A Design Methodology for Distributed Real-Time Automotive Applications

  • Werner Damm
  • Alexander Metzner

This paper presents a survey on techniques for supporting a seamless development process of embedded automotive real-time systems. Starting from a set of requirements we show how to integrate early design space exploration, real-time requirements and the definition of component interfaces in a distributed organization of suppliers and OEMs. The main focus is to provide building blocks for a design methodology enabling an AUTOSAR driven process. We also present a method to formally specify requirements in terms of sequence diagrams and how these requirements can be formally checked against implementations by using a rich set of time analysis techniques. Finally, we present our approach of optimizing the implementation in order to reduce the number of ECUs or to increase robustness.


Electronic Control Unit Design Space Exploration Event Stream Schedulability Analysis Response Time 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. N. Audsley, A. Burns, R. Davis, K. Tindell, and A. Wellings. Fixed priority pre-emptive schedul-ing: An historical perspective. Real-Time Systems, 8(2), 1995.Google Scholar
  2. S. Baruah and A. Burns. Sustainable Scheduling Analysis. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium. IEEE Computer Society, 2006.Google Scholar
  3. W. Damm and D. Harl. LSCs: Breathing Life into Message Sequence Charts. Formal Methods in System Design, 19, 2001.Google Scholar
  4. W. Damm, E. B öde, A. Metzner, T. Peikenkamp, and A. Votintseva. Boosting Re-use of Embed-ded Automotive Applications Through Rich Components. Proceedings Foundations of Inter-face Technologies, 2005.Google Scholar
  5. R. Davis and A. Burns. Hierarchical Fixed Priority Pre-emptive Scheduling. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, 2005.Google Scholar
  6. M. Di Natale and J. Stankovic. Dynamic End-To-End Guarantees in Distributed Real-Time Sys-tems. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. H. Dierks, , A. Metzner, and I. Stierand. Combining Timed Automata based Formal Specifica-tions and Real-Time Scheduling. Technical report, Department of Computer Science, Carl-von-Ossietzky Universit ät Oldenburg, 2006.Google Scholar
  8. A. Easwaran, I. Lee, O. Sokolsky, and I. Shin. Incremental Schedulability Analysis of Hierarchical Real-Time Components. In Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Embedded Software, 2006.Google Scholar
  9. E. Fersman and W. Yi. A generic approach to schedulability analysis of real time tasks. Nordic Journal of Computing, 11, 2004.Google Scholar
  10. A. Hamann, M. Jersak, K. Richter, and R. Ernst. Design Space Exploration and System Optimiza-tion with SymTA/S. In Proc. RTSS, 2004.Google Scholar
  11. H. Heinecke, K.-P. Schnelle, H. Fennel, J. Bortolazzi, L. Lundh, J. Leflour, J.-L. Mat é , K. Nishikawa, and T. Scharnhorst. AUTomotive Open System ARchitecture - an industry-wide initiative to manage the complexity of emerging automotive E/E-architectures. In Proceedings of Convergence 2004, International Congress on Transportation Electronics, 2004.Google Scholar
  12. M. Hendriks and M. Verhoef. Timed Automata Based Analysis of Embedded System Architec-tures. In Proc. IPDPS, 2006.Google Scholar
  13. T.A. Henzinger and S. Matic.“An Interface Algebra for Real-Time Components”. In Proc. RTAS, 2006.Google Scholar
  14. J. Jonsson and K. Shin. Deadline Assignment in Distributed Hard Real-Time Systems with Relaxed Locality Constraints. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 1997.Google Scholar
  15. J. Klose, T. Toben, B. Westphal, and H. Wittke. Check It Out: On the Efficient Formal Verification of Life Sequence Charts. In Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Computer Aided Verifica-tion, 2006.Google Scholar
  16. C. Liu and J. Layland. Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming in a hard real-time environ-ment. Journal of the ACM, 20(1):46-61, 1973.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. G. Madl, S. Abdelwahed, and D.C. Schmidt. Verifying distributed real-time properties of embed-ded systems via graph transformations and model checking. Real Time Systems, 33, 2006.Google Scholar
  18. A. Metzner. Effizienter Entwurf verteilter eingebetteter Echtzeitsysteme. PhD thesis, Carl-von-Ossietzky Universit ät Oldenburg, 2005.Google Scholar
  19. A. Metzner and C. Herde. RTSAT - An Optimal and Efficient Approach to the Task Allocation Problem in Distributed Architectures. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Sympo-sium. IEEE Computer Society, 2006.Google Scholar
  20. A. Metzner, M. Fr änzle, C. Herde, and I. Stierand. Scheduling Distributed Real-Time Systems by Satisfiability Checking. In Proceedings of the Conference on Embedded and Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications, 2005.Google Scholar
  21. A. Metzner, M. Fr änzle, C. Herde, and I. Stierand. An Optimal Approach to the Task Allocation Problem on Hierarchical Architectures. In Proceedings of the 20th IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium, 2006.Google Scholar
  22. J. Palencia and M. Harbour. Schedulability Analysis for Tasks with Static and Dynamic Offsets. In Proceeding of the 9th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1998.Google Scholar
  23. K. Richter, R. Racu, and R. Ernst. Scheduling Analysis Integration for Heterogeneous Multi-processor SoC. In Proc. RTSS, 2003.Google Scholar
  24. K. Tindell. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Hard Real-Time Systems. PhD thesis, University of York, 1994.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Werner Damm
    • 1
  • Alexander Metzner
    • 1
  1. 1.OFFISGermany

Personalised recommendations