Integrating reliability and timing analysis of CAN-based systems

This paper presents and illustrates a reliability analysis method developed with a focus on controller-area-network-based automotive systems. The method considers the effect of faults on schedulability analysis and its impact on the reliability estimation of the system, and attempts to integrate both to aid system developers. The authors illustrate the method by modeling a simple distributed antilock braking system, and showing that even in cases where the worst case analysis deems the system unschedulable, it may be proven to satisfy its timing requirements with a sufficiently high probability. From a reliability and cost perspective, this paper underlines the tradeoffs between timing guarantees, the level of hardware and software faults, and per-unit cost.

[1]  Andy J. Wellings,et al.  Analysing real-time communications: controller area network (CAN) , 1994, 1994 Proceedings Real-Time Systems Symposium.

[2]  Hans A. Hansson,et al.  Deriving reliability estimates of distributed real-time systems by simulation , 2000, Proceedings Seventh International Conference on Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications.

[3]  Martin Törngren,et al.  Fundamentals of Implementing Real-Time Control Applications in Distributed Computer Systems , 1998, Real-Time Systems.

[4]  Yeqiong Song,et al.  Worst-case deadline failure probability in real-time applications distributed over controller area network , 2000, J. Syst. Archit..

[5]  Lui Sha,et al.  Priority Inheritance Protocols: An Approach to Real-Time Synchronization , 1990, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[6]  Eduardo Tovar,et al.  Integrating inaccessibility in response time analysis of CAN networks , 2000, 2000 IEEE International Workshop on Factory Communication Systems. Proceedings (Cat. No.00TH8531).

[7]  C. Norstrom,et al.  Integrating reliability and timing analysis of CAN-based systems , 2000, 2000 IEEE International Workshop on Factory Communication Systems. Proceedings (Cat. No.00TH8531).

[8]  David Wright,et al.  Probabilistic scheduling guarantees for fault-tolerant real-time systems , 1999, Dependable Computing for Critical Applications 7.

[9]  Farokh B. Bastani,et al.  On the Reliability of AI Planning Software in Real-Time Applications , 1995, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[10]  XuJia,et al.  Priority Scheduling Versus Pre-Run-Time Scheduling , 2000 .

[11]  Hans A. Hansson,et al.  Reliability Modelling of Time-Critical Distributed Systems , 2000, FTRTFT.

[12]  Hans A. Hansson,et al.  Response time analysis under errors for CAN , 2000, Proceedings Sixth IEEE Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium. RTAS 2000.

[13]  Alan Burns,et al.  Preemptive priority-based scheduling: an appropriate engineering approach , 1995 .

[14]  Alan Burns,et al.  Applying new scheduling theory to static priority pre-emptive scheduling , 1993, Softw. Eng. J..

[15]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  Priority Scheduling Versus Pre-Run-Time Scheduling , 2004, Real-Time Systems.

[16]  Alan Burns,et al.  GUARANTEED MESSAGE LATENCIES FOR DISTRIBUTED SAFETY-CRITICAL HARD REAL-TIME CONTROL NETWORKS1 , 1994 .

[17]  Alan Burns,et al.  Calculating controller area network (can) message response times , 1994 .