Advertisement

A Compositional Framework for Real-Time Guarantees

  • Insik Shin
  • Insup Lee
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4147)

Abstract

Our primary goal is to develop a compositional real-time scheduling framework where global (system-level) timing properties are established by composing together independently (specified and) analyzed local (component-level) timing properties. In this paper, we define two problems and one design issue in developing such a framework and present our approaches to the problems and the design issue. The two problems are (1) the scheduling interface derivation problem that is to (exactly) abstract the collective real-time requirements of a component as a single real-time requirement, or a scheduling interface and (2) the scheduling interface composition problem that is to (exactly) compose the scheduling interfaces of components into the system-level scheduling interface. The design issue is how to define a scheduling interface model. Our approach is to use the standard periodic model as the scheduling interface model and to address the two problems with the periodic model. We introduce exact conditions under which our proposed periodic scheduling interface model can abstract the collective real-time requirements that a set of periodic tasks demands under EDF (earliest deadline first) and RM (rate monotonic) scheduling. We present simulation results to evaluate the overheads that the periodic scheduling interfaces incur in terms of utilization increase.

Keywords

Schedule Algorithm Schedulability Analysis Schedule Framework Schedule Component Rate Monotonic 
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.
    Baruah, S., Mok, A., Rosier, L.: Preemptively scheduling hard-real-time sporadic tasks on one processor. In: Proc. of IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1990, pp. 182–190 (1990)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bernat, G., Burns, A., Llamosi, A.: Weakly hard real-time systems. IEEE Transactions on Computers 50(4), 308–321 (2001)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chakrabarti, A., de Alfaro, L., Henzinger, T.A., Stoelinga, M.: Resource interfaces. In: Alur, R., Lee, I. (eds.) EMSOFT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2855, pp. 117–133. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deng, Z., Liu, J.W.-S.: Scheduling real-time applications in an open environment. In: Proc. of IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1997, pp. 308–319 (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feng, X., Mok, A.: A model of hierarchical real-time virtual resources. In: Proc. of IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 2002, pp. 26–35 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hamdaoui, M., Ramanathan, P.: A dynamic priority assignment technique for streams with (m, k)-firm deadlines. IEEE Transactions on Computers 44(12), 1443–1451 (1995)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kuo, T.-W., Li, C.H.: A fixed-priority-driven open environment for real-time applications. In: Proc. of IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1999, pp. 256–267 (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lehoczky, J., Sha, L., Ding, Y.: The rate monotonic scheduling algorithm: exact characterization and average case behavior. In: Proc. of IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pp. 166–171 (1989)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lipari, G., Baruah, S.: A hierarchical extension to the constant bandwidth server framework. In: Proc. of IEEE Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium, May 2001, pp. 26–35 (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lipari, G., Bini, E.: Resource partitioning among real-time applications. In: Proc. of Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (July 2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu, C.L., Layland, J.W.: Scheduling algorithms for multi-programming in a hard-real-time environment. Journal of the ACM 20(1), 46–61 (1973)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Parekh, A.K., Gallagher, R.G.: A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks: the single-node case. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 1(3), 344–357 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Regehr, J., Stankovic, J.: HLS: A framework for composing soft real-time schedulers. In: Proc. of IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 2001, pp. 3–14 (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Saewong, S., Rajkumar, R., Lehoczky, J.P., Klein, M.H.: Analysis of hierarchical fixed-priority scheduling. In: Proc. of Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (June 2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shin, I., Lee, I.: Periodic resource model for compositional real-time guarantees. In: Proc. of IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 2003, pp. 2–13 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Insik Shin
    • 1
  • Insup Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.Departement of Computer and Information ScienceUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations