Safe design of high-performance embedded systems in an MDE framework

  • Huafeng Yu
  • Abdoulaye Gamatié
  • Éric Rutten
  • Jean-Luc Dekeyser
Original Paper

Abstract

In this paper, we use the UML MARTE profile to model high-performance embedded systems (HPES) in the GASPARD2 framework. We address the design correctness issue on the UML model by using the formal validation tools associated with synchronous languages, i.e., the SIGALI model checker, etc. This modeling and validation approach benefits from the advantages of UML as a standard, and from the number of validation tools built around synchronous languages. In our context, model transformations act as a bridge between UML and the chosen validation technologies. They are implemented according to a model-driven engineering approach. The modeling and validation are illustrated using the multimedia functionality of a new-generation cellular phone.

Keywords

MARTE High-performance embedded systems Gaspard2 Synchronous languages Formal validation SIGALI Mode automata 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Apvrille L, Muhammad W, Ameur-Boulifa R, Coudert S, Pacalet R (2006) A UML-based environment for system design space exploration. In: 13th IEEE international conference on electronics, circuits and systemsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benveniste A, Caspi P, Edwards S, Halbwachs N, Le Guernic P, Simone R (2003) The synchronous languages twelve years later. Proc IEEE 91(1): 64–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Besnard L, Marchand H, Rutten E (2006) The SIGALI tool box environment. In: Workshop on discrete event systems, WODES’06, Ann-Arbor, MI, USAGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Colaço J-L, Hamon G, Pouzet M (2006) Mixing signals and modes in synchronous data-flow systems. In: ACM international conference on embedded softwareGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Delaval G, Rutten É (2007) A domain-specific language for multi-task systems, applying discrete controller synthesis. J Embed Syst Spec Issue Synchronous Paradigm Embed Syst 2007, p 17Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fecher H, Schönborn J, Kyas M, de Roever W-P (2005) 29 New unclarities in the semantics of UML 2.0 state machines. In: ICFEM. LNCS, vol 3785. Springer, New York, pp 52–65Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gamatié A, Rutten E, Yu H (2008) A model for the mixed-design of data-intensive and control-oriented embedded systems. Research report, INRIA. http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00293909/fr
  8. 8.
    Gamatié A, Rutten E, Yu H, Boulet P, Dekeyser J-L Synchronous modeling and analysis of data intensive applications. Accepted by EURASIP Journal on Embedded Systems. Aslo available as INRIA Research Report 5876. http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00001216/en
  9. 9.
    Graf S (2008) Omega—correct development of real time embedded systems. SoSyM Int J Softw Syst Modell 7(2): 127–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    INRIA DaRT Project DaRT (2007) Gaspard2. https://gforge.inria.fr/projects/gaspard2Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Labbani O, Dekeyser J, Boulet P, Rutten E (2005) Introducing control in the Gaspard2 data-parallel metamodel: synchronous approach. In: Int’l workshop on modeling and analysis of real-time and embedded systemsGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Latella D, Majzik I, Massink M (1999) Automatic verification of a behavioural subset of UML statechart diagrams using the SPIN model-checker. Formal Asp Comput 11: 637–664MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maraninchi F, Rémond Y (2003) Mode-automata: a new domain-specific construct for the development of safe critical systems. Sci Comput Program 46(3): 219–254MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Object Management Group (2003) UML profile for schedulability, performance and time. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/apps/doc?formal/03-09-01.pdf, Sept. 2003
  15. 15.
    Object Management Group (2006) Final adopted OMG SysML specification. http://www.omg.org/cgi-bin/doc?ptc/06-0504
  16. 16.
    Object Management Group (2007) Modeling and analysis of real-time and embedded systems (MARTE). http://www.omgmarte.org/
  17. 17.
    SchSfer T, Knapp A, Merz S (2001) Model checking UML state machines and collaborations. In: CAV 2001 workshop on software model checking, ENTCS 55(3), Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schmidt D-C (2006) Model-driven engineering. IEEE Comput 39(2): 25–31Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Selic B-V (2004) On the semantic foundations of standard UML 2.0. In: Bernardo M, Corradini F (eds) Formal methods for the design of real-time systems. LNCS, vol 3185. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yu H, Gamatié A, Rutten E, Dekeyser J-L (2008) Model transformations from a data parallel formalism towards synchronous languages. In: Eugenio V (ed) Embedded systems specification and design languages, selected contributions from FDL’07 series. Lecture notes in electrical engineering, vol 10. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huafeng Yu
    • 1
  • Abdoulaye Gamatié
    • 1
  • Éric Rutten
    • 2
  • Jean-Luc Dekeyser
    • 1
  1. 1.INRIA/CNRS/USTL/LIFLVilleneuve d’AscqFrance
  2. 2.INRIA Grenoble - Rhône-AlpesSaint Ismier CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations