research-article

Failure-dependent execution time analysis

Authors:

Dominik DomisAuthors Info & Claims

QoSA-ISARCS '11: Proceedings of the joint ACM SIGSOFT conference -- QoSA and ACM SIGSOFT symposium -- ISARCS on Quality of software architectures -- QoSA and architecting critical systems -- ISARCS

Pages 115 - 122

https://doi.org/10.1145/2000259.2000279

Published: 20 June 2011 Publication History

Abstract

The growing complexity of safety-critical embedded systems is leading to an increased complexity of safety analysis models. Often used fault tolerance mechanisms have complex failure behavior and produce overhead compared to systems without such mechanisms. The question arises whether the overhead for fault tolerance is acceptable for the increased safety of a system. Manually modeling the timing behavior is cost intensive and error prone. Current approaches of safety analysis and execution time analysis are not able to reflect the timing behavior of complex mechanisms according to failures. In this paper, we describe an approach that combines safety analysis models with execution times to extract different execution times for different failure conditions. This provides a detailed view on the safety behavior in combination with the produced overhead and allows to find and certify appropriate fault tolerance mechanisms.

References

[1]

Guillem Bernat, Alan Burns, and Martin Newby. Probabilistic timing analysis: An approach using copulas. J. Embedded Comput., 1:179--194, April 2005.

Digital Library

[2]

J.L. Diaz, D.F. Garcia, Kim Kanghee, Lee Chang-Gun, L. Lo Bello, J.M. Lopez, Min Sang Lyul, and O.Mirabella. Stochastic analysis of periodic real-time systems. Real-Time Systems Symposium, 2002. RTSS 2002. 23rd IEEE, pages 289--300, 2002.

Digital Library

[3]

DO-178B. Software Considerations in Airbone Systems and Equipment Certification Standard, 1991. Radio Technincal Commission for Aeronautics.

[4]

ISO26262. ISO/DIS 26262, 2009. International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Draft International Standard (DIS).

[5]

IEC61508. International Standard IEC 61508, 1998. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC).

[6]

C. Ferdinand and R. Heckmann. aiT: Worst-Case Execution Time Prediction by Static Program Analysis. In Building the Information Society, volume 156/2004, pages 377--383, 2004.

[7]

Reinhard Wilhelm, Jakob Engblom, Andreas Ermedahl, Niklas Holsti, Stephan Thesing, David Whalley, Guillem Bernat, Christian Ferdinand, Reinhold Heckmann, Tulika Mitra, Frank Mueller, Isabelle Puaut, Peter Puschner, Jan Staschulat, and Per Stenström. The worst-case execution-time problem-overview of methods and survey of tools. ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst., 7(3):1--53, 2008.

Digital Library

[8]

Guillem Bernat, Antoine Colin, and Stefan Petters. pWCET: A tool for probabilistic worst-case execution time analysis of real-time systems. Technical report, University of York. England UK, 2003.

[9]

L. David and I. Puaut. Static determination of probabilistic execution times. In Real-Time Systems, 2004. ECRTS 2004. Proceedings. 16th Euromicro Conference on, pages 223--230, june-2 july 2004.

Digital Library

[10]

A. Burns and S. Edgar. Predicting computation time for advanced processor architectures. Real-Time Systems, 2000. Euromicro RTS 2000. 12th Euromicro Conference on, pages 89--96, 2000.

Digital Library

[11]

David Griffin and Alan Burns. Realism in Statistical Analysis of Worst Case Execution Times. In Björn Lisper, editor, 10th International Workshop on Worst-Case Execution Time Analysis (WCET 2010), volume 15 of OpenAccess Series in Informatics (OASIcs), pages 44--53, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2010. Schloss Dagstuhl--Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik. The printed version of the WCET'10 proceedings are published by OCG (www.ocg.at) - ISBN 978-3-85403-268-7.

[12]

Guillem Bernat, Antoine Colin, and Stefan M. Petters. WCET Analysis of Probabilistic Hard Real-Time Systems. In In Proceedings of the 23rd Real-Time Systems Symposium RTSS 2002, pages 279--288, 2002.

Digital Library

[13]

Yue Lu, T. Nolte, J. Kraft, and C. Norstrom. Statistical-based response-time analysis of systems with execution dependencies between tasks. In Engineering of Complex Computer Systems (ICECCS), 2010 15th IEEE International Conference on, pages 169--179, march 2010.

Digital Library

[14]

A. Burns and S. Edgar. Statistical analysis of WCET for scheduling. Real-Time Systems Symposium, 2001. Proceedings. 22nd IEEE, pages 215--224, dec. 2001.

Digital Library

[15]

I. Broster, A. Burns, and G. Rodriguez-Navas. Probabilistic analysis of CAN with faults. Real-Time Systems Symposium, 2002. RTSS 2002. 23rd IEEE, pages 269--278, 2002.

Digital Library

[16]

T. Nolte, H. Hansson, and C. Norstrom. Probabilistic worst-case response-time analysis for the controller area network. Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium, 2003. Proceedings. The 9th IEEE, pages 200--207, may. 2003.

Digital Library

[17]

Yun Liang and Tulika Mitra. Cache modeling in probabilistic execution time analysis. In Proceedings of the 45th annual Design Automation Conference, DAC '08, pages 319--324, New York, NY, USA, 2008. ACM.

