Support of nested system hierarchy

[yoogx]

PolyORB-HI/C and PolyORB-HI/Ada backends do not correctly handle situations where systems are inside systems, so as to model deep hierarchy.

[yoogx]

The patches above solve the issue for PolyORB-HI/C

[nvcyc]

The aadl_xml backend has the same issue that it does not support nested system hierarchy. May I know if you have a plan for fixing it in aadl_xml? Let me know if you'd like me to open a new issue for the aadl_xml backend.

[yoogx]

Can you provide a test for the failure you observe?

[nvcyc]

Sure.

Assuming the test AADL file is named Test_Nested_System.aadl shown as follows:

package Test_Nested_System
public
    system deployment
    end deployment;

    system implementation deployment.impl
        subcomponents
            sec_sys: system second_layer_system.impl;
    end deployment.impl;

    system second_layer_system
    end second_layer_system;

    system implementation second_layer_system.impl
    end second_layer_system.impl;
end Test_Nested_System;

Then, with using the following command (with the aadl_xml backend): ocarina -aadlv2 -g aadl_xml -r Test_Nested_System::deployment.impl Test_Nested_System.aadl we will see the following error message:

+========================== OCARINA BUG DETECTED =========================+
| Detected exception: SYSTEM.ASSERTIONS.ASSERT_FAILURE                    |
| Error: ocarina-backends-xml_tree-nodes.adb:399                          |
| Please refer to the User's Guide for more details.                      |
+=========================================================================+

raised SYSTEM.ASSERTIONS.ASSERT_FAILURE : ocarina-backends-xml_tree-nodes.adb:399

Symbolic Traceback:

Note that the compilation passes without an error if the system component second_layer_system is declared as abstract component (or any other types of components.)

[yoogx]

Bug solved, see commit in this issue

[nvcyc]

Thanks! Just verified that the latest code with the fix works as expected.

[nvcyc]

For this fix in aadl_xml, I'm wondering if the following line should also have the same, additional condition check: https://github.com/OpenAADL/ocarina/blob/1b28ef0a3a05721b404665beac7e0800e75927c2/src/backends/aadl_xml/ocarina-backends-aadl_xml-main.adb#L556 and have Root_System_Processed toggled in this block?

In fact, would it be simpler to just have the following condition check:

if Category = CC_System and E = Root_System_Node then

in both #176 and #L556 without an introduction of the new variable Root_System_Processed?

[yoogx]

Yes, you are right, that would simplify the codebase