controllability/Observability Analysis of Digital Circuits,” Vol. CAS-26, Sept. 1979.

  28. Y. Zorian et al., “Embedded Core Test,” IEEE Design & Test of Computers, 1997.

  29. C.E. Pereira et al., “Applying Active-Objects to the Development of Real-Time Systems on a C++ QNX Environment,” Proc. Workshop on Object-Oriented Technologies and Real-Time Systems on the 10th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP), Linz, July 1996.

  30. Paradigm+, Version 2.0, Protosoft Inc., 1994.

  31. “UML--Unified Modeling Language,” version 1.0, Rational Software Corporation, Jan. 1997, http://www.rational.com.

  32. O.P. Dias, I.C. Teixeira, and J.P. Teixeira, “Architectural Quality Evaluation for High-Level DFT,” Proc. IFIP Int. Workshop of Logic and Architecture Syntesis, pp. 185–193, Dec. 1997.

  33. B. Hendrickson and R. Leland, “The Chaco User' Guide--Version 2.0,” Technical Report SAND95-2344, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM 87185-1110, July 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  34. S. Baase, Computer Algorithms--Introduction to Design and Analysis, 2nd edition, Addison-Wesley, 1988.

  35. “Complexity Measurements,” http://www.mccabe.com/appnote/complex.html.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Escola Superior de Tecnologia, Instituto Politécnico de Setúbal, Rua Vale de Chaves, 2900, Setúbal, Portugal

    Octávio P. Dias

  2. Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Instituto de Engenharia de Sistemas e Computadores, Apartado 13 069, 1017, Lisboa Codex, Portugal

    Isabel C. Teixeira & J. Paulo Teixeira

Authors
  1. Octávio P. Dias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Isabel C. Teixeira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Paulo Teixeira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dias, O.P., Teixeira, I.C. & Teixeira, J.P. Metrics and Criteria for Quality Assessment of Testable Hw/Sw Systems Architectures. Journal of Electronic Testing 14, 149–158 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008374027849

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008374027849

Search

Navigation