The Trajectory approach for AFDX FIFO networks revisited and corrected

We consider the problem of dimensioning real-time AFDX FIFO networks with a worst-case end-to-end delay analysis. The state-of-the-art has considered several approaches to compute these worst-case end-to-end delays. Among them, the Trajectory approach has received more attention as it has been shown to provide tight end-to-end delay upper bounds. Recently, it has been proved that current Trajectory analysis can be optimistic for some corner cases, leading in its current form, to certification issues. In this paper, we first characterize the source of optimism in the Trajectory approach on detailed examples. Then, we provide a correction to the identified problems. Two problems are solved: the first one is on the root cause of the underestimated time interval to compute delays of competing flows and a problem in the definition of the end-to-end delay computation. The second one is on the way that serialized frames are taken into account in the worst-case delay analysis.

[1]  Laurent George,et al.  End‐to‐end response time with fixed priority scheduling: trajectory approach versus holistic approach , 2005, Int. J. Commun. Syst..

[2]  Pascal Richard,et al.  Optimistic problems in the trajectory approach in FIFO context , 2013, 2013 IEEE 18th Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation (ETFA).

[3]  Pascale Minet,et al.  Worst case end-to-end response times of flows scheduled with FP/FIFO , 2006, International Conference on Networking, International Conference on Systems and International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies (ICNICONSMCL'06).

[4]  Jean-Yves Le Boudec,et al.  Application of Network Calculus to Guaranteed Service Networks , 1998, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[5]  Christian Fraboul,et al.  Improving the Worst-Case Delay Analysis of an AFDX Network Using an Optimized Trajectory Approach , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[6]  Eric Rondeau,et al.  Evaluation of switched Ethernet in an industrial context by using the Network Calculus , 2002, 4th IEEE International Workshop on Factory Communication Systems.

[7]  Laurent George,et al.  The Trajectory Approach for the End-to-End Response Times with Non-preemptive FP/EDF , 2004, SERA.

[8]  Michael Paulitsch,et al.  TTEthernet Dataflow Concept , 2009, 2009 Eighth IEEE International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications.

[9]  J. Javier Gutiérrez,et al.  Holistic schedulability analysis for multipacket messages in AFDX networks , 2013, Real-Time Systems.

[10]  Steven Martin,et al.  Schedulability analysis of flows scheduled with FIFO: application to the expedited forwarding class , 2006, Proceedings 20th IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium.

[11]  Christian Fraboul,et al.  Applying and optimizing trajectory approach for performance evaluation of AFDX avionics network , 2009, 2009 IEEE Conference on Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation.

[12]  Thomas Nolte,et al.  Flexible, efficient and robust real-time communication with server-based Ethernet Switching , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Workshop on Factory Communication Systems Proceedings.