Android Automotive (AAOS) - Porsche implementation and timeline - "...failed due to a bug within the test itself."

[CHP]

"Android Automotive (AAOS), marketed as Cars with Google built-in or colloquially just Google built-in, is an open-source operating system designed for use in vehicle dashboards, based on Android. Introduced in March 2017,it was developed by Google and Intel.

In October 2023, Porsche announced a collaboration with Google which will bring Android Automotive to the carmaker’s future vehicles. Google Maps, Google Assistant, and a wide variety of apps will be available through the Google Play Store.

Volvo, Renault, Ford and GM are using AAOS with GAS. In order to communicate with in-vehicle networks (IVI) such as the CAN bus, Android Automotive uses the Vehicle Hardware Abstraction Layer (VHAL), which serves as a bridge between the vehicle's hardware and software components.

Vehicles with Android Automotive (without GAS):
Porsche Macan (2024+)
Porsche Taycan (2025+)"
from Wikipedia

From Porsche 2024 (https://opensource.porsche.com/blog/android-open-source)

“My team diligently works together with our suppliers to make sure that all tests are completed successfully. During our joint work, we encountered several unit tests that have failed due to a bug within the test itself. By reporting the bugs directly to the community, not only do we benefit from future fixes, but so do all our partners, such as Audi, whose Android team is currently doing the same integration work. Breaking new ground, creating synergies between teams, and fostering collaboration is right up my ally! “

MACAN EV production began in May 2024


In summary, in late 2023, Porsche confirmed collaboration with Google, in 2024 (no time stamp on document as far as I can see) Porsche reported problems with Compatibility Test Suite for testing parts from third party manufactures and MACAN EV production began in May 2024.

This feels rushed and reading above statement, it seems some of us are actively participating in community work. My post (summary of findings in the internet) should be interpreted within the context of the recent poll (Macan EV Poll: Type and frequency of software-related issues you have had with your vehicle?).

Sponsored

 

[sor]

Issues with unit tests are not uncommon, and in fact you very often find unit tests where the test writer made a bunch of assumptions. Then someone comes along with a different implementation of the interface, or passing different values to a method, code which works perfectly fine, and find out the test is hard coding a check for something, or was written to a specification implementation.

The fixing of the test itself is usually pretty minor effort in the scheme of things and doesn’t block progress.

That’s not to discount the importance of unit tests, in an ideal world we would have 100% coverage of all units with spec driven tests. Just to say that the fact Porsche found and fixed some problems with the AAOS test suite is not much to be alarmed about, and in fact seems like a good thing, how open source should work. You hit some edge case nobody else has and you make it better. That doesn’t mean the feature wasn’t working before, or that contributing improvements blows the timeline. The fact that they mention what they fixed implies that those fixes are included. You can also do testing outside of a unit test suite.

Other cars were already using AAOS. If anything it just throws question on those pre-2024 vehicles for being qualified without the fixes for these tests. But tomorrow new issues will be found and that is the software development lifecycle.

 

[PrudentOcean]

sor is entirely correct, unit tests validate the behavior of the code being tested, confirming that a given input produces the expected output. This necessarily hard-codes both the input and output, and if the implementation of the code being tested changes, then the assumptions in the unit test may no longer be correct and cause the unit test to fail.

But it could also mean that the change in the code broke something and that the unit test caught the incorrect behavior.

 

[byebye]

And thanks to the number of options available, there are so many configurations both software and hardware that make the system so hard to test and fix...
When complexity generates too much complexity, maybe it's time for Porsche to think differently?

Sponsored