From task scheduling in single processor environments to message scheduling in a PROFIBUS fieldbus network

  • Eduardo Tovar
  • Francisco Vasques
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1586)


In this paper we survey the most relevant results for the prioritybased schedulability analysis of real-time tasks, both for the fixed and dynamic priority assignment schemes. We give emphasis to the worst-case response time analysis in non-preemptive contexts, which is fundamental for the communication schedulability analysis. We define an architecture to support priority-based scheduling of messages at the application process level of a specific fieldbus communication network, the PROFIBUS. The proposed architecture improves the worst-case messages’ response time, overcoming the limitation of the first-come-first-served (FCFS) PROFIBUS queue implementations.


Message Request Controller Area Network Early Deadline First Priority Assignment Schedulability Analysis 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Stankovic, J.: “Real-Time Computing Systems: the Next Generation” in STANKOVIC J., RAMAMRITHAM, K. (Eds.) “Tutorial: Hard Real-Time Systems” (IEEE 1988), pp. 14–38, 1988.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Normes FIP NF C46-601 to NF C46-607, Union Technique de l’Electricité, AFNOR, 1990.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Profibus Standard DIN 19245 part I and II. Translated from German, Profibus Nutzerorganisation e.V., 1992.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    SAE J1583, Controller Area Network (CAN), an In-Vehicle Serial Communication Protocol. SAE Handbook, Vol. II, 1992.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    The P-NET Standard. International P-NET User Organisation ApS, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    General Purpose Field Communication System, Vol. 1/3 (P-NET), Vol. 2/3 (Profibus), Vol. 3/3 (FIP), CENELEC, 1996.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tindell, K., Hansson, H., Wellings, A.: “Analysing Real-Time Communications: Controller Area Network (CAN)”. Proceedings of the IEEE Real Time Systems Symposium (RTSS’94), S.Juan, Puerto Rico, pp. 259–263, IEEE Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tindell, K., Burns, A., Wellings, A.: “Calculating Controller Area Network (CAN) Message Response Times”, Control Engineering Practice, Vol. 3, No. 8, pp. 1163–1169, Pergamon, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Raja, P., Ruiz, L., Decotignie, J.-D. “On the Necessary Real-Time Conditions for the Producer-Distributer-Consumer Model”. Proceedings of 1st IEEE Workshop on Factory Communication Systems (WFCS’95), Leysin, Switzerland, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pedro, P., Burns, A.: “Worst Case Response Time Analysis of Hard Real-Time Sporadic Traffic in FIP Networks”. Proceedings of 9th Euromicro Workshop on Real-time Systems, Toledo, Spain, pp. 5–12, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tovar, E., Vasques, F.: “Pre-run-time Schedulability Analysis of P-NET Networks”. Proceedings of 24th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (IECON’98), Aachen, Germany, pp. 236–241, 1998.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tovar, E., Vasques, F., Burns, A.: “Real-Time Communications in Multihop P-NET Networks”. Submitted to Control Engineering Practice, 1998.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tovar, E., Vasques, F.: “Real-Time Fieldbus Communications Using Profibus Networks”. To appear in the IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 1998.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    TOVAR, E., VASQUES, F.: “Cycle Time Properties of the Profibus Timed Token Protocol”, submitted to IEE Proceedings-Software, 1998.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    ISO, Information Processing Systems-Fibre Distributed Data Interface (FDDI)-Part 2: Token Ring Media Access Control (MAC), ISO International Standard 9314-2, 1989.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    IEEE, IEEE Standard 802.4: token passing bus access method and physical layer specification, 1985.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Grow, R.: “A Timed Token Protocol for Local Area Networks”. Proceedings of Electro’82, May 1982, Token Access Protocols, Paper 17/3.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Agrawal, G., Chen, B., Zhao, W., Davari, S.: “Guaranteeing Synchronous Message Deadlines with the Timed Token Protocol”. Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, June 1992.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Montuschi, P., Ciminiera, L., Valenzano, A.: “Time Characteristics of IEE802.4 Token Bus Protocol”. IEE Proceedings, January 1992 139 (1), pp. 81–87.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Burns, A.: “Scheduling Hard Real-Time Systems”. Software Engineering Journal-Special Issue on Real-time Systems, pp. 116–128, May 1991.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu, C., Layland, J.: “Scheduling Algorithms for Multiprogramming in a Hard-Real-Time Environment”. Journal of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), Vol. 20, NO. 1, pp. 46–61, January 1973.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sha, L., Rajkumar, R., Lehoczky, J.: “Priority Inheritance Protocols: an Approach to Real-Time Synchronisation”. IEEE Transactions on Computers, Vol. 39, NO. 9, pp. 1175–1185, September 1990.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Joseph, M., Pandya, P.: “Finding Response Times in a Real-Time System”. The Computer Journal, Vol. 29, NO. 5, pp. 390–395, 1986.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Audsley, N., Burns, A., Richardson, M., Tindell, K., Wellings, A.: “Applying New Scheduling Theory to Static Priority Pre-emptive Scheduling”. Software Engineering Journal, Vol. 8, NO. 5, pp. 285–292, September 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zheng, Q.: “Real-Time Fault-Tolerant Communication in Computer Networks”. PhD Thesis, University of Michigan, 1993.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Baruah, S., Howell, R., Rosier, L.: “Algorithms and Complexity Concerning the Preemptive Scheduling of Periodic Real-time Tasks on One Processor”, Real-Time Systems, 2, pp. 301–324, 1990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Baruah, S., Mok, A., Rosier, L.: “Preemptively Scheduling Hard-Real-Time Sporadic Tasks on One Processor”. Proceedings of the 11th Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS’90), pp. 182–190, 1990.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ripoll, I., Crespo, A., Mok, A.: “Improvement in Feasibility Testing for Real-time Systems”, Real-Time Systems, 11, pp. 19–39, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Spuri, M.: “Earliest deadline Scheduling in Real-time Systems”. PhD Thesis, Scuola Superiore Santa Anna, Pisa, 1995.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zheng, Q., Shin, K.: “On the Ability of Establishing Real-Time Channels in Point-to-Point Packet-Switched Networks”. IEEE Transactions on Communications, Vol. 42, no. 2/3/4, pp. 1096–1105, 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    George, L., Rivierre, N., Spuri, M.: “Preemptive and Non-Preemptive Real-Time Uni-Processor Scheduling”. Technical Report No., 2966, INRIA, September 1996.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Spuri, M.: “Analysis of Deadline Scheduled Real-Time Systems”. Technical Report No. 2772, INRIA, January 1996.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tindell, K., Clark, J.: “Holistic Schedulability Analysis for Distributed Hard Real-Time Systems”, in Microprocessors and Microprogramming, No. 40, 1994.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Spuri, M.: “Holistic Analysis for Deadline Scheduled Real-Time Distributed Systems”. INRIA, Technical Report no. 2873, April 1996.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tindell, K., Burns, A., Wellings A. “Analysis of Hard Real-Time Communications”. Real-Time Systems, 1995, 9, pp. 147–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eduardo Tovar
    • 1
  • Francisco Vasques
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer EngineeringPolytechnic Institute of PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of PortoPorto CodexPortugal

Personalised recommendations