Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 197–209 | Cite as

An efficient response-time analysis for real-time transactions with fixed priority assignment

Original Paper

Abstract

In the general context of tasks with offsets (general transactions), only exponential methods are known to calculate the exact worst-case response time (WCRT) of a task. The known pseudo-polynomial techniques give an upper bound of the WCRT. In this paper, we present a new worst-case response-time analysis technique (mixed method) for transactions scheduled by fixed priorities, and executing on a uniprocessor system. This new analysis technique gives a better (i.e. lower) pseudo-polynomial upper bound of the WCRT. The main idea is to combine the principle of exact calculation and the principle of approximation calculation, in order to decrease the pessimism of WCRT analysis, thus allowing improving the upper bound of the response time provided while preserving a pseudo-polynomial complexity. Then we define the Accumulative Monotonic property on which a necessary condition of feasibility is discussed. We also propose, to speed up the exact and mixed analysis, the dominated candidate task concept that allows reducing significantly the number of critical instants to study in an analysis.

Keywords

Response-time analysis Real-time transactions Tasks with offsets 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Audsley N, Burns A, Davis R, Tindell K, Wellings A (1995) Fixed priority preemptive scheduling: an historical perspective. Real-Time Syst 8: 129–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baruah S, Chen D, Gorinsky S, Mok A (1999) Generalized multiframe tasks. Int J Time-Crit Comput Syst 17: 5–22Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bini E, Buttazzo G (2004) Biasing effects in schedulablity measures. In: IEEE Proceedings of the 16th Euromicro conference on real-time systems (ECRTS04) Catania, Italy, p 16, July 2004Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Han CC, Yan HY (1997) A better polynomial-time scedulability test for real-time fixed-priority scheduling algorithms. In: Proceedings of IEEE real-time systems symposium, pp 36–45, December 1997Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Liu CL, Layland JW (1973) Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming in real-time environnement. J ACM 20(1): 46–61MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Maki-Turja J, Nolin M (2004) Faster response time analysis of tasks with offsets. In: Proceedings of 10th IEEE real-time technology and applications symposium (RTAS), May 2004Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Maki-Turja J, Nolin M (2004) Tighter response time analysis of tasks with offsets. In: Proceedings of 10th international conference on real-time computing and applications (RTCSA’04), August 2004Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maki-Turja J, Nolin M (2005) Fast and tight response-times for tasks with offsets. In: 17th EUROMICRO conference on real-time systems IEEE Palma de Mallorca, Spain, July 2005Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Maki-Turja J, Nolin M (2008) Efficient implementation of tight response-times for tasks with offsets. In: Real-time systems journal, February 2008. Springer, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mok AK, Chen D (1996) A multiframe model for real-time tasks. In: Proceeding of the 17th real-time systems symposium, Washington, pp 22–29, December 1996Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Palencia JC, Gonzalez Harbour M (1998) Schedulability analysis for tasks with static and dynamic offsets. In: Proceedings of IEEE real-time system symposium (RTSS), p 19, December 1998Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Palencia JC, Gonzalez Harbour M (2003) Offset-based response time analysis of distributed systems scheduled under EDF. In: Euromicro conference on real-time systems. Porto, Portugal, June 2003Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rahni A, Grolleau E, Richard M (2007) New worst-case response time analysis technique for real-time transactions. In: ISoLa workshop on leveraging applications of formal methods, verification and validation Isola2007 Poitiers France, vol RNTI-SM-1, pp 9–20, December 2007Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rahni A, Grolleau E, Richard M (2007) Méthode d’évaluation du pire temps de réponse de tâches à offset, 5 ème Ecole d’été temps réel ETR2007 Nantes France, Septembre 2007Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rahni A, Richard M, Grolleau E (2007) Nouvelle Approche Approximative D’Analyse de Temps de Réponse, Rapport interne 2007-001 LISI/ENSMA, Université de PoitiersGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rahni A, Traore K, Grolleau E, Richard M (2007) Comparaison of two worst-case response time analysis methods for real-time transactions. In: Junior researchers workshop on real-time computing, Nancy France, March 2007Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sha L, Rajkumar R, Lehoczky JP (1990) Piority inheritance protocols: an approach to real-time synchronization. IEEE Trans Comput 9(39): 1175–1185CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tindell K (1992) Using offset information to analyse static priority pre-emptively scheduled task sets. Technical Report YCD-182, Dept of Computer Science, Unoversity of York, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tindell K (1994) Adding time-offsets to schedulability analysis. Technical Report YCS 221, Dept of Computer Science, University of York, England, January 1994Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Traore K, Grolleau E, Cottet F (2006) Characterization and analysis of tasks with offsets: monotonic transactions. In: Proceedings of 12th international conference on embedded and real-time computing systems and applications. RTCSA’06 Sydney, Australia, p 12Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Traore K, Grolleau E, Cottet F (2006) Shedulability analysis of serial transactions. In: Real-time and network systems RTNS’06 Poitiers France, pp 141–149, May 2006Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Traore K, Grolleau E, Cottet F (2006) Simpler of serial transactions using reverse transaction. In: ICAS 06Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Traore K, Grolleau E, Rahni A, Richard M (2006) Response-time analysis of tasks with offsets. In: 12th IEEE international conference on emerging technologies and factory automation ETFA’06, September 2006Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmed Rahni
    • 1
  • Emmanuel Grolleau
    • 1
  • Michaël Richard
    • 1
  1. 1.LISI/ENSMAFuturoscope Chasseneuil CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations