Industrial Application of a Partitioning Scheduler to Support Mixed Criticality Systems

Authors Stephen Law, Iain Bate, Benjamin Lesage

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.57 MB
  • 22 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Stephen Law
  • Rolls Royce Control Systems, Birmingham, UK
Iain Bate
  • The University of York, York, UK
Benjamin Lesage
  • Rolls Royce Control Systems, Birmingham, UK
  • The University of York, York, UK

Cite AsGet BibTex

Stephen Law, Iain Bate, and Benjamin Lesage. Industrial Application of a Partitioning Scheduler to Support Mixed Criticality Systems. In 31st Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS 2019). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 133, pp. 8:1-8:22, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2019)


The ever-growing complexity of safety-critical control systems continues to require evolution in control system design, architecture and implementation. At the same time the cost of developing such systems must be controlled and importantly quality must be maintained. This paper examines the application of Mixed Criticality System (MCS) research to a DAL-A aircraft engine Full Authority Digital Engine Control (FADEC) system which includes studying porting the control system’s software to a preemptive scheduler from a non-preemptive scheduler. The paper deals with three key challenges as part of the technology transitions. Firstly, how to provide an equivalent level of fault isolation to ARINC 653 without the restriction of strict temporal slicing between criticality levels. Secondly extending the current analysis for Adaptive Mixed Criticality (AMC) scheduling to include the overheads of the system. Finally the development of clustering algorithms that automatically group tasks into larger super-tasks to both reduce overheads whilst ensuring the timing requirements, including the important task transaction requirements, are met.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Computer systems organization → Real-time operating systems
  • Software and its engineering → Real-time schedulability
  • Hardware → Safety critical systems
  • MCS
  • DO-178C
  • Real-Time


