From Timing Analysis to CI: Integrating WCET Tools into Your Embedded CI Pipeline

Hook: Why your CI pipeline still misses timing regressions — and how that changes in 2026

If you build safety‑critical embedded software, you already know the pain: functional tests pass in CI, unit coverage looks healthy, but a field integration or a late HW change exposes a timing regression that invalidates your real‑time guarantees. Tool overload, fragmented workflows and missing automation for WCET (Worst‑Case Execution Time) checks create exactly that blind spot. The January 2026 acquisition of StatInf’s RocqStat technology by Vector—and the announced plan to integrate it into VectorCAST—is a practical inflection point. It makes in‑CI WCET verification realistic for teams that need end‑to‑end, auditable timing assurance in production‑grade pipelines.

The 2026 context: why timing analysis belongs in CI now

Late 2025 and early 2026 saw three developments that raise the bar for timing verification:

• Automotive and aerospace OEMs tightened timing requirements in safety standards and verification plans as systems grew more software‑defined (ISO 26262 and DO‑178C artifact expectations increased).
• Multi‑core SoCs and heterogeneous architectures (including RISC‑V and mixed‑safety domains) made measurement‑only strategies unreliable; static analysis and formal WCET became essential to find rare, path‑dependent worst cases.
• Toolchains consolidated around integrated ecosystems—Vector’s VectorCAST moves to absorb RocqStat represents this consolidation trend, enabling tighter automation between testing and timing analysis.

As Vector said at the announcement, the goal is a “unified environment for timing analysis, WCET estimation, software testing and verification workflows.” That matters because verification teams need automation, traceability, and repeatability—attributes CI delivers when the right timing tools are incorporated.

What RocqStat + VectorCAST integration changes for teams

Vector’s acquisition brings three practical advantages to embedded DevOps workflows:

• Unified Data Model — Test vectors, code coverage, and timing estimations can share the same artifacts and metadata, easing traceability for audits and tool qualification.
• Seamless Automation — Instead of manual export/import steps between testing and WCET tools, a VectorCAST–RocqStat integration enables a single CI job to build, test, measure and statically analyze artifacts.
• Tool Qualification Path — Vector’s experience with safety standards shortens the qualification work for teams using these tools in ISO 26262/DO‑178C contexts.

High‑level integration patterns for WCET in CI

Below are practical patterns you can adopt depending on your risk profile and available hardware:

1. On‑host static WCET analysis (fast, deterministic)

Use RocqStat’s static analysis to compute a WCET bound from the binary and a processor timing model. This is the least hardware‑dependent option and is ideal for early gating in CI.

• Inputs: ELF/binary, compiler map, timing model for target core
• Output: machine‑readable WCET report (JSON/XML) and annotated disassembly
• CI use: Run as a post‑build job; fail the pipeline when WCET > requirement.

2. Hybrid: static + measurement (best coverage)

Combine static WCET with measurement‑based testing on an emulator or HIL. Static analysis gives upper bounds; measurement finds empirical hotspots and helps validate the model.

• Run static RocqStat analysis in CI for fast gating.
• Schedule nightly measurement runs on QEMU or HIL; correlate high‑latency traces back to static paths.

3. Hardware‑in‑the‑loop (HIL) for final verification

For ASIL‑D or avionics criticality, you’ll want periodic HIL runs that exercise the final binary configuration, caches and bus contention. CI triggers full HIL jobs as part of release validation, not every PR.

Concrete CI integration: an end‑to‑end example

Below is a pragmatic CI pattern you can adapt: Build → Unit tests → VectorCAST functional tests → RocqStat static WCET → Gate. The example uses a generic runner and JSON reports to keep vendor‑specific commands flexible.

Step 0 — Preconditions

• Artifact repository (Nexus/S3) for binaries and map files
• Access to VectorCAST test runner in CI agents, or a runner image with Vector tools installed
• RocqStat analysis engine (or its CLI) available on CI agents
• Timing model files for the target CPU (kept under version control)

Step 1 — Build and normalize artifacts

Produce reproducible binaries with symbol/output maps. Use deterministic build flags and keep the linker map.

make clean && make TARGET=production CFLAGS='-O2 -g -ffunction-sections' LDFLAGS='-Wl,-Map=app.map'

Step 2 — Run VectorCAST tests and export test metadata

Execute unit and integration tests inside VectorCAST. Export a test result file that contains the exercised call graph and coverage.

# pseudo-command
vectorcast-runner --project myproj --suite regression --export test_results.json --binary out/app.elf

Step 3 — Launch RocqStat static timing analysis

Run static WCET analysis using the binary, map and timing model. Ensure analysis configuration references the VectorCAST exported coverage when performing path pruning (if supported).

# pseudo-command
rocqstat-cli analyze \
  --binary out/app.elf \
  --map out/app.map \
  --timing-model models/cortex-a53.tm \
  --coverage test_results.json \
  --output reports/wcet_report.json

Step 4 — Parse and enforce thresholds

CI should parse the JSON report and fail jobs where WCET exceeds the allowed deadline. Keep thresholds in a central policy file so they’re auditable.

# bash example
WCET_NS=$(jq '.functions[].wcet_ns | max' reports/wcet_report.json)
ALLOWED_NS=20000000 # e.g., 20ms
if [ "$WCET_NS" -gt "$ALLOWED_NS" ]; then
  echo "WCET violation: ${WCET_NS}ns > ${ALLOWED_NS}ns"
  exit 1
fi

Handling variability: multicore, caches, interrupts

Static WCET analysis must account for microarchitectural effects. In 2026, most teams use one or more of these strategies:

• Constrained scheduling and partitioning: Reserve cores for critical tasks to reduce interference.
• Platform models: Keep timing models updated for caches, pipelines and bus contention; RocqStat integration with VectorCAST should ease exchanging models between teams.
• Proof obligations: Maintain evidence that system configuration assumptions (e.g., cache locking, I/O priorities) are enforced at boot and during runtime.

Toolchain integration tips — reduce friction

Practical lessons from teams that successfully added WCET checks to CI:

• Automate artifact tagging: Keep the exact compiler, linker and timing model versions as part of the build metadata (bake them into the artifact manifest).
• Store and version timing models: Treat them as first‑class artifacts—changes should be reviewed and gated like code.
• Make WCET jobs lightweight: Run full analyses only on mainline or nightly; use incremental/smart analysis for PRs where possible.
• Use ML‑assisted triage: In 2026 many teams apply basic machine learning to prioritize functions for full static analysis based on change impact.

Qualification and compliance: what changes with integrated tooling

Tool qualification remains a critical step for safety cases. The VectorCAST + RocqStat combination reduces manual evidence stitching but doesn’t remove the need for qualification. Key actions:

• Define tool classification per ISO 26262/DO‑178C and produce a tool qualification plan that includes the integrated workflow.
• Capture reproducible evidence: CI artifacts (binaries, maps, timing models, analysis configs, VectorCAST test archives) must be archived and checksumed.
• Automate report generation: Produce auditable, human‑readable reports from each CI run and tie them into your requirements management tool for traceability.

Common pitfalls and how to avoid them

• Pitfall: Treating static WCET as a one‑time activity. Fix: Make it part of PR gating and regression suites.
• Pitfall: Ignoring toolchain drift (compiler flags, optimization changes). Fix: Pin build environments and log the toolchain in the artifact manifest.
• Pitfall: Overly strict thresholds that cause noise. Fix: Use staged thresholds—warn on small regressions, fail on significant ones.
• Pitfall: Relying solely on measurement in CI. Fix: Combine static analysis to cover rare paths and use scheduled measurement runs to validate models.

Example governance policy (short)

Embed this kind of policy in your CI so developers and reviewers have a clear contract:

• Every PR that modifies timing‑sensitive modules must run static WCET analysis; PRs that increase WCET by >5% create a mandatory performance review ticket.
• Nightly builds run full static + measurement hybrid analysis; critical branches (release) require a HIL verification report.
• Change to timing models or scheduling requires sign‑off by the system architect and an updated tool qualification artifact.

Example: a mini case study (anonymized, practical)

Team X at a Tier‑1 supplier integrated RocqStat into VectorCAST in a pilot (early 2026). Results after three months:

• PR gating caught two regressions caused by compiler behavior changes, preventing a late integration respin.
• Nightly hybrid runs improved confidence in cache models and reduced field timing incidents during a HW change rollout.
• Archival of artifacts simplified their ISO 26262 audit—inspectors could review the exact binary, test coverage and WCET report from the CI run.

That pilot demonstrates the practical value of tool integration: fewer surprises and faster, auditable verification cycles.

Advanced strategies and future predictions (2026 and beyond)

Looking forward, expect these trends to shape timing verification:

• Tighter cloud/edge workflows: We’ll see more hybrid CI where heavy static analysis runs in cloud workers and results are pulled into on‑prem artifact stores for qualification.
• Better multi‑core WCET models: Vendors will ship richer, validated platform models; toolchains (like VectorCAST + RocqStat) will offer certified templates for common SoCs.
• AI for path prioritization: Machine learning will guide which call paths to analyze deeply, reducing full‑analysis costs without sacrificing safety.
• Standardized interfaces: Expect more common JSON schemas for WCET reports so CI tooling (and third‑party gatekeepers) can parse and act on timing results uniformly.

Actionable checklist to get started this week

1. Map your timing requirements to specific functions/tasks and add them to your CI test plan.
2. Ensure your build pipeline outputs binary + link map + deterministic metadata (compiler, flags, timestamps).
3. Integrate a static WCET run (RocqStat or equivalent) as a non‑blocking step for PRs and a blocking step for mainline merges.
4. Archive all CI artifacts and WCET reports for traceability.
5. Schedule nightly hybrid runs (static + measurement) and plan monthly HIL verification for release candidates.

Tip: Start small—run static WCET on the top‑10 hottest functions first, then expand coverage as confidence grows.

Final thoughts: why Vector + RocqStat matters to DevOps for real‑time systems

Vector’s acquisition of RocqStat in January 2026 accelerates a critical shift: timing analysis moves from bespoke, manual verification tasks to an integrated, automatable part of the CI pipeline. For teams building safety‑critical real‑time systems, that means fewer surprises, stronger auditability and a clearer path to tool qualification.

Adopting WCET checks in CI is not a single‑tool problem—it’s a cultural and process change. But with integrated toolchains (VectorCAST + RocqStat), the technical friction lowers significantly. Implement the patterns above to get practical, measurable improvements in verification velocity and safety assurance.

Call to action

Ready to reduce timing risk in your next release? Start with the checklist above: add a static WCET job to your CI, archive the artifacts, and schedule a hybrid nightly run. If you want a jumpstart, download our CI integration template and a sample YAML for GitLab/Jenkins/GitHub Actions that includes parsing scripts for WCET reports—use it to build a reproducible, auditable timing pipeline in days, not months.

Need help adapting this to AUTOSAR, DO‑178C or a custom multicore platform? Contact our team for a short technical advisory session—bring your build logs and linker map and we’ll show a 1‑day pilot integration plan.

Related Reading

• Gaming and Health: What the New Study Means for Students and Young Adults
• Audience Metrics and Outrage: Measuring the Real Value of Polarizing TV Guests
• The Coziest Hot‑Water Bottles for Beauty Sleep and Nighttime Hair Routines
• Selecting a CRM for Security-Conscious Teams: A Technical Vendor Security Checklist
• Community Monetization Without Paywalls: How Digg’s Beta Signals New Models for Fan Hubs