Analysis of the effects of real and injected software faults: Linux as a case study

Jarboui, Tahar; Arlat, Jean; Crouzet, Yves; Kanoun, Karama; Marteau, Thomas

doi:10.1109/prdc.2002.1185618

Cited by 22 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 18 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results are given in Figure 4 for Windows 2000. This figure shows that the OS robustness is very similar using the two parameter corruption techniques, which confirms our previous work on fault representativeness [20].…”

Section: Robustness Measuresupporting

confidence: 89%

Benchmarking the dependability of Windows NT4, 2000 and XP

Kalakech

Kanoun

Crouzet

et al. 2004

International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, 2004

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Robustness Measuresupporting

confidence: 89%

Benchmarking the dependability of Windows NT4, 2000 and XP

Kalakech

Kanoun

Crouzet

et al. 2004

International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, 2004

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This technique was used in [1] and [13]. In [3,11] both BF and DT errors are used. c) Fuzzing (FZ), which assigns a randomly chosen value to the parameter in a function call.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Selection of Error Model(s) for OS Robustness Evaluation

Johansson

Suri

Murphy

2007

37th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN'07)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The choice of error model used for robustness evaluation of Operating Systems (OSs) influences the evaluation run time, implementation complexity, as well as the evaluation precision. In order to find an "effective" error model for OS evaluation, this paper systematically compares the relative effectiveness of three prominent error models, namely bit-flips, data type errors and fuzzing errors using fault injection at the interface between device drivers OS. Bit-flips come with higher costs (time) than the other models, but allow for more detailed results. Fuzzing is cheaper to implement but is found to be less precise. A composite error model is presented where the low cost of fuzzing is combined with the higher level of details of bit-flips, resulting in high precision with moderate setup and execution costs.

show abstract

“…But only experimental evidence can indicate the area of validity of these "theoretically wrong" methods. Research comparing empirically the measures produced by different fault injection methods [18][19][20] is also an indirect contribution in this direction.…”

Section: Conclusion and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Asymmetric Fault-Tolerant Software

Popov

Strigini

2010

2010 IEEE 21st International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the unspecified version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Abstract -The most popular forms of fault tolerance against design faults use "asymmetric" architectures in which a "primary" part performs the computation and a "secondary" part is in charge of detecting errors and performing some kind of error processing and recovery. In contrast, the most studied forms of software fault tolerance are "symmetric" ones, e.g. Nversion programming. The latter are often controversial, the former are not. We discuss how to assess the dependability gains achieved by these methods. Substantial difficulties have been shown to exist for symmetric schemes, but we show that the same difficulties affect asymmetric schemes. Indeed, the latter present somewhat subtler problems. In both cases, to predict the dependability of the fault-tolerant system it is not enough to know the dependability of the individual components. We extend to asymmetric architectures the style of probabilistic modeling that has been useful for describing the dependability of "symmetric" architectures, to highlight factors that complicate the assessment. In the light of these models, we finally discuss fault injection approaches to estimating coverage factors. We highlight the limits of what can be predicted and some useful research directions towards clarifying and extending the range of situations in which estimates of coverage of fault tolerance mechanisms can be trusted. Permanent repository link

show abstract

Analysis of the effects of real and injected software faults: Linux as a case study

Cited by 22 publications

References 18 publications

Benchmarking the dependability of Windows NT4, 2000 and XP

Benchmarking the dependability of Windows NT4, 2000 and XP

On the Selection of Error Model(s) for OS Robustness Evaluation

Assessing Asymmetric Fault-Tolerant Software

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About