Over the past few decades, the automobile industry has evolved from a simple means of transportation to a complex machine that resembles a smartphone on wheels. This transformation is due to the integration of advanced technologies and the adoption of a more sophisticated approach to design and development.

The evolution of the car can be traced back to the early 20th century when the first automobiles were developed. These vehicles were simple and utilitarian, designed primarily for transportation from point A to point B. However, as technology advanced, so did the car. In the 1950s and 1960s, we saw the emergence of advanced safety features such as seat belts, airbags, and anti-lock brakes. By the 1980s, we began to see the introduction of onboard computers, which enabled more advanced engine management and diagnostics. In the 1990s, vehicles saw the integration of more sophisticated electronic systems, such as electronic stability control (ESC) and advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS).

In the 21st century, the car has undergone a massive transformation. Today’s vehicles are equipped with advanced features that were once reserved for high-end luxury cars.

The percentage of car production costs attributed to electronic control systems and automotive software has been consistently rising over the years. This upward trend is clearly depicted in the Statista data (https://www.statista.com/statistics/277931/automotive-electronics-cost-as-a-share-of-total-car-cost-worldwide/) shown in the following figure, which has been monitoring this development since 1970:

Figure 1.1 – Electronics system as percent of total car cost

This increasing complexity of automotive systems has presented a challenge for the industry in terms of software development.

The evolution of the car into a smart, connected, and autonomous machine is driven by several factors, which include the following:

• The growing demand for advanced safety features
• The need for more efficient and environmentally friendly transportation
• The desire for a more convenient and connected driving experience

The adoption of advanced technologies such as sensors, software systems, and connectivity has enabled car manufacturers to deliver on these demands, creating a new era of smart, autonomous, and connected vehicles.

With the integration of new technologies such as ADAS and connected car features, the amount of software that needs to be developed and integrated into vehicles has grown significantly.

The comparison to the Apollo mission highlights the significant increase in complexity of modern cars. While the Apollo spacecraft had only a limited number of systems that needed to be managed, modern cars can contain up to 100 or more ECUs, sensors, and actuators, all of which need to communicate seamlessly within very tight time constraints with one another to ensure proper functioning. Additionally, modern cars are highly connected devices that require sophisticated software and networking capabilities, further adding to their complexity. This increased complexity allows modern cars to offer advanced features and functionality but also requires more sophisticated maintenance and repair processes.

Having discussed the evolution and complexity of automotive software, let’s shift our focus to one of the essential components that enable modern cars to function effectively – the ECU.

What is an ECU?

Before we move any further, we need to understand what an automotive ECU is. This is a computer – comprising a printed circuit board (PCB) with a microcontroller and various electronic components – that controls various functions in a vehicle. These functions may include engine management, transmission control, climate control, power steering, and brakes. Here are some examples of automotive ECUs:

• Engine control module (ECM): The ECM is responsible for managing the engine’s performance, including fuel injection, ignition timing, and emissions control.
• Transmission control module (TCM): The TCM manages the operation of the transmission, including gear selection, shift timing, and torque converter lock-up.
• Body control module (BCM): The BCM controls various functions related to the vehicle’s body and interior, such as lighting, climate control, door locks, and audio systems.
• Anti-lock braking system (ABS) control module: The ABS control module manages the operation of the ABS, which helps to prevent skidding and maintain control of the vehicle during braking.
• Battery management system (BMS): The BMS’s primary function is to monitor, control, and optimize the performance of the vehicle’s battery pack. It also ensures all battery cells within the pack are charged and discharged uniformly, preventing the overcharging of certain cells and maximizing the overall battery capacity.

Some examples of these components are shown in the following figure:

Figure 1.2 – Examples of ECUs in a vehicle

Overall, automotive ECUs play a critical role in the operation of modern vehicles, providing precise control over various systems and ensuring optimal performance, efficiency, and safety. As automotive ECUs rely heavily on complex software to perform their functions, we first need to understand the software development aspect to comprehend the nuances of ECU operation and design.

Introducing automotive software development

Automotive software development is a critical component of the continued innovation and success of the automotive industry. It involves creating and maintaining software systems used in various types of automobiles, cars, trucks, buses, and other automobiles. These software systems are responsible for multiple tasks, such as engine management, navigation, entertainment, and safety features. Therefore, engineers in this field must have expertise in embedded systems, real-time programming, control systems, and communication protocols to create reliable and safe software systems.

It is a highly specialized field that requires close collaboration with other members of the automotive development team, such as electrical and mechanical engineers and quality assurance specialists, to ensure seamless integration of the software systems into the vehicle and meet the end users’ needs. Clean software architecture principles can help address the challenges of this complex field by creating a system that is easy to maintain, modify, and evolve while being resilient to change.

Note

Clean architecture in software design refers to a structured approach that prioritizes clarity, separation of concerns, and maintainability. It emphasizes the organization of code in a way that minimizes dependencies, allowing for easy modifications and testing. Clean architecture fosters systems that are adaptable, scalable, and easy to comprehend.

It’s a challenging field but plays a critical role in the continuous success and innovation of the automotive industry. Before we discuss advancements in this field, let’s first understand traditional automotive software development.

Understanding traditional software development

Traditional automotive software development involves a wide variety of ECUs with different hardware and software, which can make it difficult to ensure that all components work together efficiently. Each supplier has its own software architecture definitions, development methodology, and interfaces for ECUs, resulting in fragmented and non-standardized software components (SWCs) across the automotive industry. This approach had several limitations, including the following:

• Limited reusability: SWCs developed for one vehicle or system may not be reusable in another, leading to increased development costs and a longer time to market, if a similar functionality is required on another platform.
• Integration time: The integration of different SWCs can be a time-consuming and expensive process, particularly if the components were not designed to work together from the beginning.
• Time to market: The time to market for new vehicles and features can be long and costly, particularly when traditional automotive software development methods are used. This can lead to missed opportunities and lost revenue for manufacturers and suppliers.
• Complex supply chain: The rising complexity of software implementations is closely linked to the increasing complexity of supply chains. In this context, software developers design their components based on the requirement definitions provided by original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) or Tier 1 suppliers, who are responsible for their integration at a later stage.
• Rigidity: Automotive software is often monolithic and inflexible. Also, it is very hard to adapt to changing requirements and technologies.

Traditional automotive software development was fragmented, non-standardized, and costly, making it challenging to develop high-quality software and meet the growing demands of the automotive industry. An example of this type of non-standardized architecture is shown in the following figure:

Figure 1.3 – Example of non-standardized software architecture

Thus, AUTOSAR was introduced to address these limitations and promote more efficient, effective, and standardized automotive software development. In the following section, we discuss a case study to illustrate this point.

Note on the evolution of automotive software standardization

There were early efforts to standardize automotive software both within individual companies and through collaborations between various entities, such as OSEK/VDX and HIS. These initiatives aimed to address specific aspects of software architecture, such as operating systems and diagnostics. Despite these efforts, they were often narrow in focus and lacked the integration needed for modern vehicle systems. This led to the development of AUTOSAR, a comprehensive standard that addresses all layers of automotive software architecture, enabling better scalability, interoperability, and reusability across different manufacturers and vehicle platforms.

Case study – Replacing an MCU and exchanging microcontroller drivers

Let’s consider an example of a company wanting to upgrade an ECU, which was typically designed and implemented using proprietary software and hardware architectures, with little or no standardization across different car manufacturers. The microcontroller deployed in an ECU was typically bespoke and tailored to the car manufacturer and the specific model, and any alteration to it would necessitate extensive modifications to both the hardware and software aspects.

Suppose the company wants to replace the microcontroller of the ECU with a more advanced microcontroller. In that case, they would need to design a new hardware board that is compatible with the new microcontroller, which would likely involve changing the pin assignments and other circuitry.

With a similar architecture to that shown in Figure 1.3, most of the software would need to be rewritten or modified to adapt to the new microcontroller’s peripheral interfaces, and architecture. This would require a significant investment in time, money, and resources, depending on the complexity of the ECU.

In summary, prior to the advent of AUTOSAR, altering the microcontroller of an automotive ECU represented a formidable task, necessitating considerable technical knowledge and regulatory expertise. The lack of standardization across automotive manufacturers compounded the issue, making it difficult to devise a universal solution. Moreover, the intricate nature of the software and hardware involved rendered any attempts to upgrade or modify an ECU a substantial challenge, requiring significant effort and resources. With the advent of AUTOSAR, there was a paradigm shift as it allowed software to be abstracted from not just the microcontroller but the entirety of the ECU and vehicle architecture. This enables developers to write applications that communicate with other software, fully abstracted from aspects such as the ECU architecture, endianness, bus architecture, signal packing and protocol, and vehicle gateways.

