Engineering · Embedded Software · AUTOSAR
AUTOSAR Development Services, Classic and Adaptive
Configuration and integration of the AUTOSAR platforms on your ECU: BSW, MCAL and RTE configuration, communication and diagnostic stacks, Adaptive services over SOME/IP, and the security stack that is often left until last. Agnile delivers AUTOSAR Classic and AUTOSAR Adaptive work packages for OEM, Tier-1, and Tier-2 programmes; drivers, bootloaders and application code are covered by our embedded software engineering services.
Reviewed by Shreyansh, Founder & CTO ·
What do AUTOSAR development services cover?
AUTOSAR development services configure and integrate the standardised AUTOSAR software platform on an ECU. On the Classic Platform that means Basic Software (BSW) and MCAL configuration, RTE generation, and the communication, diagnostic and Crypto Stack modules; on the Adaptive Platform, ara::com services over SOME/IP, manifests and platform services on a POSIX operating system. Agnile Technologies delivers this work — including SecOC and Hardware Security Module integration — as scoped work packages or embedded team capacity.
Writing the MCAL-level drivers, Complex Device Drivers, bootloader or application software that sits in and on that stack is automotive embedded software engineering; the same team can deliver both.
Offerings
What We Deliver
Four areas, one team. The engineers who configure the BSW also integrate the security modules — which is exactly why the security work does not stall the schedule.
AUTOSAR Classic Configuration and Integration
The Classic Platform remains the backbone of hard real-time ECUs, and most of the effort is in the configuration. We configure BSW and MCAL stacks against your target microcontroller, integrate Complex Device Drivers where the standard stack ends — our guide to secure MCAL and CDD development shows how we approach that boundary — and bring up communication stacks across CAN, CAN FD, and Automotive Ethernet. Diagnostics is covered end to end: UDS services, DoIP for Ethernet-connected ECUs, and the security-access behaviour that assessors increasingly probe.
AUTOSAR Adaptive Development
For high-performance ECUs, the Adaptive Platform replaces static schedules with a POSIX-based, service-oriented architecture. We design and implement Adaptive Applications against ara::com, model services in SOME/IP with runtime service discovery, and handle Execution Management, State Management, and platform bring-up on POSIX operating systems. For programmes heading toward the software-defined vehicle, we structure applications so they can be updated and extended over the vehicle’s life — which is the point of Adaptive in the first place.
Security Stack Specialization
AUTOSAR security modules are often treated as someone else’s problem; for us they are the core competence. We configure and integrate the Crypto Stack — Csm, CryIf, and KeyM, deploy SecOC for authenticated on-board communication, and carry out Hardware Security Module integration from key provisioning to crypto offload on HSM-equipped silicon such as Infineon AURIX, NXP S32, and Renesas RH850. Secure Boot, Secure Flashing, and key management land in the same work package — see Secure Boot and the ECU chain of trust.
MISRA C and ASPICE-Aligned Development
Delivery quality is process-backed, not asserted. We write to MISRA C guidelines with static analysis gates in Continuous Integration, keep bidirectional traceability from requirements through architecture to code and test, and align delivery with ASPICE expectations so our work packages drop into your assessed processes without friction. Where your ECU carries ASIL A–D requirements, development runs inside your ISO 26262 process.
Comparison
AUTOSAR Classic vs AUTOSAR Adaptive
The platforms are complements, not competitors — a current vehicle architecture typically runs both, Classic at the edge and Adaptive on the domain and central computers. The condensed comparison is below; our AUTOSAR Classic vs Adaptive guide covers the decision in depth, including migration paths.
| Dimension | AUTOSAR Classic | AUTOSAR Adaptive |
|---|---|---|
| Typical use cases | Hard real-time control on resource-constrained microcontrollers; function set fixed at build time | High-performance, service-oriented applications that evolve over the vehicle’s life — the SDV workload |
| Communication | Signal-based: CAN, CAN FD, LIN, FlexRay, and Automotive Ethernet with statically configured routing | Service-oriented: SOME/IP over Automotive Ethernet with runtime service discovery |
| Safety and security patterns | Static schedules and OS partitioning for ASIL A–D coexistence; SecOC message authentication; Crypto Stack backed by an HSM | POSIX process isolation and Identity and Access Management; TLS alongside SecOC; managed secure updates |
| Typical ECUs | Body controllers, powertrain and battery management, braking and chassis, gateways | ADAS domain controllers, zonal and central high-performance computers, telematics units |
Process
How an AUTOSAR Classic Integration Runs — Six Steps
Durations are typical for one Classic ECU with a usable ECU extract — roughly eight to twelve weeks to an integrated, tested build. Missing inputs, a new microcontroller target or a SecOC roll-out across a vehicle network extend steps 2 and 4; Adaptive Platform bring-up is scoped separately.
Input review and ECU extract Weeks 1–2
System description or ECU extract, communication matrix, diagnostic description, security concept and target microcontroller reviewed; gaps, tool versions and stack releases agreed before configuration starts.
MCAL and BSW configuration Weeks 2–5
MCAL configured for the target; OS, communication, memory, mode-management and watchdog modules configured and generated in your licensed AUTOSAR toolchain.
RTE generation and SWC integration Weeks 5–7
RTE generated, application Software Components integrated, runnables mapped to tasks and cores, timing budgets checked.
Diagnostic, communication and security stacks Weeks 6–10
Dcm and Dem with UDS over CAN-TP and DoIP; SOME/IP where the ECU provides or consumes services; Csm, CryIf, KeyM and SecOC configured against the key and freshness concept; HSM interface brought up.
On-target integration testing Weeks 9–11
Integration tests on target hardware with bus traces and timing measurements; issues fixed in configuration rather than patched in generated code; handover to HIL testing where the programme has a bench.
Release and handover Weeks 11–12
Configuration baseline under version control, integration report, release notes and traceability — maintainable by your own team after handover.
Deliverables
What a Work Package Produces
Configuration lives in your toolchain and your version control; each artefact is mapped to the process or assessment evidence it supports.
| Deliverable | What It Contains | Evidence It Supports |
|---|---|---|
| ECU configuration baseline | BSW, MCAL and RTE configuration and generated code under version control, with tool and stack versions recorded | Reproducible builds; ASPICE configuration management |
| Communication and diagnostic configuration | PDU and signal routing, SOME/IP service interfaces, UDS service and data-identifier mapping over CAN-TP and DoIP | OEM communication and diagnostic acceptance |
| Security configuration specification | Csm jobs, CryIf and KeyM key slots, SecOC freshness and MAC parameters, HSM interface | ISO/SAE 21434 Clause 10 cybersecurity specifications and integration evidence |
| Integration test report | On-target tests, bus traces, timing and resource measurements, open issues | ASPICE software integration verification; ISO 26262 Part 6 software integration and verification |
| Static analysis report | MISRA C results for hand-written integration and Complex Device Driver code, with justified deviations | ISO 26262 Part 6 coding-guideline compliance; ASPICE unit verification |
| Traceability matrix | Requirements to configuration, code and test | ASPICE bidirectional traceability and consistency |
| Tool-use inputs | Configuration and generator tool versions, use cases and known limitations | Inputs to your tool classification under ISO 26262 Part 8 Clause 11 |
Security Engineering
ISO/SAE 21434 Evidence, Produced from Development
UNECE R155 pushed cybersecurity evidence into every serious AUTOSAR programme, and ISO/SAE 21434 expects a large share of its Work Products to come from the development phase — not from a compliance team writing documents after the code has shipped. When the engineers doing the AUTOSAR work know the standard, that evidence falls out of the engineering itself:
- Requirements traced into configuration. SecOC freshness and key concepts, Csm job configuration, and Secure Diagnostics access control are documented as they are designed — not reverse-engineered for the assessor later.
- Specifications aligned with the concept phase. Cybersecurity specifications at the software architecture level stay traceable to the Cybersecurity Concept and Cybersecurity Goals your TARA produced.
- Verification evidence from real test campaigns. Integration and verification reports are generated from the communication, diagnostic, and security-stack testing that the programme runs anyway.
For the process side — CSMS build-out, TARA, and the full 42 Work Products — see our ISO/SAE 21434 consulting practice. On AUTOSAR programmes the two engagements interlock: one team writes the code, the other makes sure the evidence holds up in front of an assessor.
Germany and Europe
AUTOSAR Development for German and European Programmes
Requirements differ by OEM and are fixed in each supplier contract, but in generic terms German and European OEM and Tier-1 programmes commonly expect an AUTOSAR work package to arrive with four kinds of evidence.
- Automotive SPICE process evidence. Automotive SPICE (ASPICE), maintained by the VDA QMC, is the process-assessment model German OEMs commonly use for software suppliers. Configuration, integration and test work is delivered with the work products and traceability its software engineering processes expect, against the capability-level target in your contract.
- ISO 26262 tool-qualification inputs. AUTOSAR configuration tools and code generators are software tools under ISO 26262 Part 8 Clause 11. We record tool versions, use cases and known limitations so your safety team can set the tool confidence level and decide whether qualification is needed.
- Mixed Classic and Adaptive architectures, SOME/IP and SDV integration. Classic ECUs at the edge, Adaptive on zonal and central computers, SOME/IP service interfaces between them and DoIP for diagnostics and reprogramming — the integration pattern of software-defined vehicle platforms, verified on HIL and SIL test environments.
- UNECE R155 security evidence. Crypto Stack, SecOC and secure diagnostics configuration produce ISO/SAE 21434 work products directly. The testing R155 paragraph 7.3.6 requires of those measures runs with our automotive penetration testing team for Germany and Europe, and the process side with ISO/SAE 21434 consulting.
Delivery practicalities
| Delivery model | Remote-first from Bengaluru, working in your toolchain over your remote-development infrastructure, with on-site phases in Germany or elsewhere in Europe for kick-off, integration milestones and handover |
|---|---|
| Working window | India is 4.5 hours ahead of CET and 3.5 hours ahead of CEST; your morning overlaps our afternoon for reviews and integration calls |
| Toolchain and licences | We work in the AUTOSAR toolchain and stack your programme has licensed; tool access and licence arrangements agreed per project |
| Data protection | Operations run under Agnile's ISO/IEC 27001:2022 information-security management system (Certificate No. 25110402); TISAX data-exchange rules agreed with your information-security team where your programme applies them |
| Language | Specifications, reports, reviews and walkthroughs in English |
| Contracting | Agnile Technologies Private Limited; mutual NDA before scoping; work packages quoted after a scoping call |
Engagement models
Three Ways to Engage
Feature and Work-Package Delivery
A defined scope delivered against milestones — a BSW configuration for a new ECU, a Complex Device Driver for a custom peripheral, a SecOC roll-out across a vehicle network, or an Adaptive service migration. Fixed deliverables, clear acceptance criteria.
Team Extension
Agnile engineers embedded in your AUTOSAR programme — working in your toolchain, your build system, and your reviews, carrying configuration, application, and integration work as part of the team for as long as the programme needs it.
Integration and V&V Support
Bring-up, integration debugging, and Verification & Validation for AUTOSAR stacks — from communication timing analysis to Fuzz Testing of the diagnostic and security surfaces, run together with our Automotive Cybersecurity practice.
FAQ
AUTOSAR Development Questions
Explore next
Go deeper on the AUTOSAR stack
Our engineering guides to the platforms and security modules, and the services that build, test and assess them.
AUTOSAR guides
Scope Your AUTOSAR Work Package
A 60-minute scoping call: bring your ECU list, your integration blocker, or the security modules nobody on the team wants to own. We respond to qualified enquiries within one business day.