Skip to main content
Log in

Multi-Valued Performance Metrics for Real-Time Embedded Systems

  • Published:
Design Automation for Embedded Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To rapidly explore the design space of a real-time embedded system, it is essential to be able to efficiently analyze the timing behaviors of different system architectures. This includes not only determining if a design can satisfy all the timing constraints but also comparing the timing performance of different designs for tradeoff purposes. Understanding the exact timing behavior of a large system can be computationally prohibitive. Previous work in this area has mostly focused on producing a yes/no answer to the schedulability of a system architecture under the worst-case scenario. This not only often leads to overly pessimistic designs, but also provides no insight as how to rank different architectural designs with respect to their timing performance. In this paper, we present several metrics that may be used to measure the timing performance of a design. The metrics were analyzed using workloads from both real-world task systems and randomly generated task systems. A superior metric has been identified through analysis of large sets of experiments. We also show, through an example, how this metric can be used effectively during a design exploration process.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Audsley, N., Burns, A., Richardson, M., Tindell, K., and Wellings, A. J. 1993. Applying new scheduling theory to static priority pre-emptive scheduling. Software Engineering Journal 8(5): 284–292.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Balarin, F., and Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, A. 1997. Schedule validation for embedded reactive real-time systems. Proceedings of Design Automation Conference pp. 52–57.

  3. Blickle, T., Teich, J., and Thiele, L. 1998. System-level synthesis using evolution algorithms. Journal of Design Automation for Embedded Systems 3: 23–58.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Devore, J. L. 1987. Probability and Statistics for Engineering and the Sciences. Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Dick, R. P., and Jha, N. K. 1997. MOGAC: A multiobjective genetic algorithm for the co-synthesis of hardware-software embedded systems. 1997 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design pp. 522–529.

  6. Gajski, D. D., Vahid, F., Narayan, S., and Gong, J. 1994. Specification and Design of Embedded Systems Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gupta, R. K., and De Micheli, G. 1993. Hardware-software cosynthesis for digital systems. IEEE Design & Test of Computers 10(3): 29–40.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Halang, W. A., and Stoyenko, A. D. 1994. Next generation of real-time operating systems: industrial perspective. Proceedings of the NATO Advanced Study Institute on Real Time Computing pp. 595–596.

  9. Hu, X., D'Ambrosio, J. G., Murray, B. T., and Tang, D. 1994. Codesign of Architectures for Automotive Powertrain Modules. IEEE Micro pp. 17–25.

  10. Hu, X., and D'Ambrosio, J. G. 1997. Hardware/software partitioning for real-time embedded systems. Journal of Design Automation for Embedded Systems 2(3/4): 339–358.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hu, X., Greenwood, G. W., and D'Ambrosio, J. G. 1996. An evolutionary approach to configuration-level hardware/software partitioning. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Parallel Problem Solving From Nature pp. 900–909.

  12. Lawler, E. L., and Martel, C. U. 1981. Scheduling periodically occurring tasks on multiple processors. Information Processing Letters 12(1): 9–12.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Lehoczky, J., Sha, L., and Ding, Y. 1989. The rate monotonic scheduling algorithm: Exact characterization and average case behavior. Proceedings of the 1989 IEEE Real-time System Symposium pp. 166–171.

  14. Leung, J. Y-T. 1989. A new algorithm for scheduling periodic, real-time tasks. Algorithmica 4: 209–219.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Liu, C. L., and Layland, J. W. 1973. Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming in a hard real-time environment. Journal of the ACM 20(1): 46–61.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ramamritham, K., and Stankovic, J. A. 1984. Dynamic task scheduling in distributed real-time systems. IEEE Software 1(3): 65–75.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sha, L., Rajkumar, R., and Lehoczky, J. P. 1990. Priority inheritance protocols: An approach to real-time synchronization. IEEE Transactions on Computers 39(9) 1175–1185.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Yen, T.-Y., and Wolf, W. 1995. Performance estimation for real-time distributed embedded systems. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Design (ICCD'95) pp. 64–69.

  19. Wolf, W. 1994. Hardware-software co-design of embedded systems. Proceedings of the IEEE 82(7): 967–989.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hu, X.(., Sambandam, R.S. Multi-Valued Performance Metrics for Real-Time Embedded Systems. Design Automation for Embedded Systems 5, 5–28 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008993532472

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008993532472

Navigation