Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Control/Architecture Codesign for Cyber-Physical Systems

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Hardware/Software Codesign

Abstract

Control/architecture codesign has recently emerged as one popular research focus in the context of cyber-physical systems. Many of the cyber-physical systems pertaining to industrial applications are embedded control systems. With the increasing size and complexity of such systems, the resource awareness in the system design is becoming an important issue. Control/architecture codesign methods integrate the design of controllers and the design of embedded platforms to exploit the characteristics on both sides. This reduces the design conservativeness of the separate design paradigm while guaranteeing the correctness of the system and thus helps to achieve more efficient design. In this chapter of the handbook, we provide an overview on the control/architecture codesign in terms of resource awareness and show three illustrative examples of state-of-the-art approaches, targeting respectively at communication-aware, memory-aware, and computation-aware design.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 699.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 949.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

CFG:

Control-Flow Graph

CPS:

Cyber-Physical System

DSE:

Design Space Exploration

ECU:

Electronic Control Unit

E/E:

Electric and Electronic

EMB:

Electro-Mechanical Brake

ET:

Event-Triggered

FTDMA:

Flexible Time Division Multiple Access

LCS:

Live Cache States

MILP:

Mixed Integer Linear Programming

OS:

Operating System

PSO:

Particle Swarm Optimization

RCS:

Reaching Cache States

RTOS:

Real-Time Operating System

TDMA:

Time-Division Multiple Access

TT:

Time-Triggered

WCET:

Worst-Case Execution Time

References

  1. OSEK/VDX operating system specification 2.2.3 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. 664P7-1 aircraft data network, part 7, avionics full-duplex switched Ethernet network (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  3. The FlexRay communications system protocol specification, Version 3.0.1 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. LIN specification package revision 2.2A (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  5. MOST specification rev. 3.0 E2 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. AS6802 (2011) Time-triggered Ethernet

    Google Scholar 

  7. Infineon Product Brief XC2300B – Series (Accessed 12 May 2016). http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Pb_XC2300B.pdf?fileId=db3a30432a7fedfc012ab3c3d7863706

  8. Ackermann J, Utkin VI (1994) Sliding mode control design based on Ackermann’s formula. In: Proceedings of the 33rd IEEE conference on decision and control, vol 4, Lake Buena Vista, pp 3622–3627. doi:10.1109/CDC.1994.411715

  9. Andalam S, Sinha R, Roop P, Girault A, Reineke J (2013) Precise timing analysis for direct-mapped caches. In: 2013 50th ACM/EDAC/IEEE design automation conference (DAC), Austin, pp 1–10. doi:10.1145/2463209.2488917

  10. Astrom KJ, Murray RM (2008) Feedback systems: an introduction for scientists and engineers. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  11. Batcher KW, Walker RA (2008) Dynamic round-robin task scheduling to reduce cache misses for embedded systems. In: 2008 Design, automation and test in Europe, Munich, pp 260–263. doi:10.1109/DATE.2008.4484893

  12. Bhave AY, Krogh BH (2008) Performance bounds on state-feedback controllers with network delay. In: 47th IEEE conference on decision and control, CDC 2008, Cancun, pp 4608–4613. doi:10.1109/CDC.2008.4739330

  13. Bosch (1991) CAN Specification version 2.0. Stuttgart, Bosch

    Google Scholar 

  14. Castane R, Marti P, Velasco M, Cervin A, Henriksson D (2006) Resource management for control tasks based on the transient dynamics of closed-loop systems. In: 18th Euromicro conference on real-time systems (ECRTS’06), Dresden, pp 10, 182. doi:10.1109/ECRTS.2006.24

  15. Cervin A, Velasco M, Marti P, Camacho A (2009) Optimal on-line sampling period assignment. Research report, Lund University and Technical University of Catalonia

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chang W, Chakraborty S (2016) Resource-aware automotive control systems design: a cyber-physical systems approach. Found Trends© Electron Design Autom 10(4):249–369. http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/1000000045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Charette RN (2009) This car runs on code. IEEE Spectrum. http://spectrum.ieee.org/transportation/systems/this-car-runs-on-code

  18. eCos. http://ecos.sourceware.org

  19. Feiler PH (2003) Real-time application development with OSEK: a review of the OSEK standards. Technical report, Carnegie Mellon University

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Gaid MEMB, Cela A, Hamam Y (2006) Optimal integrated control and scheduling of networked control systems with communication constraints: application to a car suspension system. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 14(4):776–787. doi:10.1109/TCST.2006.872504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gaid MEMB, Cela A, Hamam Y, Ionete C (2006) Optimal scheduling of control tasks with state feedback resource allocation. In: 2006 American control conference, Minneapolis, pp 310–315. doi:10.1109/ACC.2006.1655373

  22. Gloy N, Smith MD (1999) Procedure placement using temporal-ordering information. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst 21(5):977–1027. doi:10.1145/330249.330254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Goswami D, Lukasiewycz M, Schneider R, Chakraborty S (2012) Time-triggered implementations of mixed-criticality automotive software. In: 2012 Design, automation test in Europe conference exhibition (DATE), Dresden, pp 1227–1232. doi:10.1109/DATE.2012.6176680

  24. Goswami D, Schneider R, Chakraborty S (2014) Relaxing signal delay constraints in distributed embedded controllers. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 22(6):2337–2345. doi:10.1109/TCST.2014.2301795

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Henriksson D, Cervin A (2005) Optimal on-line sampling period assignment for real-time control tasks based on plant state information. In: Proceedings of the 44th IEEE conference on decision and control, Seville, pp 4469–4474. doi:10.1109/CDC.2005.1582866

  26. Kalamationos J, Kaeli DR (1998) Temporal-based procedure reordering for improved instruction cache performance. In: Proceedings of fourth international symposium on high-performance computer architecture, Las Vegas, pp 244–253. doi:10.1109/HPCA.1998.650563

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kleinsorge JC, Falk H, Marwedel P (2011) A synergetic approach to accurate analysis of cache-related preemption delay. In: 2011 Proceedings of the international conference on embedded software (EMSOFT), Taipei, pp 329–338. doi:10.1145/2038642.2038693

  28. Liu X, Chen X, Kong F (2015) Utilization control and optimization of real-time embedded systems. Found Trends© Electron Design Autom 9(3):211–307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/1000000042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Lukasiewycz M, GlaßM, Teich J, Milbredt P (2009) Flexray schedule optimization of the static segment. In: Proceedings of the 7th IEEE/ACM international conference on hardware/software codesign and system synthesis, CODES+ISSS’09. ACM, New York, pp 363–372. doi:10.1145/1629435.1629485

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Marti P, Lin C, Brandt SA, Velasco M, Fuertes JM (2004) Optimal state feedback based resource allocation for resource-constrained control tasks. In: Proceedings of 25th IEEE international on real-time systems symposium, Lisbon, pp 161–172. doi:10.1109/REAL.2004.39

  31. Martí P, Lin C, Brandt SA, Velasco M, Fuertes JM (2009) Draco: efficient resource management for resource-constrained control tasks. IEEE Trans Comput 58(1):90–105. doi:10.1109/TC.2008.136

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Pettis K, Hansen RC (1990) Profile guided code positioning. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1990 conference on programming language design and implementation, PLDI’90. ACM, New York, pp 16–27. doi:10.1145/93542.93550

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Pigan R, Metter M (2008) Automating with PROFINET, 2nd edn. Publicis Publishing, Erlangen

    Google Scholar 

  34. Samii S, Cervin A, Eles P, Peng Z (2009) Integrated scheduling and synthesis of control applications on distributed embedded systems. In: 2009 Design, automation test in Europe conference exhibition, Nice, pp 57–62. doi:10.1109/DATE.2009.5090633

  35. Schneider R, Goswami D, Zafar S, Lukasiewycz M, Chakraborty S (2011) Constraint-driven synthesis and tool-support for flexray-based automotive control systems. In: Proceedings of the seventh IEEE/ACM/IFIP international conference on hardware/software codesign and system synthesis, CODES+ISSS’11. ACM, New York, pp 139–148. doi:10.1145/2039370.2039394

    Google Scholar 

  36. Sedighizadeh D, Masehian E (2009) Particle swarm optimization methods, taxonomy and applications. Int J Comput Theory Eng 1(4):486–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Wilhelm R, Engblom J, Ermedahl A, Holsti N, Thesing S, Whalley D, Bernat G, Ferdinand C, Heckmann R, Mitra T, Mueller F, Puaut I, Puschner P, Staschulat J, Stenström P (2008) The worst-case execution-time problem – overview of methods and survey of tools. ACM Trans Embed Comput Syst 7(3):36:1–36:53. doi:10.1145/1347375.1347389

  38. Wilhelm R, Grund D, Reineke J, Schlickling M, Pister M, Ferdinand C (2009) Memory hierarchies, pipelines, and buses for future architectures in time-critical embedded systems. IEEE Trans Comput Aided Des Integr Circuits Syst 28(7):966–978. doi:10.1109/TCAD.2009.2013287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Zeng H, Natale MD, Ghosal A, Sangiovanni-Vincentelli A (2011) Schedule optimization of time-triggered systems communicating over the flexray static segment. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 7(1):1–17. doi:10.1109/TII.2010.2089465

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Singapore Institute of Technology, 10 Dover Drive, 138683, Singapore, Singapore

    Wanli Chang

  2. TU Munich, Arcisstraße 21, 80333, Munich, Germany

    Licong Zhang, Debayan Roy & Samarjit Chakraborty

Authors
  1. Wanli Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Licong Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Debayan Roy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Samarjit Chakraborty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wanli Chang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea (Republic of)

    Soonhoi Ha

  2. Department of Computer Science, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Erlangen, Germany

    Jürgen Teich

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this entry

Cite this entry

Chang, W., Zhang, L., Roy, D., Chakraborty, S. (2017). Control/Architecture Codesign for Cyber-Physical Systems. In: Ha, S., Teich, J. (eds) Handbook of Hardware/Software Codesign. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7267-9_37

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation