www.thalesgroup.com filling the gap between system design & performance verification rafik...
TRANSCRIPT
www.thalesgroup.com
Filling the Gap Between System Design &
Performance VerificationRafik HENIA, Laurent RIOUX, Nicolas SORDON
Thales Research & Technology
2 /2 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Characterized by :
High complexity Strict Time-to-market constraints Strong real-time requirements
Real-Time Embedded Applications
Challenge :
Reliable model-based performance verification approach at early design
stages to avoid costly timing errors
Requires bridging the gap between design model and performance verification activities
Requires seamless integration of performance verification methods in the design process
complexityti
me-
critic
ality
money
Issue :
Traditional V-cycle not suitable any more since performance verification
activities only start when development and integration are completed
Performance issues are more difficult and expensive to fix at this stage
3 /3 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Current Design Approach at THALES
MyCCM (Make your Component Connector Model)
Component-based design approach
Components encapsulate functional code
Components connected through communication ports
Construction of applications by assembling components
Code generation of non-functional code
Supported by UML modelers and Thales MDE internal modeling tools
Separation of concerns between functional and non-functional code
Black-box components for easy application prototyping
Reuse of components
4 /4 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Software Defined Radio
Signal modulation implementation using software rather than
hardware
Easy reprogramming to fit different situations with the same hardware
Typically used by armies to guarantee confidentiality of
communications
Strong real-time constraints
Use Case Context
5 /5 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Design Use Case – Software Defined Radio
6 /6 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
?
From Design Model to Performance Analysis ?
Required by SymTA/S
Application model
Mapping
Timing characteristics
Scheduling characteristics
Available in modeling tool
Application model
Mapping
Mo
del
ing
to
ol
Sym
TA/S
7 /7 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Mo
del
ing
to
ol
Sym
TA/S
?Performance Viewpoint
From Design Model to Performance Analysis ?
Security Viewpoint
Safety Viewpoint
Performance Viewpoint
A model view from the performance engineering
perspective
Separation of concerns to master the system
design complexity
8 /8 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Performance Viewpoint
UML-profile MARTE
OMG standard
Concepts for real-time constraints
modeling
Concepts for target platform
modeling
Syntax is not user-friendly !
9 /9 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Performance Viewpoint
UML-profile MARTE
OMG standard
Concepts for real-time constraints
modeling
Concepts for target platform
modeling
Syntax is not user-friendly !
Syntax adaptation required
10 /10 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Available in design tool
Application model
Mapping
Timing characteristics
Scheduling characteristics
Required by SymTA/S
Application model
Mapping
Timing characteristics
Scheduling characteristics
?Performance Viewpoint
Semantic Gap between Design Model to Performance Analysis ?
A task produces output data
at the end of its execution
semantic gap
11 /11 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Performance Viewpoint
Design Model Semantic
asynchronous communication
synchronous communication
12 /12 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
Design Model Transformation
Task 1 Task 2
Task 2Task 1,a
Task 1,b
Modeling tool
SymTA/S
13 /13 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
From Design Model to Performance Analysis via Pivot Model
Pivot analysis model
MainStreamEngineering
Spectra Cx
Performance Viewpoint
Pivot analysis model
Introduce a minimum of
independence from modeling and
analysis tools
14 /14 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
From Performance Analysis Back to Design Model
Performance Viewpoint
Pivot analysis model
Analysis results
adaptation
Transformation
rules required to
inject the analysis
results in the
design model
15 /15 /D
ate
/Réf
ére
nce
DAC 2013Designer/User Track
We developed a framework allowing the automation of the
model-based performance verification activities at the early
design stages
Essential to decrease design time and increase productivity
We meet the industrial needs through:
Viewpoint concept to achieve a clear separation between design main stream
and performance engineering activities
Adapted DSL (Domain-Specific Language) for performance (MARTE)
Transformation rules from design model to performance analysis model via
pivot model, thus allowing bridging the semantic gap separating them
Transformations rules adapting performance analysis results to design model
Summary