An Open Framework for Real-Time Scheduling Simulation
- First Online:
Real-time systems seek to guarantee predictable run-time behaviour to ensure that tasks will meet their deadlines. Optimal scheduling decisions, however, easily impose unacceptable run-time costs for many but the most basic scheduling problems, specifically in the context of multiprocessors and distributed systems. Deriving suitable heuristics then usually requires extensive simulations to gain confidence in the chosen approach. In this paper we therefore present Fortissimo, an open framework that facilitates the development of taylor-made real-time scheduling simulators for Multiprocessor systems.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- N. C. Audsley, A. Burns, M. F. Richardson, and A. J. Wellings. STRESS: A simulator for hard real-time systems. Software Practice and Experience, July 1994.Google Scholar
- R. Davis and A. Wellings. Dual-priority scheduling. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 100–109, 1995.Google Scholar
- E. Gene. Real-time systems: Spring simulators documentation, 1990. http://www-ccs.cs.umass.edu/spring/internal/spring_sim_docs.html.
- M. Gergeleit and H. Streich. Task-pair scheduling with optimistic case execution times—An example for an adaptive real-time system. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Object-Oriented Real-Time Dependable Systems (WORDS), February 1996.Google Scholar
- E. D. Jensen, C. D. Locke, and H. Tokuda. A time-driven scheduling model for real-time operating systems. In Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1985.Google Scholar
- G. Koren and D. Shasha. Skip-over: Algorithms and complexity for overloaded systems that allow skips. In Proceedings of Sixteenth IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium. IEEE, 1995.Google Scholar
- T. Kramp, M. Adrian, and R. Koster. An open framework for real-time scheduling simulation. SFB 501 Report 01/00, Department of Computer Science, University of Kaiserslautern, Germany, January 2000.Google Scholar
- J. W. S. Liu, K.-J. Lin, W.-K. Shih, A. C. Yu, J.-Y. Chung, and W. Zhao. Algorithms for scheduling imprecise computations. IEEE Computer, 24(5):58–68, May 1991.Google Scholar
- J. W. S. Liu, J. L. Redondo, Z. Deng, T. S. Tia, R. Bettati, A. Silberman, M. Storch, R. Ha, and W. K. Shih. PERTS: A prototyping environment for real-time systems. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 184–188. IEEE, December 1993.Google Scholar
- L. Sha, R. Rajkumar, and J. P. Lehoczky. Priority inheritance protocols: An approach to real-time synchronisation. Technical Report CMU-CS-87-181, Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University, 1987.Google Scholar
- J. A. Stankovic, M. Spuri, M. Di Natale, and G. Buttazzo. Implications of classical scheduling results for real-time systems. IEEE Computer, 28(6):16–25, June 1995.Google Scholar
- A. D. Stoyenko. A schedulability analyzer for Real-time Euclid. In Proceedings of the Eighth Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 218–227. IEEE, December 1987.Google Scholar
- H. Tokuda, J. W. Wendorf, and H.-Y. Wang. Implementation of a time-driven scheduler for real-time operating systems. In Proceedings of the Eighth IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1987.Google Scholar