- 457 Downloads
We introduce the paradigm of schedule-carrying code (SCC). A hard real-time program can be executed on a given platform only if there exists a feasible schedule for the real-time tasks of the program. Traditionally, a scheduler determines the existence of a feasible schedule according to some scheduling strategy. With SCC, a compiler proves the existence of a feasible schedule by generating executable code that is attached to the program and represents its schedule. An SCC executable is a real-time program that carries its schedule as code, which is produced once and can be revalidated and executed with each use. We evaluate SCC both in theory and practice. In theory, we give two scenarios, of nonpreemptive and distributed scheduling for Giotto programs, where the generation of a feasible schedule is hard, while the validation of scheduling instructions that are attached to the programs is easy. In practice, we implement SCC and show that explicit scheduling instructions can reduce the scheduling overhead up to 35% and can provide an efficient, flexible, and verifiable means for compiling Giotto programs on complex architectures, such as the TTA.
KeywordsControl Task Feasible Schedule Input Event Time Safety Initial Address
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Ferdinand, C., Heckmann, R., Langenbach, M., Martin, F., Schmidt, M., Theiling, H., Thesing, S., Wilhelm, R.: Reliable and precise WCET determination for a real-life processor. In: Henzinger, T.A., Kirsch, C.M. (eds.) EMSOFT 2001. LNCS, vol. 2211, pp. 469–485. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Henzinger, T.A., Kirsch, C.M.: The Embedded Machine: predictable, portable real-time code. In: Proc. Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp. 315–326. ACM, New York (2002)Google Scholar
- 7.Kirsch, C.M., Henzinger, T.A., Sanvido, M.A.A.: A Programmable Microkernel for Real-Time Systems. Technical Report CSD-03-1250, UC Berkeley (2003)Google Scholar
- 10.Necula, G.C.: Proof-carrying code. In: Proc. Principles of Programming Languages, pp. 106–119. ACM Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar