Configuring ADAS Platforms for Automotive Applications Using Metaheuristics

Abstract

Modern Advanced Driver-Assistance Systems (ADAS) combine critical real-time and non-critical best-effort tasks and messages onto an integrated multi-core multi-SoC hardware platform. The real-time safety-critical software tasks have complex interdependencies in the form of end-to-end latency chains featuring, e.g., sensing, processing/sensor fusion, and actuating. The underlying real-time operating systems running on top of the multi-core platform use static cyclic scheduling for the software tasks, while the communication backbone is either realized through PCIe or Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN). In this paper, we address the problem of configuring ADAS platforms for automotive applications, which means deciding the mapping of tasks to processing cores and the scheduling of tasks and messages. Time-critical messages are transmitted in a scheduled manner via the timed-gate mechanism described in IEEE 802.1Qbv according to the pre-computed Gate Control List (GCL) schedule. We study the computation of the assignment of tasks to the available platform CPUs/cores, the static schedule tables for the real-time tasks, as well as the GCLs, such that task and message deadlines, as well as end-to-end task chain latencies, are satisfied. This is an intractable combinatorial optimization problem. As the ADAS platforms and applications become increasingly complex, such problems cannot be optimally solved and require problem-specific heuristics or metaheuristics to determine good quality feasible solutions in a reasonable time. We propose two metaheuristic solutions, a Genetic Algorithm (GA) and one based on Simulated Annealing (SA), both creating static schedule tables for tasks by simulating Earliest Deadline First (EDF) dispatching with different task deadlines and offsets. Furthermore, we use a List Scheduling-based heuristic to create the GCLs in platforms featuring a TSN backbone. We evaluate the proposed solution with real-world and synthetic test cases scaled to fit the future requirements of ADAS systems. The results show that our heuristic strategy can find correct solutions that meet the complex timing and dependency constraints at a higher rate than the related work approaches, i.e., the jitter constraints are satisfied in over 6 times more cases, and the task chain constraints are satisfied in 41% more cases on average. Our method scales well with the growing trend of ADAS platforms.

A Comprehensive Review of Bio-Inspired Optimization Algorithms Including Applications in Microelectronics and Nanophotonics

“…In order to maintain exploration and exploitation and prevent the local optimum from stagnating, GWO additionally uses operations that are controlled by two factors. GWO just needs one vector of position; hence, it uses less memory than the PSO algorithm [ 21 ]. Additionally, while PSO preserves the best solution so far obtained by all particles as well as the single best solution for every particle, GWO only retains the three best solutions.…”

“…As an illustration of their ubiquity, we mention here just some selected fields where their applications have been reported. They encompass various branches of engineering, including mechanical engineering (automotive [ 20 , 21 ], aerospace [ 22 ], fluid dynamics [ 23 ], thermal engineering [ 24 ], automation [ 25 ], robotics [ 26 ], mechatronics [ 27 ], MEMS [ 28 , 29 ], etc. ), electrical engineering [ 30 ] (including power engineering [ 31 ], electronics [ 32 ], microelectronics [ 33 ] and nanoelectronics [ 33 ], control engineering [ 34 ], renewable energy [ 35 ], biomedical engineering [ 36 ], telecommunications [ 36 ], signal processing [ 37 ]), geometrical optics [ 38 ], photonics [ 39 ], nanophotonics and nanoplasmonics [ 40 ], image processing [ 41 ] including pattern recognition [ 42 ], computing [ 30 ], [ 43 ], networking (computer networks [ 44 ] including Internet and Intranet [ 45 ], social networks [ 46 ], networks on a chip [ 47 ], optical networks [ 48 ], cellular (mobile) networks [ 49 ], wireless sensor networks [ 50 ], Internet of things [ 51 ], etc.…”