Design patterns for supporting RTSJ component models

Alrahmawy, Mohammed F.; Wellings, Andy

doi:10.1145/1620405.1620408

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This violates the hierarchical memory structure, where the handlers of a mission shares the mission memory. Instead immortal memory is used, a temporary solution which in the future could be reworked using techniques inspired by those presented in [2].…”

Section: Memory Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

A predictable Java profile

Bøgholm

Hansen

Ravn

et al. 2009

Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Java Technologies for Real-Time and Embedded Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Java profile suitable for development of high integrity embedded systems is presented. It is based on event handlers which are grouped in missions and equipped with respectively private handler memory and shared mission memory. This is a result of our previous work on developing a Java profile, and is directly inspired by interactions with the Open Group on their on-going work on a safety critical Java profile (JSR-302). The main contribution is an arrangement of the class hierarchy such that the proposal is a generalization of Real-Time Specification for Java (RTSJ). A further contribution is to integrate the mission concept as a handler, such that mission memory becomes a handler private memory and such that mission initialization and finalization are scheduled activities. Two implementations are presented: one directly on an open source JVM using Xenomai and another, based on delegation, on an RTSJ platform. grated analysis tools instead of programmer supplied parameters to provide predictable programs. More recently the Open Group has formed a committee to develop a profile for Safety-Critical Java [17,4], and they have outlined their approach in a recent paper [20]. During the work in the committee we have had access to intermediate drafts which we have commented. This paper is a summary and consolidation of points where we find that the current draft may improve.We have found the Open Group's approach refreshing, because they solve a major issue by settling for handlers as the schedulable entities in a real-time system. RTSJ supports both a handler paradigm and a thread paradigm, but the latter is hampered by inheritance from Java threads, for instance with unwanted asynchronous interrupts and conditional waits. Threads are not really suitable as logical processes. The handler concept is much closer in spirit to a logical process. In this, as in many other details, we agree with the SCJ draft.The points where we would see further advances, and thus the contributions of this paper are:

show abstract

Section: Memory Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%