Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #32271
| From | Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.electronics.design, comp.arch.embedded |
| Subject | Re: Validation in non-regulated industries/markets |
| Date | 2024-11-12 17:28 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <vh0rsf$1redv$2@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <vgk30d$323tl$1@dont-email.me> <vgkn3l$358tg$1@dont-email.me> <8b52b8a7-7f5b-0526-6df0-2d1219e3a179@Strand_in_London.Gov.UK> <vh0re9$1redv$1@dont-email.me> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
On 11/12/2024 5:21 PM, Don Y wrote: > Validation exists for a reason -- separate from and subsequent to > product testing. Because these sorts of SNAFUs happen all the > time! [Sidetracked by my anecdotes... :< ] Anyway, the question posed is how to address the "product as delivered" (in terms of hardware) requirement inherent (and mandated) in validation for those markets where there are no "rules". How much can you alter the hardware and still, in good conscience (and, more practically, in having faith in your results), attest to the fact that you have verified the product is what it SHOULD be, despite any deficiencies in the specification(s)? When are you rationalizing equivalence just because a true "as delivered" environment is not possible? [How do you test subsystems, on which you rely, inside an MCU without a bond-out option? Or, do you simply say that anything that can't be tested need NOT be tested -- and not even make an attempt to do so? E.g., Why do we checksum internal FLASH? Can you simulate a failure -- without altering the hardware -- to be able to verify that you can detect it?]
Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Validation in non-regulated industries/markets Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-11-07 21:10 -0700
Re: Validation in non-regulated industries/markets David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-11-08 10:53 +0100
Re: Validation in non-regulated industries/markets "Niocláiſín Cóilín de Ġloſtéir" <Master_Fontaine_is_dishonest@Strand_in_London.Gov.UK> - 2024-11-13 00:27 +0100
Re: Validation in non-regulated industries/markets Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-11-12 17:21 -0700
Re: Validation in non-regulated industries/markets Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-11-12 17:28 -0700
Re: Validation in non-regulated industries/markets David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2024-11-13 09:58 +0100
Re: Validation in non-regulated industries/markets bitrex <user@example.net> - 2024-11-13 14:18 -0500
Re: Validation in non-regulated industries/markets Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-11-13 12:59 -0700
Re: Validation in non-regulated industries/markets Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-11-13 14:42 -0700
csiph-web