From 3f2e9ba46331669b93509f864867f9023e620e7f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Philipp Ahmann Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2025 15:28:30 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Add manual testing to verification plan template Signed-off-by: Philipp Ahmann --- .../verification/guidance/verification_plan_template.rst | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/process/process_areas/verification/guidance/verification_plan_template.rst b/process/process_areas/verification/guidance/verification_plan_template.rst index 3e84dd5245..6e019a0943 100644 --- a/process/process_areas/verification/guidance/verification_plan_template.rst +++ b/process/process_areas/verification/guidance/verification_plan_template.rst @@ -150,6 +150,12 @@ Verification Plan Template This section describes how tests will be executed and the procedures for analyzing the results. It should outline the tools and processes used for test execution and reporting. + Manual test execution + ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + + The automation rate for test case execution is expected to be above 99%. + For manual test execution it should be described how to re-execute tests manually and how to report potential issues. + Test Selection and Regression Testing ------------------------------------- From 65c9f862678496cc3fb7abd6ffdb3d892382c671 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Philipp Ahmann Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 10:46:53 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Add manual test execution to verification guide and concept Signed-off-by: Philipp Ahmann --- .../verification/guidance/verification_guideline.rst | 9 +++++++++ .../process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst | 2 +- 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/process/process_areas/verification/guidance/verification_guideline.rst b/process/process_areas/verification/guidance/verification_guideline.rst index b85f7f6bb4..80cddd4f0f 100644 --- a/process/process_areas/verification/guidance/verification_guideline.rst +++ b/process/process_areas/verification/guidance/verification_guideline.rst @@ -96,9 +96,18 @@ In order to check the test results for the impact of a change or addition, it is execute affected test cases locally upfront using the execution framework of the build tooling following basically the steps the CI does locally. +Automated tests can also be executed locally, as the sources and binaries are available for re-execution. +Failing test cases during re-execution can be reported following the guide :need:`gd_temp__problem_template`. + + +Execution of manual test cases +^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ + There may be the need for limited number of manually executed test cases. These manually executed test cases are execution script driven, where a script guides through the test cases and reports the result in the same logging format as automated tests do. +This enables parsable execution logs which can be used in automated test result collection. +Failing test cases during manual execution are reported by following the guide :need:`gd_temp__problem_template`. Reporting of failing test cases ------------------------------- diff --git a/process/process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst b/process/process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst index b58aa1e565..0f5c83685d 100644 --- a/process/process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst +++ b/process/process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ Also their execution may differ whether it is a QM or ASIL rated test case. The rigor is described in the implementation of :need:`wp__verification_plan`. -Automated test cases should contain further information about which methods have been applied. +Automated test cases (as well as manual, where applicable) should contain further information about which methods have been applied. The corresponding guidance is given here: :need:`gd_guidl__verification_guide`. The identifier of the respective method is to be used as meta data (*TestType* and *DerivationTechnique*). From 2f47a0baa7bbcd40805a454b5a80f91cce91af14 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Philipp Ahmann <2428012+pahmann@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2025 14:14:13 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 3/3] should shall be shall Signed-off-by: Philipp Ahmann <2428012+pahmann@users.noreply.github.com> --- process/process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/process/process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst b/process/process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst index 0f5c83685d..541f13321c 100644 --- a/process/process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst +++ b/process/process_areas/verification/verification_concept.rst @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ Also their execution may differ whether it is a QM or ASIL rated test case. The rigor is described in the implementation of :need:`wp__verification_plan`. -Automated test cases (as well as manual, where applicable) should contain further information about which methods have been applied. +Automated test cases (as well as manual, where applicable) shall contain further information about which methods have been applied. The corresponding guidance is given here: :need:`gd_guidl__verification_guide`. The identifier of the respective method is to be used as meta data (*TestType* and *DerivationTechnique*).