{"title":"DMAC:错过截止日期控制","authors":"P. Pazzaglia, C. Mandrioli, M. Maggio, A. Cervin","doi":"10.4230/LIPIcs.ECRTS.2019.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The real-time implementation of periodic controllers requires solving a co-design problem, in which the choice of the controller sampling period is a crucial element. Classic design techniques limit the period exploration to safe values, that guarantee the correct execution of the controller alongside the remaining real-time load, i.e., ensuring that the controller worst-case response time does not exceed its deadline. This paper presents DMAC: the first formally-grounded controller design strategy that explores shorter periods, thus explicitly taking into account the possibility of missing deadlines. The design leverages information about the probability that specific sub-sequences of deadline misses are experienced. The result is a fixed controller, that on average works as the ideal clairvoyant time-varying controller that possesses knowledge of deadline hits and misses. We obtain a safe estimate of the hit and miss events using the scenario theory, that allows us to provide probabilistic guarantees. The paper analyzes controllers implemented using the Logical Execution Time paradigm and three different strategies to handle deadline miss events: killing the job, letting the job continue but skipping the next activation, and letting the job continue using a limited queue of jobs. Our experimental results show that our design proposal – i.e., that exploring the space where deadline can be missed and handled with different strategies – greatly outperforms classical control design techniques.","PeriodicalId":191379,"journal":{"name":"Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DMAC: Deadline-Miss-Aware Control\",\"authors\":\"P. Pazzaglia, C. Mandrioli, M. Maggio, A. Cervin\",\"doi\":\"10.4230/LIPIcs.ECRTS.2019.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The real-time implementation of periodic controllers requires solving a co-design problem, in which the choice of the controller sampling period is a crucial element. Classic design techniques limit the period exploration to safe values, that guarantee the correct execution of the controller alongside the remaining real-time load, i.e., ensuring that the controller worst-case response time does not exceed its deadline. This paper presents DMAC: the first formally-grounded controller design strategy that explores shorter periods, thus explicitly taking into account the possibility of missing deadlines. The design leverages information about the probability that specific sub-sequences of deadline misses are experienced. The result is a fixed controller, that on average works as the ideal clairvoyant time-varying controller that possesses knowledge of deadline hits and misses. We obtain a safe estimate of the hit and miss events using the scenario theory, that allows us to provide probabilistic guarantees. The paper analyzes controllers implemented using the Logical Execution Time paradigm and three different strategies to handle deadline miss events: killing the job, letting the job continue but skipping the next activation, and letting the job continue using a limited queue of jobs. Our experimental results show that our design proposal – i.e., that exploring the space where deadline can be missed and handled with different strategies – greatly outperforms classical control design techniques.\",\"PeriodicalId\":191379,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems\",\"volume\":\"46 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"27\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ECRTS.2019.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ECRTS.2019.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
The real-time implementation of periodic controllers requires solving a co-design problem, in which the choice of the controller sampling period is a crucial element. Classic design techniques limit the period exploration to safe values, that guarantee the correct execution of the controller alongside the remaining real-time load, i.e., ensuring that the controller worst-case response time does not exceed its deadline. This paper presents DMAC: the first formally-grounded controller design strategy that explores shorter periods, thus explicitly taking into account the possibility of missing deadlines. The design leverages information about the probability that specific sub-sequences of deadline misses are experienced. The result is a fixed controller, that on average works as the ideal clairvoyant time-varying controller that possesses knowledge of deadline hits and misses. We obtain a safe estimate of the hit and miss events using the scenario theory, that allows us to provide probabilistic guarantees. The paper analyzes controllers implemented using the Logical Execution Time paradigm and three different strategies to handle deadline miss events: killing the job, letting the job continue but skipping the next activation, and letting the job continue using a limited queue of jobs. Our experimental results show that our design proposal – i.e., that exploring the space where deadline can be missed and handled with different strategies – greatly outperforms classical control design techniques.