It’s worth noting that our focus has primarily been on the benefits of AUTOSAR in relation to microcontroller replacement in this context. However, the benefits of AUTOSAR are far more comprehensive. Beyond facilitating microcontroller substitution, AUTOSAR’s broad reach positively affects numerous other aspects of automotive software and hardware, making it a more efficient and flexible solution in the realm of automotive technology.

AUTOSAR is an open and standardized software architecture for the automotive industry. It was developed by a consortium of automotive manufacturers, suppliers, and tool developers. The aim is to create an industry standard for automotive software architectures that is open and accessible to all. The standard is designed to meet the technical goals of the automotive software industry: modularity, scalability, transferability, and function reusability.

The main objective of AUTOSAR is to develop a standard architecture that can be used across different automotive domains, such as powertrain, chassis control, body, and safety. This standardization aims to enable SWCs from different suppliers to work together seamlessly, reduce development costs, and facilitate the reusability of SWCs. It also helps in managing the increasing complexity of electrical and electronic systems, as well as ensuring their quality and reliability.

Here’s how the different components of the ecosystem work:

• OEMs: They are responsible for setting ECU software requirements and choosing Tier 1 suppliers to deliver the hardware and SWCs. By adopting AUTOSAR, OEMs ensure compliance with safety and regulatory standards while promoting modular, reusable, and scalable software development for seamless integration and compatibility across various automotive systems and suppliers.
• Tier 1 suppliers: A Tier 1 supplier is a company that directly supplies components or systems. It can be hardware or software to an OEM for use in vehicle production. These suppliers are considered at the top of the automotive supply chain and are responsible for providing high-quality and reliable components that meet the OEM’s specifications and requirements. Examples of Tier 1 suppliers in the automotive industry include companies that provide engines, transmissions, braking systems, steering systems, and electronics components such as infotainment systems and ECUs.
• Standard software vendors: Standard software vendors provide AUTOSAR-compliant software modules, such as communication stacks and diagnostic services, that can be easily integrated and interchanged with other SWCs. The standard software is developed following the AUTOSAR standards and can be used by Tier 1 suppliers to build more complex software modules.
• Semiconductor manufacturers: Semiconductor manufacturers in the automotive industry provide the electronic components. They ensure that future hardware and software needs of the automotive industry are met.

The AUTOSAR standard is developed and maintained through a collaborative effort involving its partners, who ensure that it remains relevant and up to date by considering the necessary use cases to support the roadmaps of users. Partners are grouped based on their membership type, with varying levels of involvement in the standard’s development, implementation, and usage. This approach encourages diverse stakeholder participation and reflects the needs and perspectives of the entire automotive ecosystem. The collaborative nature of AUTOSAR has been instrumental in its success, enabling it to become the industry standard for automotive software architectures. The main categories are as follows:

• Core partners: The core partners are BMW Group, Bosch, Continental, Daimler AG, Ford, General Motors, PSA Group, Toyota, Volkswagen Group, and Volvo Group. They were the initial members of the partnership and provided the funding and resources required to develop the AUTOSAR standard.
• Premium partners: A group of companies who are members of the AUTOSAR development partnership and have made significant contributions to the development and promotion of the AUTOSAR standard. Premium partners have a higher level of involvement and influence in the partnership than regular members and benefit from additional collaboration opportunities and early access to the latest AUTOSAR specifications and releases.
• Development partners: Development partners play an important role in the partnership by sharing their knowledge, expertise, and resources to help shape the future of the automotive industry.
• Associate partners: Associate partners have a lower level of involvement than core partners and premium partners, but still benefit from collaboration opportunities and access to the latest AUTOSAR specifications and release.

In summary, AUTOSAR enables all the stakeholders in the ECU development process to work together effectively by providing a common language and standardized framework. This promotes interoperability, scalability, and reuse of SWCs across different car manufacturers and reduces development time and costs while improving software quality and reliability.

Impact on traditional software development

AUTOSAR addresses the limitations of traditional automotive software development by providing a standardized approach. By promoting modularity, standardization, and scalability, AUTOSAR has made it easier to develop high-quality software that meets the increasingly demanding needs of the automotive industry. The success of AUTOSAR is evident in its widespread adoption as the industry standard for automotive software architectures.

