2013
DOI: 10.1145/2489253.2489255
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diagnostic tracing for wireless sensor networks

Abstract: Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) are hard to program due to unconventional programming models used to satisfy stringent resource constraints. The common event-driven concurrent programming model and lack of kernel protection in these systems introduce the possibility of several subtle faults such as race conditions. These faults are often triggered by unexpected interleavings of events in the real world, and can occur long after their causes. Reproducing a fault from the trace of the past events can play a cruc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This and other approaches like Minerva [107] and FlashBox [28] that use hardware modifications cannot be deployed to COTS IoT systems. Some software-only efforts, such as TinyTracer [109] and Prius [110], selectively record some events (only control flow for TinyTracer) and therefore cannot enable replay-based debugging. The open questions center around how to provide high fidelity system-level replay, i.e., replay that is able to reproduce both control flow at an instruction level and the state of memory at any point in time for any software module executing on the node.…”
Section: Foundations To Build Uponmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This and other approaches like Minerva [107] and FlashBox [28] that use hardware modifications cannot be deployed to COTS IoT systems. Some software-only efforts, such as TinyTracer [109] and Prius [110], selectively record some events (only control flow for TinyTracer) and therefore cannot enable replay-based debugging. The open questions center around how to provide high fidelity system-level replay, i.e., replay that is able to reproduce both control flow at an instruction level and the state of memory at any point in time for any software module executing on the node.…”
Section: Foundations To Build Uponmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As IoT becomes increasingly pervasive, we need more and broader software engineering support to improve the quality of WSN-based IoT programs [34]. In recent years, apart from instance-based analysis, other dynamic analysis techniques have been developed for WSN applications: For example, Sundaram et al propose an efficient approach to intra-procedural and interprocedural control-flow tracing [35]; Dylog [36] provides a dynamic event-logging facility for networked embedded programs to support efficient and accurate analysis. Based on various data logs, some testing techniques have been proposed for WSN programs: For instance, D2 [37] employs function count profiling and PCA (Principal Component Analysis) to reveal network anomalies; Khan et al applies discriminative sequence mining to uncover interactive bugs [38].…”
Section: B Dynamic Analysis and Verification Of Iot Programsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By "general-purpose" we mean that it can handle all sources of non-determinism and thus Tardis can be used for debugging all kinds of bugs, whether related to data flow or control flow. Previous work in software-based record-and-replay for WSNs has captured only control flow (e.g., TinyTracer [7]) or only a subset of system variables (e.g., EnviroLog [5]). …”
Section: Contributionsmentioning
confidence: 99%