EDCC 2002: Dependable Computing EDCC-4 pp 253-270 | Cite as

Wrapping Real-time Systems from Temporal Logic Specifications

  • Manuel Rodrίguez
  • Jean-Charles Fabre
  • Jean Arlat
Conference paper
First Online:
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2485)

Abstract

This paper defines a methodology for developing wrappers for real-time systems starting from temporal logic specifications. Error confinement wrappers are automatically generated from the specifications of the target real-time system. The resulting wrappers are the executable version of the specifications, and account for both timing and functional constraints. They are executed on-line by a runtime checker, a sort of virtual machine that interprets temporal logic. A reflective approach is used to implement an observation layer placed between the runtime checker and the target system. It allows the wrappers to obtain the necessary event and data items from the target system so as to perform at runtime the checks defined by the temporal logic specifications. The proposed method has been applied to the use of real-time microkernels in dependable systems. Fault injection is used to assess the detection coverage of the wrappers and analyze trade-offs between performance and coverage.

Keywords

Virtual Machine Temporal Logic Linear Temporal Logic Fault Injection Time Linear Temporal Logic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    W. R. Cheswick and S. M. Bellovin, Firewalls and Internet Security, Addison-Wesley, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    J. Voas, K. Miller, Interface Robustness for COTS-Based Systems, Digest no. 97/013, Colloquium on COTS and Safety Critical Systems, IEE, Computing and Control Division, pp. 7/1–7/12, 1997.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. M. Voas, “Certifying Off-the-Shelf Software Components”, Computer, pp. 53–59, 1998.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. K. Ghosh, M. Schmid, F. Hill, “Wrapping Windows NT Software for Robustness”, in Proc. 29th Int. Symp. on Fault-Tolerant Computing, Madison, WI, USA, pp. 344–347, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    A. Mahmood, D. M. Andrews, E. J. McCluskey, “Executable Assertions and Flight Software”, in Proc. 6th Digital Avionics Systems Conf., Baltimore, MD, USA, pp. 346–351, 1984.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    C. Rabéjac, J.-P. Blanquart, J.-P. Queille, “Executable Assertions and Timed Traces for On-Line Software Error Detection”, in Proc. 26th Int. Symp. on Fault-Tolerant Computing, Sendai, Japan, pp. 138–147, 1996.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. Hiller, “Executable Assertions for Detecting Data Errors in Embedded Control Systems”, in Proc. Int. Conf. on Dependable Systems and Networks, New York, NY, USA, pp. 24–33, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    F. Salles, M. Rodrίguez, J.-C. Fabre, J. Arlat, “Metakernels and Fault Containment Wrappers”, in Proc. 29th Int. Symp. on Fault-Tolerant Computing Systems, Madison, WI, USA, pp. 22–29, 1999.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Diaz, G. Juanole, J.-P. Courtiat, “Observer — A Concept for Formal On-Line Validation of Distributed Systems”, IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, vol. 20, no. 12, pp. 900–913, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    F. Jahanian, R. Rajkumar, S. Raju, “Runtime Monitoring of Timing Constraints in Distributed Real-Time Systems”, Real-Time Systems, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 247–274, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    A. K. Mok, G. Liu, “Efficient Run-Time Monitoring of Timing Constraints”, in Proc. 3rd Real-Time Technology and Applications Symp., Montreal, Canada, pp. 252–262, 1997.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    T. Savor, R. E. Seviora, “An Approach to Automatic Detection of Software Failures in Real-Time Systems”, Ibid., pp. 136–146, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Enforceable Security Policies, TR98-1664, Dept. Comp. Science, Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY (USA), 1998.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    M. Rodrίguez, J.-C. Fabre, J. Arlat, “Formal Specification for Building Robust Real-time Microkernels”, in Proc. 21st Real-Time Systems Symp, Orlando, FL, USA, pp. 119–128, 2000.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Chorus Systems, “CHORUS/ClassiX release 3-Technical Overview”, TR CS/TR-96-119.12, Chorus Systems, 1997 (http://www.sun.com/chorusos).
  16. [16]
    A. Burns, A. J. Wellings, Real-time Systems and their Programming Languages, Addison-Wesley, 1997.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    I. Majzik, J. Jávorszky, A. Pataricza E. Selényi, “Concurrent Error Detection of Program Execution Based on Statechart Specification”, in Proc. 10th European Workshop on Dependable Computing, Vienna, Austria, pp. 181–185, 1999.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    K. Havelund, G. Rosu, “Synthesizing Monitors for Safety Properties”, in Proc. Int. Conf. on Tools and Algorithms for Construction and Analysis of Systems, Grenoble, France, pp. 342–256, 2002.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    B. C. Moszkowski, Executing Temporal Logic Programs, Cambrige University Press, 1987.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    P. Maes, “Concepts and Experiments in Computational Reflection”, in Proc. Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems and Aplications, Orlando, FL (USA), pp. 147–155, 1987.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    S. Hazelhurst, J. Arlat, “Specifying and Verifying Fault Tolerant Hardware”, in Proc. Designing Correct Circuits, Grenoble, France, 2002.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    M. Rodrίguez Moreno, “Wrapping Technology for the Dependability of Real-Time Systems”, Doctoral Dissertation, National Polytechnic Institute, Toulouse, France, July 2002. (in French).Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    ANTLR, ANTLR Complete Language Translation Solutions, http://www.antlr.org.
  24. [24]
    G. Kiczales, J. D. Riviéres, D. G. Bobrow, The Art of the Metaobject Protocol, MIT Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    J.-C. Fabre, T. Pérennou, “A Metaobject Architecture for Fault Tolerant Distributed Systems: The FRIENDS Approach”, IEEE Trans. on Computers, pp. 78–95, 1998.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    A. Burns, A. M. Lister, “A Framework for Building Dependable Systems”, The Computer Journal, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 173–181, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    M. Joseph, Real-Time Systems: Specification, Verification and Analysis, Prentice-Hall, 1996.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    M. Rodrίguez, A. Albinet, J. Arlat, “MAFALDA-RT: A Tool for Dependability Assessment of Real-Time in Proc. Int. Conf. on Dependable Systems and Networks, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 267–272, 2002.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    M. Rodrίguez, J.-C. Fabre and J. Arlat, “Assessment of Real-Time Systems by Fault-Injection”, in Proc. European Safety and Reliability Conference, Lyon, France, pp. 101–108, 2002.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    J. A. Stankovic, M. Spuri, K. Ramamritham, G. C. Buttazzo, Deadline Scheduling for Real-Time Systems: EDF and Related Algorithms, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel Rodrίguez
    • 1
  • Jean-Charles Fabre
    • 1
  • Jean Arlat
    • 1
  1. 1.LAAS-CNRSToulouse Cedex 4France

Personalised recommendations