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. Airlines Electronic Engineering Committee. Avionics Application Software Standard Interface Part 1 - Required Services. ARINC Specification 653 Part 1-3, Aeronautical Radio, Inc., 2010. Google Scholar
  2. N. Audsley. On priority assignment in fixed priority scheduling. Information Processing Letters, 79(1):39-44, 2001. Google Scholar
  3. N. Audsley and A. Wellings. Analysing APEX applications. In 17th IEEE International Real-Time Systems Symposium, (RTSS), pages 39-44, December 1996. Google Scholar
  4. S. Baruah and A. Burns. Implementing mixed criticality systems in Ada. In International Conference on Reliable Software Technologies, pages 174-188. Springer, 2011. Google Scholar
  5. S. Baruah, A. Burns, and R. Davis. Response-time analysis for mixed criticality systems. In 32nd IEEE International Real-Time Systems Symposium, (RTSS). IEEE, 2011. Google Scholar
  6. I. Bate. Scheduling and timing analysis for safety critical real-time systems. PhD thesis, Citeseer, 1999. Google Scholar
  7. I. Bate and A. Burns. An Approach to Task Attribute Assignment for Uniprocessor Systems. In 11th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems, pages 46-53, 1999. Google Scholar
  8. I. Bate and A. Burns. An Integrated Approach to Scheduling in Safety-Critical Embedded Control Systems. Real-Time Systems Journal, 25(1):5-37, July 2003. Google Scholar
  9. I. Bate, A. Burns, and R. Davis. A bailout protocol for mixed criticality systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 2015. Google Scholar
  10. I. Bate, A. Burns, and R. Davis. An enhanced bailout protocol for mixed criticality embedded software. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 43(4):298-320, 2017. Google Scholar
  11. A. Bertout, J. Forget, and R. Olejnik. Automated runnable to task mapping. Technical report, HAL, May 2013. Google Scholar
  12. E. Bini and G. Buttazzo. Measuring the performance of schedulability tests. Real-Time Systems, 30(1-2):129-154, 2005. Google Scholar
  13. A. Burns, K. Tindell, and A. Wellings. Effective analysis for engineering real-time fixed priority schedulers. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 21(5):475-480, 1995. Google Scholar
  14. R. Davis, S. Altmeyer, and A. Burns. Mixed Criticality Systems with Varying Context Switch Costs. In Proceedings IEEE Real Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium (RTAS), 2018. Google Scholar
  15. R. Davis, I. Bate, G. Bernat, I. Broster, A. Burns, A. Colin, S. Hutchesson, and N. Tracey. Transferring real-time systems research into industrial practice: Four impact case studies. In Proceedings of the Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS). IEEE, 2018. Google Scholar
  16. H. Faragardi, B. Lisper, K. Sandström, and T. Nolte. An efficient scheduling of AUTOSAR runnables to minimize communication cost in multi-core systems. In 7th International Symposium on Telecommunications (IST), pages 41-48, September 2014. Google Scholar
  17. Johannes Freitag, Sascha Uhrig, and Theo Ungerer. Virtual Timing Isolation for Mixed-Criticality Systems. In 30th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS 2018). Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, 2018. Google Scholar
  18. P. Graydon and I. Bate. Safety Assurance Driven Problem Formulation for Mixed-Criticality Scheduling. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Mixed-Criticality Systems, pages 19-24, 2013. Google Scholar
  19. Jonathan L Herman, Christopher J Kenna, Malcolm S Mollison, James H Anderson, and Daniel M Johnson. RTOS support for multicore mixed-criticality systems. In 18th Real Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium, pages 197-208. IEEE, 2012. Google Scholar
  20. B. Korel. Automated software test data generation. IEEE Transactions on software engineering, 16(8):870-879, 1990. Google Scholar
  21. S. Kramer, D. Ziegenbein, and A. Hamann. Real world automotive benchmarks for free. In 6th International Workshop on Analysis Tools and Methodologies for Embedded and Real-time Systems, 2015. Google Scholar
  22. S. Law and I. Bate. Achieving appropriate test coverage for reliable measurement-based timing analysis. In 28th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS). IEEE, 2016. Google Scholar
  23. S. Law, M. Bennett, I. Ellis, S. Hutchesson, G. Bernat, A. Colin, and A. Coombes. Effective Worst-Case Execution Time Analysis of DO178C Level A Software. Ada User Journal, 36(3):182-186, 2015. Google Scholar
  24. C. Lee, H. Hahn, Y. Seo, S. Min, R. Ha, S. Hong, C. Park, M. Lee, and C. Kim. Analysis of cache-related preemption delay in fixed-priority preemptive scheduling. IEEE transactions on computers, 47(6):700-713, 1998. Google Scholar
  25. B. Lesage, S. Law, and I. Bate. TACO: An industrial case study of Test Automation for COverage. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Real-Time Networks and Systems, RTNS '18, pages 114-124, 2018. Google Scholar
  26. E. Oklapi, M. Deubzer, S. Schmidhuber, E. Lalo, and J. Mottok. Optimization of real-time multicore systems reached by a Genetic Algorithm approach for runnable sequencing. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Applied Electronics (AE), pages 233-238. IEEE, 2014. Google Scholar
  27. Antonio Paolillo, Paul Rodriguez, Vladimir Svoboda, Olivier Desenfans, Joël Goossens, Ben Rodriguez, Sylvain Girbal, Madeleine Faugere, and Philippe Bonnot. Porting a safety-critical industrial application on a mixed-criticality enabled real-time operating system. In Proc. 5th Workshop on Mixed Criticality Systems (WMC), RTSS, pages 1-6, 2017. Google Scholar
  28. RTCA. Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification. DO-178C, 2011. Google Scholar
  29. J. Rushby. Partitioning for Safety and Security: Requirements, Mechanisms, and Assurance. NASA Contractor Report CR-1999-209347, NASA Langley Research Center, June 1999. Also issued by the FAA. Google Scholar
  30. Paulo Baltarejo Sousa, Konstantinos Bletsas, Eduardo Tovar, Pedro Souto, and Benny Åkesson. Unified overhead-aware schedulability analysis for slot-based task-splitting. Real-Time Systems, 50(5-6):680-735, 2014. Google Scholar
  31. K. Tindell and A. Alonso. A very simple protocol for mode changes in priority preemptive systems. Technical report, Universidad Politecnica de Madrid, 1996. Google Scholar
  32. S. Vestal. Preemptive scheduling of multi-criticality systems with varying degrees of execution time assurance. In 28th IEEE International Real-Time Systems Symposium, (RTSS). IEEE, 2007. Google Scholar