--- title: "Completing the Audit Trail: Why Embedded Teams Need Runtime Observability" url: https://daily.dev/posts/completing-the-audit-trail-why-embedded-teams-need-runtime-observability-k5z5v1y8v source_url: https://www.embedded.com/completing-the-audit-trail-why-embedded-teams-need-runtime-observability type: article source: "Embedded.com" published: 2026-08-24T18:01:39.669Z updated: 2026-08-24T18:02:06.462Z tags: ["cicd", "observability", "embedded"] reading_time: 6 upvotes: 0 comments: 0 language: en --- > ## Documentation Index > Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://daily.dev/llms.txt > Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further. # Completing the Audit Trail: Why Embedded Teams Need Runtime Observability **[Embedded.com](https://daily.dev/sources/embedded-com)** · 6 min read · 0 upvotes · 0 comments ## Summary Reproducible builds ensure a firmware artifact can be traced back to its source code and toolchain, but they don't explain intermittent, timing-sensitive failures that only appear during runtime under specific hardware and scheduling conditions. Extending the audit trail with continuous observability (runtime traces, scheduling activity, resource utilization, communication events) lets engineers diagnose these failures by analyzing recorded execution history instead of trying to reproduce unknown conditions. The piece, written by Percepio's CTO, argues embedded DevOps should evolve beyond CI/CD to include continuous testing and continuous observability working together. ## Full article daily.dev links to this article rather than hosting it. Read it at the original source: ## Questions this post answers ### Why do reproducible firmware builds sometimes still fail intermittently during testing even though the firmware image never changed? Reproducible builds guarantee the same source code and toolchain produce the same firmware image, but they do not guarantee identical runtime conditions across test runs. Small variations in input timing, interrupt arrival patterns, task scheduling, hardware state, or environmental conditions can trigger latent race conditions or resource-contention issues that only surface under specific, infrequent sequences of events. _daily.dev surfaces engineering deep dives like this for teams chasing down flaky embedded test failures._ ### What is the difference between reproducible builds and runtime observability in embedded software development? Reproducible builds establish confidence in the artifact by ensuring a known source-code baseline and toolchain produce a verifiable firmware image, answering what software was running. Runtime observability answers what happened while it was running, capturing traces, scheduling activity, timing data, resource utilization, and system-state transitions to explain execution behavior that build and test records alone cannot reveal. _Teams weighing build traceability against runtime visibility can track this debate on daily.dev._ ## Similar posts on daily.dev - [From Prototype to Production — Observability and Auditability \(Part 6\)](https://daily.dev/posts/from-prototype-to-production-observability-and-auditability-part-6--2zmkplcj0) · ITNEXT · 0 upvotes · 0 comments - [What do AI observability tools actually do?](https://daily.dev/posts/what-do-ai-observability-tools-actually-do--c53ahphju) · InfoWorld · 0 upvotes · 0 comments - [As agentic dev tools boom, workflow auditability becomes the constraint](https://daily.dev/posts/as-agentic-dev-tools-boom-workflow-auditability-becomes-the-constraint-vr9ylzsgj) · The New Stack · 0 upvotes · 0 comments --- Tags: [#cicd](https://daily.dev/tags/cicd), [#observability](https://daily.dev/tags/observability), [#embedded](https://daily.dev/tags/embedded) [View this post on daily.dev](https://daily.dev/posts/completing-the-audit-trail-why-embedded-teams-need-runtime-observability-k5z5v1y8v)