1 / 12

Predictable Design for Real-time Embedded Control A Case Study

Predictable Design for Real-time Embedded Control A Case Study. Jinfeng Huang & Jeroen Voeten Eindhoven University of Technology . PROGR E SS. A running example: railroad crossing Problems in current design practice Compositional design approach Demo. Contents. Railroad Crossing.

berg
Download Presentation

Predictable Design for Real-time Embedded Control A Case Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Predictable Design for Real-time Embedded Control A Case Study Jinfeng Huang & Jeroen Voeten Eindhoven University of Technology PROGRESS

  2. A running example: railroad crossing Problems in current design practice Compositional design approach Demo Contents

  3. Railroad Crossing • Trains run independently at different velocities • Velocities are constant • Avoid collisions • As efficient as possible

  4. Check Crossing Stop Motor Delay (D) Critical Zone Crossing Area Sensor A D T+D+  T Current Practice Train A Crossing Train B Start Motor

  5. SensorA signaled T Delay D T+D Check Crossing T+D+1 Stop motor T+D+1+2 Timing Property Between D and D+ seconds after Train A has passed Sensor A, “Train A” checks the Crossing and stops the trainif the Crossing is occupied • (Timed) execution trace of “Train A”: 1+2  ?

  6. Other components running SensorA signaled T T+1 T+1+D+2 T+1+D +2+1+3 Delay D T+1+D Check Crossing T+1+D +2+1 Stop motor T+1+D +2+1+3+2 Timing Property - Add other Components • e.g. to control other trains or crossings. • (Timed) execution trace of “Train A” (disturbed by other components): 1+2+3+1+2  BOOM !!!

  7. Problems in current practice • Behaviors of components are not compositional • Debug and analysis codes “pollute” the timing behavior of the system • Lack reusability, maintainability, portability etc. • Lack facilities to guarantee property preservation: Implementation exhibits unexpected behaviors not present in the model

  8. Compositional Approach (Modeling) • POOSL: Based on a two-phase execution frame: actions are instantaneous and time progress is represented in a virtual way (instead of based directly on a physical clock) • Compositional semantics • Executable • Expressive (concurrency, time, communication…)

  9. Abstract Model Refinement Refinement Extended Model Simulation Train A Train B Crossing Image Image Estimation of  Synthesis Model LEGO DACTA Interface Synthesis Compositional Approach (Modeling) Verification

  10. Compositional Approach (Synthesis) • Automatic code generation (RT-Rotalumis,C++) • Real-time property-preserving mapping guaranteed by the -hypothesis • The execution tree: ordering of actions is kept from model to implementation • Synchronization between virtual time and physical time: if an action happens at virtual time t in model it happens in physical time interval (t-/2,t+/2) in implementation

  11. Demo: The Railroad Crossing • Velocity TrainA: 40 cm/s • Velocity TrainB: 90 cm/s Abstract Model Extended Model Rapid analysis Synthesis Model Realization Models and video are not included in the presentation. For those who are interested, please mailto: j.huang@tue.nl

  12. Future Work and Open Issues • Mapping efficiency • Prediction  / platform requirements • Multi-processor platforms • Streaming data • Continuous-time environmental models • Tools

More Related