don't know where you sourced your perspective but yea based on the reports ive heard from automotive engineers, coding in autosar is the direct opposite of wild
And lest you take issue with my characterization or claim Tesla is a rogue outlier, let me remind you that Volkswagen shipped deliberate software emissions defeat code in 11 million diesel passenger vehicles over eight model years including half a million in the USA, and was only caught by academic researchers.
ISO 26262? Not sure how the enforcement looks, but automotive is pretty serious about ISO 26262.
Still, the infotainment is most likely QM so it wouldn't apply in this specific situation.
The infotainment system itself may be QM but there has to be assurance that it is in fact separated from higher safety level system.
Yes, hence why I said I'm not sure about enforcement mechanisms how they stack up against the aviation standard. Still, in my limited experience, projects that are ASIL x take the thing pretty seriously and they do get certifications from external bodies. Actually, I am supporting an SEooC external certification right now.
> The infotainment system itself may be QM but there has to be assurance that it is in fact separated from higher safety level system.
The separation most likely happens _outside_ the infotainment itself, through a gateway.