TY - GEN
T1 - Priority inversion and its control
T2 - 2nd International Workshop on Real-Time Ada Issues, IRTAW 1988
AU - Locke, Douglass
AU - Sha, Lui
AU - Rajkurnar, Ragunathan
AU - Lehoczky, John
AU - Burns, Greg
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 1988 ACM.
PY - 1988/6/1
Y1 - 1988/6/1
N2 - To successfully engineer a large scale real-time system project, we need a disciplined approach to both the logical complexity and the timing complexity inherent in these systems. The logical complexity is managed by the software engineering methodology embodied in Ada while the timing complexity is supported by formal real-time scheduling algorithms [3,4,5,6]. From a software engineering point of view, formal scheduling algorithms translate the complex timing constraints into simple resource utilization constraints. As long as the utilization constraints of CPU, I/O channel and communication media are observed, the deadlines of periodic tasks and the response time requirements of aperiodic tasks will both be met. There is considerable freedom to modify software provided that the resource utilization remains within specified bounds. Furthermore, should there be a transient overload, the number of tasks missing their deadlines will be a function of the magnitude of the overload and the order in which the tasks miss deadlines is pre-defined [7]. From an implementation point of view, these algorithms belong to the class of static priority algorithms which can be implemented efficiently. Task priorities are functions of the timing constraints, computation requirements and relative importance of tasks. The priorities need not be computed at run-time unless task parameters are modified.
AB - To successfully engineer a large scale real-time system project, we need a disciplined approach to both the logical complexity and the timing complexity inherent in these systems. The logical complexity is managed by the software engineering methodology embodied in Ada while the timing complexity is supported by formal real-time scheduling algorithms [3,4,5,6]. From a software engineering point of view, formal scheduling algorithms translate the complex timing constraints into simple resource utilization constraints. As long as the utilization constraints of CPU, I/O channel and communication media are observed, the deadlines of periodic tasks and the response time requirements of aperiodic tasks will both be met. There is considerable freedom to modify software provided that the resource utilization remains within specified bounds. Furthermore, should there be a transient overload, the number of tasks missing their deadlines will be a function of the magnitude of the overload and the order in which the tasks miss deadlines is pre-defined [7]. From an implementation point of view, these algorithms belong to the class of static priority algorithms which can be implemented efficiently. Task priorities are functions of the timing constraints, computation requirements and relative importance of tasks. The priorities need not be computed at run-time unless task parameters are modified.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79956021016&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79956021016&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1145/58612.59374
DO - 10.1145/58612.59374
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:79956021016
T3 - Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Real-Time Ada Issues, IRTAW 1988
SP - 39
EP - 42
BT - Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Real-Time Ada Issues, IRTAW 1988
A2 - Barnes, J.
PB - Association for Computing Machinery, Inc
Y2 - 1 June 1988 through 3 June 1988
ER -