Test firmware. Without the hardware.

High-fidelity emulation. Automated validation.

Run your compiled firmware against virtual hardware. Automate tests, reproduce failures, and validate embedded systems without setting up a physical board for every run.

Available for early-access evaluation.

Illustrative response · virtual time
Firmware command · 1,800 RPMEmulated motor responseTarget reached

Time (ms)

A new development loop for firmware.

Move beyond happy-path testing. Explore boundary conditions, inject faults, and investigate failures in repeatable virtual hardware environments.

Auto-generate tests.

Turn requirements into nominal, boundary, and recovery cases.

Inject faults.

Drop a device reply, freeze a sensor value, or return inconsistent feedback.

Trace failures.

Connect failed assertions to firmware execution, peripheral interactions, and diagnostic evidence.

How Vinaka works · Industrial-controller example · Fault configuration exampleSkip walkthrough
vinaka/Industrial controller
Emulated environment
compressor-controller.elfTest Speed trackingVirtual time

Virtual bench

Compiled firmware · modeled sensors, interfaces, and devices

9 components
Controller MCUCompiled firmware
RS-485 / Modbus RTUFirmware-facing interface
Motor driveSpeed feedback · register 40001

Part of a nine-component bench, including sensors, a load valve, and the modeled plant.

Controller MCU
Firmware
compressor-controller.elf
Interfaces
ADC · GPIO · UART
Test suite
Controller regression
Run the firmwareFirmware loaded · Virtual bench

Run the firmware

Workflow and evaluation detailsCode, evidence, and fit

Follow an industrial-controller example from a connected virtual bench through Python test conditions, a timed fault scenario, and execution evidence.

Vinaka is building one development loop for high-fidelity emulation, automatic test generation, fault injection, and failure tracing. Run firmware, explore failure conditions, and bring execution evidence into the next engineering decision.

This example connects a controller to sensors, a motor drive, and a modeled plant. A single bench brings the components and firmware-facing interfaces into the test.

The Python example requests 1,800 rpm and checks the healthy reply at 2.84 seconds against ±5%. This nominal-speed check precedes the fault activation at 3.00 seconds; the fault plan defines the subsequent diagnostic check.

test_speed_tracking.pyPython
def check_nominal_speed(bench):
    console = bench.port("controller", "Console")
    bench.wait_ms(400)
    console.write_line("SET_RPM 1800")
    bench.wait_ms(2400)
    request = console.write_line("GET_SPEED 17")
    reply = console.expect_line(
        pattern=r"SPEED 17 [0-9]+",
        after=request.submitted, within_ms=200,
    )
    rpm = int(reply.text.rsplit(" ", 1)[1])
    assert 1710 <= rpm <= 1890

The fault-plan example sets reported speed to 720 rpm in Modbus register 40001 from 3.00 to 5.00 seconds. The recovery requirement calls for a mismatch diagnostic within 500 ms of the first incorrect reply.

speed_feedback.fault.yamlYAML
target: { component_id: motor-drive, endpoint: Modbus RTU }
filter: { register: 40001 }
operation:
  primitive: set
  params: { value: 720 }
activation: { at_ms: 3000 }
disable: { at_ms: 5000 }
validation:
  diagnostic: SPEED_TRACKING_FAULT
  within_ms: 500
  anchor: first_mismatched_reply

The fault-plan example keeps the target, override, activation time, and recovery requirement together in one readable configuration.

The nominal-speed check passes at 2.84 seconds. Fault activation at 3.00 seconds is followed by the first mismatched reply at 3.04 seconds. That reply starts the 500 ms window for SPEED_TRACKING_FAULT. The missed deadline at 3.54 seconds establishes the diagnostic-check failure.

Illustrated speed-tracking evidence
CheckExpectedObservedVirtual time
Nominal speed1,710–1,890 rpm1,800 rpm; nominal check passes2.84 s
Reported speed1,710–1,890 rpm720 rpm3.04 s
Mismatch diagnosticSPEED_TRACKING_FAULT within 500 msDiagnostic absent at deadline; recovery gap identified3.54 s

How fidelity is evaluated

Evaluate fidelity against the behavior your firmware depends on: interface responses, state transitions, and timing requirements.

Compare the emulated response with a configured response profile, then define the interface behavior and timing requirements that matter for your evaluation.

Evaluating Vinaka

Available for early-access evaluation.

Who is Vinaka for?
Firmware and validation teams across embedded products.
What does it run?
Compiled firmware against configured emulated hardware. The technical demo establishes the model and interface scope for your target.
Which problems does it address?
Expand test coverage, reproduce failure conditions, exercise recovery paths, and inspect firmware behavior in software.
How is compatibility established?
Build your evaluation around your target, firmware configuration, interfaces, and a test that matters to your team.
What should I bring?
Bring your target details, firmware format, relevant interfaces, and one test or failure to investigate. Use the technical demo to shape your first evaluation.
What happens next?
Book a technical demo to see the emulator, discuss your target, and scope an early-access evaluation.
Book a technical demo

Built for fidelity. Built to move fast.

Firmware interacts with more than a processor. Vinaka models connected peripherals, device state, and timed events alongside firmware execution, making hardware-dependent behavior testable in a repeatable software environment.Run compiled firmware with modeled interfaces, device state, and virtual-time events.

Evaluate fidelity against the behavior your firmware depends on: interface responses, state transitions, and timing requirements.
Actual firmwareYour compiled binary.

The same firmware you need to validate, running against emulated hardware.

The foundation

Vinaka hardware model

  • CPU execution and peripheralsCPU & interfaces
  • Device state and virtual timeState & time
  • Firmware-visible responsesResponses
What this enablesMake every run reproducible.
  • Reproducible inputsRepeatable inputs
  • Virtual-time eventsVirtual time
  • Inspectable executionExecution evidence

Beyond the CPU.

Model how connected peripherals change state and respond over time, so firmware tests exercise interactions rather than isolated register values.

Test peripheral responses and state transitions.

Repeatable by design.

Preserve the configuration, inputs, and event sequence for each run. Reproduce failures without rebuilding conditions on a physical bench.

Preserve the setup, inputs, and event sequence.

More iteration, less setup.

Modify a scenario, rerun the test, and inspect the result in software. Reserve physical hardware for the checks that require it.

Modify a scenario, rerun, and inspect the result.