Digital Library

[18]

Eduardo Quinones, Emery D. Berger, Guillem Bernat, and Francisco J. Cazorla. Using randomized caches in probabilistic real-time systems. In Proceedings of the 2009 21st Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems, pages 129--138, Washington, DC, USA, 2009. IEEE Computer Society.

Digital Library

[19]

Y. Papadopoulos and M. Maruhn. Model-Based Automated Synthesis of Fault Trees from Matlab.Simulink Models. International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, 2001.

Digital Library

[20]

L. Grunske. Towards an Integration of Standard Component-Based Safety Evaluation Techniques with SaveCCM. Proc. Conf.Quality of Software Architectures QoSA, 4214, 2006.

Digital Library

[21]

Ana Rugina. System Dependability Evaluation using AADL (Architecture Analysis and Design Language), 2005. LAAS-CNRS.

[22]

M. Bozzano. ESACS: An integrated methodology for design and safety analysis of complex systems. In Proc. of European Safety and Reliability Conf. ESREL, pages 237--245, 2003.

[23]

A. Joshi, M.P.E. Heimdahl, M.P. Steven, and M.W. Whalen. Model-Based Safety Analysis, 2006. NASA.

[24]

P. Ganesh and J.B. Dugan. Automatic Synthesis of Dynamic Fault Trees from UML SystemModels. 13th International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE), 2002.

Digital Library

[25]

M. A. de Miguel, J. F. Briones, J. P. Silva, and A. Alonso. Integration of safety analysis in model-driven software development. Software, IET, 2(3):260--280, June 2008.

[26]

Bernhard Kaiser, Peter Liggesmeyer, and Oliver Mäckel. A new component concept for fault trees. In Peter A. Lindsay and Anthony Cant, editors, Safety Critical Systems and Software 2003, Eigth Australian Workshop on Safety-Related Programmable Systems, (SCS2003), Canberra, ACT, Australia, 9-10 October 2003, volume 33 of CRPIT, pages 37--46. Australian Computer Society, 2003.

Digital Library

[27]

TheMathWorks: Simulink. http://www.mathworks.de/products/simulink/.

[28]

Dominik Domis and Mario Trapp. Integrating Safety Analyses and Component-Based Design. In SAFECOMP, pages 58--71, 2008.

Digital Library

Cited By

Zhou PZuo DHou KZhang ZDong JLi JZhou H(2019)A Comprehensive Technological Survey on the Dependable Self-Management CPS: From Self-Adaptive Architecture to Self-Management StrategiesSensors10.3390/s1905103319:5(1033)Online publication date: 28-Feb-2019
https://doi.org/10.3390/s19051033
Höfig KTrapp MZimmer BLiggesmeyer P(2012)Modeling Quality Aspects: SafetyModel-Based Engineering of Embedded Systems10.1007/978-3-642-34614-9_8(107-118)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2012
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34614-9_8

Index Terms

Failure-dependent execution time analysis

Recommendations

Model-based safety assessment with SysML and component fault trees: application and lessons learned
Abstract
Mastering the complexity of safety assurance for modern, software-intensive systems is challenging in several domains, such as automotive, robotics, and avionics. Model-based safety analysis techniques show promising results to handle this ...
Fault tree analysis

Fault tree analysis (FTA) is a very prominent method to analyze the risks related to safety and economically critical assets, like power plants, airplanes, data centers and web shops. FTA methods comprise of a wide variety of modeling and analysis ...
Integrating requirements analysis and safety analysis
RE '95: Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering

Summary form only given. In developing software for safety critical systems, it is necessary to carry out both requirements analysis and safety analysis. During requirements analysis, the behavioural and functional requirements of the system's software ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

QoSA-ISARCS '11: Proceedings of the joint ACM SIGSOFT conference -- QoSA and ACM SIGSOFT symposium -- ISARCS on Quality of software architectures -- QoSA and architecting critical systems -- ISARCS

June 2011

206 pages

ISBN:9781450307246

DOI:10.1145/2000259

General Chairs:
Ivica Crnkovic
Mälardalen University, Västerås, Sweden
,
Judith A. Stafford
Tufts University, Boston, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Dorina Petriu
Carleton University, Canada
,
Jens Happe
SAP Research Karlsruhe, Germany
,
Paola Inverardi
University of L'Aquila, Italy

Copyright © 2011 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 20 June 2011

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

Comparch '11

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

Comparch '11: Federated Events on Component-Based Software Engineering and Software Architecture

June 20 - 24, 2011

Colorado, Boulder, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 46 of 131 submissions, 35%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
151
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 30 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Zhou PZuo DHou KZhang ZDong JLi JZhou H(2019)A Comprehensive Technological Survey on the Dependable Self-Management CPS: From Self-Adaptive Architecture to Self-Management StrategiesSensors10.3390/s1905103319:5(1033)Online publication date: 28-Feb-2019
https://doi.org/10.3390/s19051033
Höfig KTrapp MZimmer BLiggesmeyer P(2012)Modeling Quality Aspects: SafetyModel-Based Engineering of Embedded Systems10.1007/978-3-642-34614-9_8(107-118)Online publication date: 26-Oct-2012
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34614-9_8

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents