Integrating hardware limitations in CAN schedulability analysis

Controller Area Network (CAN) • Section 4.6 has been added, providing formal proofs that the schedulability tests given in Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 are sufficient (Theorems 2 and 3) and selfsustainable (Theorems 4 and 5). This section also shows how more precise analysis can be achieved when the priorities of messages in a FIFO queue span those of messages in a priority queue or another FIFO queue, which is often the case in practice. Extended version• In Section 5.2, we have added a formal proof that transmission deadline monotonic priority ordering is optimal when all messages have the same maximum transmission time (Theorem 7).• In Section 7, we have extended the experimental evaluation to show how the performance degradation due to FIFO queues depends on the number of messages in each queue.• Sections 6.1 and 7.1 have been added, exploring the effects of implementing one or more FIFO queues in gateway nodes that are responsible for transferring messages from one network to another.

show abstract

“…Issues include, delays in refilling a transmit buffer (Khan et al, 2010), and FIFO queuing of messages in the device driver or CAN controller.…”

Section: Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Schedulability analysis for Controller Area Network (CAN) with FIFO queues priority queues and gateways

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Later on, Davis et al [3] refuted, revisited and revised the analysis developed by Tindell et al The queueing polices implemented by the CAN device drivers and communications stacks, internal organization and hardware limitations of CAN controllers may have significant impact on the timing behavior of CAN messages [4]. A few examples of such limitations are controllers implementing FIFO and work-conserving queues [4,5], limited number of transmit buffers [6,7,8], copying delays in transmit buffers [6,8], transmit buffers supporting abort requests [7], the device drivers lacking abort request mechanisms in transmit buffers [4,6,7,8] and protocol stack prohibiting transmission abort requests in some configurations as in the case of AUTOSAR [9].…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If all such buffers are occupied by lower priority messages, a higher priority message released in the same controller may suffer from priority inversion (it will be discussed in Section 3) [2,7,8]. If the controller supports transmission abort requests then the lowest priority message in the transmit buffer (not under transmission) is swapped with the higher priority message from the message queue at the cost of additional delay that was integrated by Khan et al [7] with the existing analysis [3]. In the case of non-abortable transmit buffers, RTA of CAN messages is extended in [6,8].…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extending response-time analysis of mixed messages in CAN with controllers implementing non-abortable transmit buffers

Mubeen

Mäki-Turja

Sjödin

2012

Proceedings of 2012 IEEE 17th International Conference on Emerging Technologies &Amp; Factory Automation (ETFA 2012)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The existing response-time analysis for messages in Controller Area Network (CAN) with controllers implementing non-abortable transmit buffers does not support mixed messages that are implemented by several high-level protocols used in the automotive industry. We present the work in progress on the extension of the existing analysis for mixed messages. The extended analysis will be applicable to any high-level protocol for CAN that uses periodic, sporadic and mixed transmission modes and implements non-abortable transmit buffers in CAN controllers.

show abstract

“…Bounds on the worst case response times have been provided [2] and [3], researchers then started to integrate the limitations of hardware [4] and the communication stack, as the first analyses usually overlooked them, and also considered the effect of aperiodic traffic on CAN frame response times [5] and the consequences of transient perturbations [6]. Of course, methods to minimize the response times, or make them more predictable, were investigated too, e.g.…”

Section: Previous Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of clock drifts on CAN frame response time distributions

2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The response time distributions of the frames sent on a Controller Area Network (CAN) bus are of prime interest to dimension and validate automotive electronic architectures. However, the existing work on the timing behaviour of the CAN network does not take into account that all the data exchanges between the Electronic Control Units (ECUs) are driven by different and independent clocks which are subject to clock drifts. This paper proposes a model for clock drifts and describes their impact on the CAN frame response time distributions. By implementing the clock drifts in a CAN simulation tool, we show experimentally that the response time distributions converge, for drift values chosen randomly within the same range on all ECUs, whatever the initial phasings between the sending nodes. Furthermore, we show that, as a result of the clock drifts, the situations leading to the worst case response times are transient.

show abstract

Integrating hardware limitations in CAN schedulability analysis

Abstract: Abstract

Cited by 23 publications

References 5 publications

Schedulability analysis for Controller Area Network (CAN) with FIFO queues priority queues and gateways

Schedulability analysis for Controller Area Network (CAN) with FIFO queues priority queues and gateways

Extending response-time analysis of mixed messages in CAN with controllers implementing non-abortable transmit buffers

Impact of clock drifts on CAN frame response time distributions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About