SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Year 2000 (Y2K) Embedded Systems & Infrastructure Problem

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: gamesmistress who wrote (516)7/18/1998 5:27:00 PM
From: John Mansfield  Read Replies (4) of 618
 
'How do you go about testing embeded chips for Y2K compliance
>issues? I refer to devices that have no (aparent) external way of
>changing (or even showing) the date.

There's a few approaches; none are very good or time efficient.

If you have the inhouse capability, the parent device might be able to be
bench tested if your I&C group has the right test equipment for that
particular device. Integrated circuitry is tested, reprogrammed (PROM's)
and analyzed all the time in large I&C shops. However, unless you have
system redundancy, spare devices, or the ability to remove the entire
suspect control system from production, this option isn't feasible. In all
cases, it's time consuming.

There's a company by the name of B-Tree (www.btree.com) that is using some
proprietary tools to do white box / black box testing (basically, testing
I/O on individual circuits and chips; dummying in dates). This is not
cheap, easy, or (again) time effective. Nor is it foolproof. I also think
I saw something the other day about another startup company that is
beginning to do the same thing - check the search engines.

The above being said, for those devices and components that make up your
"process critical" control systems, it's absolutely imperative that some
type of inhouse testing assurance be obtained. Don't make the mistake of
taking a vendor's word for Y2k compliance / readiness.

>Is testing at all possible, or is it just a case of contingency planning?

In the case of those components where there's not a terribly viable way of
obtaining the assurance that you need, this situation obviously points to
the real need for contingency planning. You may *never* get some of your
components off of the Y2k 'suspect' list; the 'suspect' list should form
the basis for your contingency planning.

While I'm on the subject, don't wait until mid-1999 to think about
contingency planning. Do it in parallel with your current Y2k program
efforts as your 'suspect' list develops.

hth

--
Rick Cowles (Public PGP key on request)

_____

'Subject:
Re: How to Test embeded chips
Date:
Sat, 18 Jul 1998 14:57:36 -0400
From:
rcowles@waterw.com (Rick Cowles)
Organization:
What's that?
Newsgroups:
comp.software.year-2000
References:
1
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext