Advertisement

Mapping of Concurrent Object-Oriented Models to Extended Real-Time Task Networks

  • Matthias Büker
  • Kim Grüttner
  • Philipp A. Hartmann
  • Ingo Stierand
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 106)

Abstract

For checking the temporal behaviour of embedded systems, real-time scheduling analysis based on abstract, formal models is a well-established method. To alleviate large over-approximation resulting from abstraction of the functional behaviour, task networks with functional extensions have been proposed. These extended task networks can be analysed by a combination of model-checking and testing. A major difficulty for such analytical models in practical use-cases is the non-trivial representation of a real implementation model.To overcome this limitation we propose a formal mapping of a concurrent, object-oriented, executable implementation model with explicit shared resources to a real-time task network with functional extensions. The mapping starts from a C​+​+ subset and maps the functional behaviour based on externally observable synchronisation events. The proposed mapping allows to check the implementation model against functional and temporal requirements, like local and end-to-end deadlines.

Keywords

Output Port Function Network Function Node Task Execution Event Stream 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Aho, A.V., Sethi, R., Ullman, J.D.: Compilers: principles, techniques, and tools. Addison-Wesley Longman Publ., Boston, MA, USA (1986)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Büker, M., Metzner, A., Stierand, I.: Testing Real-Time Task Networks with Functional Extensions Using Model-Checking. In: 14th IEEE Conf. on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burns, A., Wellings, A.: Concurrency in Ada. Camb. Univ. Pr. (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fossy – Functional Oldenburg System Synthesiser. http://fossy.offis.de
  5. 5.
    Grüttner, K., Grabbe, C., Oppenheimer, F., Nebel, W.: Object Oriented Design and Synthesis of Communication in Hardware-/Software Systems with OSSS. In: Proceedings of the SASIMI 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grüttner, K., Oppenheimer, F., Nebel, W.: OSSS Methodology - System-Level Design and Synthesis of Embedded HW/SW Systems in C++. In: ISABEL 2008, Aalborg, Denmark (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hartmann, P.A., Grüttner, K., Ittershagen, P., Rettberg, A.: A Framework for Generic HW/SW Communication Using Remote Method Invocation. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Electronic System Level Synthesis Conference (ESLsyn’2011). San Diego, CA, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hartmann, P.A., Reinkemeier, P., Kleen, H., Nebel, W.: Modeling of Embedded Software Multitasking in SystemC/OSSS, Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol. 36, chap. 14, pp. 213–226. Springer (2009). DOI 10.1007/978-1-4020-9714-0Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Metzner, A.: Scheduling analysis of distributed real-time systems under functional constraints. In: Proc. Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, ETFA, pp. 591–599 (2008). DOI 10.1109/ETFA.2008.4638458Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nenova, S., Kästner, D.: Worst-case timing estimation and architecture exploration in early design phases. In: N. Holsti (ed.) 9th Intl. Workshop on Worst-Case Execution Time Analysis. Dagstuhl, Germany (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Perathoner, S., Wandeler, E., Thiele, L., Hamann, A., Schliecker, S., Henia, R., Racu, R., Ernst, R., Harbour, M.G.: Influence of different system abstractions on the performance analysis of distributed real-time systems. In: EMSOFT’07: Proc. of the 7th ACM & IEEE int. conf. on Embedded Software, pp. 193–202. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2007). DOI http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1289927.1289959Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rox, J., Ernst, R.: Construction and Deconstruction of Hierarchical Event Streams with Multiple Hierarchical Layers. In: Proc. of the 20th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS) (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schlichter, T., Haubelt, C., Hannig, F., Teich, J.: Using symbolic feasibility tests during design space exploration of heterogeneous multi-processor systems. In: 16th IEEE Intl. Conf. on Application-Specific Systems, Architectures, and Processors (ASAP 2005), pp. 9–14 (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thiele, L., Chakraborty, S., Gries, M., Künzli, S.: A framework for evaluating design tradeoffs in packet processing architectures. In: Proc. of the 39th ann. Design Automation Conference, pp. 880–885. ACM. DOI http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/513918. 514136Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthias Büker
    • 1
  • Kim Grüttner
    • 1
  • Philipp A. Hartmann
    • 1
  • Ingo Stierand
    • 2
  1. 1.OFFIS – Institute for Information TechnologyOldenburgGermany
  2. 2.Carl von Ossietzky UniversityOldenburgGermany

Personalised recommendations