Here are some ways in which AUTOSAR addresses the limitations of traditional software development:

• Common platform: It provides a common platform and architecture for software development, enabling collaboration between different suppliers and manufacturers.
• Modular design: It promotes modularity and standardization, making it easier to reuse SWCs across different projects and adapt to changing requirements and technologies.
• Cost-effective integration: The standardized approach to software development that AUTOSAR takes has made it easier and more cost-effective to integrate different SWCs.
• Safety and security: The framework for implementing safety and security concepts in automotive software helps to ensure the safety and security of vehicles on the road.
• Interoperability: It defines a common methodology for communication and enables ECUs from different suppliers to interoperate seamlessly.
• Consistency: The consistent approach to software development makes it easier to ensure the interoperability, maintainability, and scalability of SWCs.
• Flexibility: It promotes a modular and flexible approach to software development, making it easier to adapt to changing requirements and technologies.

In the next section, we will examine the methods used by AUTOSAR to address the limitations of traditional automotive software development. We will investigate how AUTOSAR’s common platform, modular design, cost-effective integration, safety and security, interoperability, consistency, and flexibility have transformed the industry by providing a standardized and efficient framework for developing superior automotive software.

How were these goals achieved?

The separation of infrastructure from the application is a fundamental principle of software architecture that enables software developers to focus on their core competencies and expertise in developing application software (ASW) modules that provide the unique features and functions of their product. They do not need to worry about the underlying hardware or software platform or the implementation details of the BSW and runtime environment (RTE). Instead, they can focus on their core competencies in developing ASW modules while providing standardized interfaces and services for accessing the BSW.

Note

The BSW provides low-level software services, such as drivers and communication and diagnostic services, that are necessary for the proper functioning of the ECU. It includes standardized modules that are compliant with the AUTOSAR specifications and can be easily integrated and interchanged with other BSW modules from different vendors.

The following figure shows the basic structure of this standardized interface:

Figure 1.4 – AUTOSAR Standardization

The separation of infrastructure from the application also enables the ECU to be more modular and scalable. Different ASW modules from different vendors can be easily integrated into the ECU, and new ASW modules can be added or removed without affecting the BSW or other ASW modules.

However, AUTOSAR does not provide specific solutions for individual problems or use cases. Instead, it provides a structured way to implement specific functionality in an ECU that can be adapted and customized to meet the needs of different car manufacturers and use cases.

For example, if a car manufacturer wants to implement a specific braking system, they would use the AUTOSAR framework and specifications to develop the software modules that control the braking system. AUTOSAR would provide a standardized way to interact with the microcontroller and peripheral hardware to allow the implementation of the braking functionality. However, it would not provide specific guidance on how to manage the braking system or how to implement specific features or functions. The following case study provides a more detailed example.

Case study – Developing an ECU in the AUTOSAR framework

An automotive supplier is developing a new radar sensor system for autonomous driving applications using AUTOSAR. The challenge is in developing a highly accurate and reliable radar sensor system that can detect objects and provide warning signals to the vehicle’s control system as soon and accurately as possible.

The supplier has decided to adopt AUTOSAR, which provides a standardized set of interfaces and services for the development and integration of SWCs. The AUTOSAR BSW layer provides a set of pre-built software modules that abstract the hardware-specific details and provide a unified interface for the ASW layer to access the hardware functions.

By using AUTOSAR, the supplier is able to reduce the development time and cost required to integrate multiple SWCs, as well as reduce the risk of incompatibilities or errors. The standardized interfaces and services provided by AUTOSAR enable the software engineers to focus on developing the application-specific features of the radar sensor system, rather than spending time on developing and integrating basic software services.

For example, the application engineers don’t have to worry about how to store data in non-volatile memory, how communication works, or whether to use a controller area network (CAN) or Ethernet as a medium of transmission.

Instead, they only focused on implementing warning algorithms that would detect objects and provide warning signals to the vehicle’s control system.

Now that we’ve understood the need for AUTOSAR, let’s look at its standards in more detail.

The AUTOSAR standards consist of a set of specifications, standards, and guidelines that provide a framework for the development and integration of SWCs in automotive ECUs. The AUTOSAR standards consist of the following components:

Figure 1.5 – AUTOSAR standards

The following list describes these components in detail:

• AUTOSAR platform: AUTOSAR has two main flavors, namely, Classic Platform (CP) and Adaptive Platform (AP). It is a common misconception that adaptive AUTOSAR is replacing classic AUTOSAR. Both adaptive AUTOSAR and classic AUTOSAR are complementary software architectures that address different requirements and use cases in the automotive industry:
  • CP is intended for conventional embedded automotive systems that have a fixed set of functionalities and tightly integrated hardware and software (static). It features a layered architecture and standardized interfaces that facilitate the consistent and efficient development and integration of SWCs. It is also optimized for resource-constrained environments, making it ideal for ECUs with limited processing power and memory.

  It uses an OSEK/VDX-based real-time operating system (RTOS), which is highly deterministic and optimized for real-time performance, thus suitable for safety-critical and hard real-time applications such as powertrain and chassis control.

  Communication is based on static configurations using predefined protocols such as CAN, LIN, FlexRay, and Ethernet, and communication relationships are established at design time.

  • AP is designed for more flexible and dynamic automotive systems, where the hardware and software are decoupled and can be upgraded independently. It provides a modular architecture and supports the use of open source and third-party components, enabling faster innovation and more frequent updates. In contrast to CP, it supports dynamic communication with a service-oriented architecture (SOA) using Ethernet, where services can be discovered and communicated with during runtime. It uses a POSIX-compliant operating system, typically based on Linux, which provides greater flexibility, suitable for handling complex and resource-intensive tasks.

  The two flavors of AUTOSAR reflect the different needs and requirements of the automotive industry, and they are designed to provide a common standard for the development and integration of SWCs in vehicles, regardless of the specific use case or application.

• Foundation: Foundation (FO) in AUTOSAR is designed to ensure interoperability between different AUTOSAR platforms by providing a set of generic artifacts that are shared between both CP and AP. This helps to promote compatibility between different platforms, including those that are not based on AUTOSAR, and ensures that automotive systems and devices can work together seamlessly.

  It contains common requirements and technical specifications, for example, E2E Protocol Specification, V2X Specification, Secure Onboard Communication Protocol, and Specification of Intrusion Detection System Protocol, which are all shared between the AUTOSAR platforms (CP and AP).

Figure 1.6 – FO within AUTOSAR standard

• Acceptance tests (ATs): AUTOSAR ATs are system tests at the bus level as well as the application level to validate the behavior of an AUTOSAR stack with regard to the ASW components as well as the communication bus:

Figure 1.7 – Acceptance test AUTOSAR

The documentation at https://www.AUTOSAR.org/fileadmin/standards/tests/1-2/AUTOSAR_ATS_CommunicationCAN.pdf describes AT specifications of communication on a CAN bus. It describes the test case steps along with the test architecture. In Figure 1.8, taken from the preceding example use case, this diagram illustrates a test setup where a test bench sends test sequences to an embedded SWC within the system under test (SUT) via the CAN bus.

Figure 1.8 – Test architecture description

• Application interfaces (AIs): AUTOSAR has standardized a large set of AIs in terms of syntax and semantics for the different vehicle domains: Body and Comfort; Powertrain; Chassis Control; Occupant and Pedestrian Safety; and HMI, Multimedia and Telematics. For instance, the Chassis Control domain focuses on stability and control, while Powertrain manages propulsion. The Body domain handles comfort and convenience features, autonomous systems enable self-driving capabilities, and in-vehicle infotainment (IVI) ensures entertainment and connectivity. AUTOSAR defines reference interfaces and SWCs across these domains that the systems can communicate effectively and are interoperable, regardless of the specific hardware or software used by different manufacturers. For example, the Powertrain and Chassis Control systems work together for car stability and performance, while the ADAS relies on inputs from various sensors and systems to make real-time driving decisions.

  An example of an application interface in AUTOSAR is the adaptive cruise control (ACC) interface. This interface standardizes how the ACC component communicates with other vehicle systems, such as sensors and actuators. It defines how data such as vehicle speed and distance from the car ahead is processed and exchanged, allowing ACC to maintain a safe distance from other vehicles automatically. By using this standardized interface, different ACC implementations can interact with various sensors and actuators across different vehicle models, guaranteeing consistency and interoperability. This is discussed in further detail here: https://www.autosar.org/fileadmin/standards/R22-11/CP/AUTOSAR_EXP_AIChassis.pdf

AUTOSAR standardizes the interfaces and SWCs across these domains, ensuring that the systems can communicate effectively and are interoperable, regardless of the specific hardware or software used by different manufacturers. For example, the interaction between the Powertrain and Chassis Control systems is crucial for vehicle stability and performance, while the Autonomous domain relies on inputs from various sensors and systems to make real-time driving decisions.

