Advertisement

Static Fault-Tolerant Real-Time Scheduling with “Pseudo-topological” Orders

  • Cătălin Dima
  • Alain Girault
  • Yves Sorel
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3253)

Abstract

We give a graph-theoretical model for off-line fault-tolerant scheduling of dataflow algorithms onto multiprocessor architectures with distributed memory. Our framework allows the modeling of both processor and communication channel failures of the “fail silent” type (either transient or permanent), and failure masking is achieved by replicating operations and data communications. We show that, in general, the graph representing a fault-tolerant scheduling may have circuits; hence, the classical computation of starting and ending times of the operations and communications, based upon a topological order, is inapplicable. We thus provide a notion of “pseudo-topological order” that permits the computation of the starting and ending times even in the case of cyclic graphs. We also derive algorithms for computing the timeouts that are used for failure detection.

Keywords

Data Dependency Failure Detection Failure Pattern Topological Order Static Schedule 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baleani, M., Ferrari, A., Mangeruca, L., Peri, M., Pezzini, S., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.: Fault-tolerant platforms for automotive safety-critical applications. In: International Conference on Compilers, Architectures and Synthesis for Embedded Systems, CASES 2003, San Jose, USA, November 2003, ACM, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bannister, J., Trivedi, K.: Task allocation in fault-tolerant distributed systems. Acta Informatica 20, 261–281 (1983)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dima, C., Girault, A., Lavarenne, C., Sorel, Y.: Off-line real-time fault-tolerant scheduling. In: Proceedings of 9th Euromicro Workshop PDP 2001, pp. 410–417. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fohler, G., Ramamritham, K.: Static scheduling of pipelined periodic tasks in distributed real-time systems. In: Euromicro Workshop on Real-Time Systems, EWRTS 1997, Toledo, Spain, June 1997, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S.: Complexity bounds for multiprocessor scheduling with resource constraints. SIAM J. Computing 4(3), 187–200 (1975)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S.: Computers and Intractability, a Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H. Freeman Company, San Francisco (1979)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gerasoulis, A., Yang, T.: A comparison of clustering heuristics for scheduling directed acyclic graphs on multiprocessors. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing 16(4), 276–291 (1992)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ghosh, S.: Guaranteeing Fault-Tolerance through Scheduling in Real-Time Systems. Phd thesis, University of Pittsburgh (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ghosh, S., Melhem, R., Mossé, D., Sansarma, J.: Fault-tolerant, rate-monotonic scheduling. Real-Time Systems Journal 15(2) (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Girault, A., Kalla, H., Sorel, Y.: A scheduling heuristics for distributed realtime embedded systems tolerant to processor and communication media failures. International Journal of Production Research (2004) (to appear)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Girault, A., Lavarenne, C., Sighireanu, M., Sorel, Y.: An algorithm for automatically obtaining distributed and fault-tolerant static schedules. In: International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, DSN 2003, San-Francisco, USA, June 2003, IEEE, Los Alamitos (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grandpierre, T., Lavarenne, C., Sorel, Y.: Optimized rapid prototyping for realtime embedded heterogeneous multiprocessors. In: Proceedings of 7th International Workshop on Hardware/Software Co-Design, Rome, Italy (May 1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kopetz, H.: TTP/A - the fireworks protocol. Research Report 23, Institut für Technische Informatik, Technische Universität Wien, Wien, Austria (1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kopetz, H., Damm, A., Koza, C., Mulazzani, M., Schwabl, W., Senft, C., Zainlinger, R.: Distributed fault-tolerant real-time systems: The MARS Approach. MICRO 9, 25–40 (1989)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Oh, Y., Son, S.H.: Enhancing fault-tolerance in rate-monotonic scheduling. Real-Time Systems 7, 315–330 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oh, Y., Son, S.H.: Scheduling hard real-time tasks with tolerance of multiple processor failures. Technical Report CS–93–28, Unversity of Virginia (May 1993)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pinello, C., Carloni, L., Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A.: Fault-tolerant deployment of embedded software for cost-sensitive real-time feedback-control applications. In: Design, Automation and Test in Europe, DATE 2004, Paris, February 2004, IEEE, Los Alamitos (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ramamritham, K.: Allocation and scheduling of precedence-related periodic tasks. IEEE Trans. on Parallel and Distributed Systems 6, 412–420 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schneider, F.B.: Byzantine generals in action: Implementing fail-stop processors. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems 2, 145–154 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ullman, J.D.: Polynomial complete scheduling problems. In: Fourth ACM Symposium on Operating System Principles, New-York, USA, pp. 96–101 (1973)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cătălin Dima
    • 1
  • Alain Girault
    • 2
  • Yves Sorel
    • 3
  1. 1.Université Paris 12Créteil cedexFrance
  2. 2.INRIA Rhône-AlpesSaint-Ismier cedexFrance
  3. 3.INRIA RocquencourtLe Chesnay cedexFrance

Personalised recommendations