Introduction

Automotive semiconductor development is increasingly integrating functional safety (FuSa) requirements in compliance with ISO 26262. A major challenge arises when the FuSa lifecycle must run in parallel with the ASIC development flow. The complexity of aligning these two processes without introducing inefficiencies or compliance risks is a key issue for safety teams and development engineers.

Problem Statement

The functional safety lifecycle mandates a systematic approach to identifying hazards, implementing safety mechanisms, and ensuring compliance with stringent safety goals. Meanwhile, ASIC development follows a well-defined flow that emphasizes performance, power, and area optimization. The difficulty arises when both processes must be executed in parallel without causing delays, misalignment in safety artifacts, or rework due to missing safety requirements.

In traditional development, the FuSa activities often lag behind hardware implementation, leading to costly redesigns and non-compliance risks. Conversely, enforcing a rigid sequential flow may lead to longer development cycles, impacting time-to-market. Striking the right balance between these two lifecycles is crucial for efficiency and compliance.

Key Challenges

1. Requirement Alignment & Traceability: Ensuring that safety requirements are correctly traced across ASIC development phases without delaying design implementation.
2. Late-stage FuSa Interventions: Identifying safety requirements after RTL implementation can lead to significant design changes, increasing cost and development time.
3. Verification Bottlenecks: Parallel execution creates challenges in aligning safety verification (e.g., FMEDA, fault injection) with ASIC validation milestones.
4. Communication Gaps: Functional safety teams and ASIC engineers often operate in silos, leading to mismatched expectations and uncoordinated reviews.
5. Tool & Process Integration: FuSa work products (e.g., safety analysis, FTA, FMEDA) must be synchronized with ASIC development tools and methodologies to avoid inefficiencies.
6. Iterative Nature of ASIC Development: Frequent changes in design specifications can impact safety assessments, requiring continuous updates to safety analyses and reviews.

Conclusion

The challenge of parallel execution of the FuSa lifecycle with ASIC development demands careful planning, robust processes, and cross-functional collaboration. Without a structured approach, projects may suffer from inefficiencies, increased costs, and non-compliance risks. The next blog will explore solutions to effectively integrate these lifecycles, ensuring both functional safety and efficient ASIC development.

If you need expert guidance on integrating the Functional Safety lifecycle with ASIC development, feel free to reach out to us.