The defined architecture is based on a modular, layered approach that emphasizes the separation of concerns, clear interfaces, and independence of components. AUTOSAR provides guidelines and best practices for software architecture and design, which enable software engineers to develop high-quality, standardized SWCs that can be easily integrated into different automotive systems and devices.

Layers

A layer in software architecture refers to a logical grouping of SWCs that share a common set of responsibilities and are designed to work together to perform a specific set of tasks.

It can be seen as a horizontal slice through the software architecture, with each layer providing a specific set of services to the layer above it, as shown in Figure 1.9. The layers are typically designed to be modular and loosely coupled so that changes made to one layer do not affect the functionality of the other layers.

The AUTOSAR layered architecture provides the necessary mechanisms for achieving software and hardware independence by dividing the software into three main layers that run on a microcontroller, as shown in the following figure:

Figure 1.9 – AUTOSAR layered architecture

Let’s discuss these layers in further detail:

• Application layer: This is where the SWCs that contain the algorithms and functionality of the system are located. This layer is responsible for implementing the high-level behavior of the system and uses the interface of the lower layers to access the hardware resources. Some examples of functions are monitoring the battery charge for a battery charger ECU and setting and viewing the temperature through the human-machine interface (HMI).
• AUTOSAR RTE: The RTE serves as both a binding and isolating layer between the ASW and BSW layers. All communication and service usage between these two layers must occur within the RTE. We will dive into the specifics of this topic in greater detail in Chapter 4.
• Basic software: The BSW layer is divided into three different layers, each providing specific functionality required for the proper functioning of an ECU. These layers are as follows:
  • Services layer: This layer offers a variety of services for applications to utilize. It comprises services such as System Services, Memory Services, Crypto Services, and Diagnostic and Communication Services.
  • ECU abstraction layer: This layer delivers ECU-related abstractions, including I/O Hardware Abstraction, Onboard Device Abstraction as an external watchdog, Memory Hardware Abstraction, and Crypto Hardware Abstraction, to enable hardware independence for applications.
  • Microcontroller abstraction layer (MCAL): This layer provides a driver implementation for the MCU in use, enabling communication between the BSW layers above and the microcontroller hardware peripherals.

Further exploration of the layers will be conducted in Chapter 2.

Stacks

A stack refers to a collection of software layers or components that work together to provide a specific functionality or service. Each layer in the stack represents a distinct set of functions and services and is responsible for performing a specific set of tasks. The layers communicate with each other through well-defined interfaces, and the data is passed between the layers in a hierarchical manner, with each layer providing services to the layer above it. The architecture is shown in the following figure:

Figure 1.10 – AUTOSAR stacks

Some of the main AUTOSAR stacks that we will dive into in our journey are the following:

• Memory Stack
• Communication (CAN, Ethernet, LIN, and FlexRay)
• Diagnostic
• IO Hardware Abstraction
• Security

Throughout this chapter, we have traced the evolution of the automotive industry and identified the challenges that traditional software development faces. These challenges served as key driving forces behind the creation of AUTOSAR. We discussed that the AUTOSAR framework offers a standardized method for software development and integration within the automotive sector. This enables software developers to concentrate on their core competencies while developing application-specific features and taking advantage of standardized interfaces and services to access the basic software layer. Furthermore, the framework fosters interoperability, scalability, and the reuse of SWCs across various car manufacturers, ultimately reducing development time and costs while enhancing software quality and reliability.

We learned that AUTOSAR is comprised of specifications and guidelines that establish a framework for the development and integration of SWCs in automotive ECUs. The framework employs a layered approach with modular and loosely coupled layers, achieving ASW and hardware independence. Additionally, AUTOSAR provides a set of stacks that collaborate to deliver ECU-specific functionalities and services. The insights gained in this chapter are significant because they allow for a better understanding of the real-world applications of AUTOSAR. By comprehending the relevance of these topics and the lessons learned, developers can effectively apply this knowledge in real-world contexts, further improving the development and integration of automotive software systems.

In the next chapter, we will explore the various layers and stacks within AUTOSAR, providing a more comprehensive understanding of the framework and its classical components.

Please answer the following questions to evaluate your overall understanding of this chapter:

1. What does AUTOSAR stand for?
2. Who developed the AUTOSAR standard?
3. What are the main goals of the AUTOSAR framework?
4. How many layers does classical AUTOSAR have?
5. List four of the AUTOSAR stacks.
6. Is adaptive AUTOSAR replacing classical AUTOSAR, and if so, why?
7. What are the key differences between classical and adaptive AUTOSAR?