Development of a Synchronous Subset of AADL

Filali-Amine, Mamoun; Lawall, Julia

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-11811-1_19

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The purpose of the work is to couple MARTE [4] with the Event-B method. Papers [6] and [7] consider a meaningful subset of AADL which allows to specify respectively a class of embedded control systems and AADL data port protocols, and assign this subset a semantics in terms of Event-B refinements and model decomposition. Despite these approaches provide formal specifications, they do not consider high-level architectures but propose a temporal model of tasks execution on GPU.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Formal Approach for the Modeling of High-Level Architectures Aligned with System Requirements

Bougacha

2020

Rigorous State-Based Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Formal Approach for the Modeling of High-Level Architectures Aligned with System Requirements

Bougacha

2020

Rigorous State-Based Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Vardanega depicts the Ravenscar profile using applicability constraints [17] in order to reduce the gap between industrial practice and theory. Filali et al [18] define the Time-Triggered architecture as an AADL subset. Each of those methods studies the validation of a set of realtime architectures with a static number of design patterns and does not cope with the composition issue.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Composition of design patterns

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article deals with performance verification of architecture models of real-time embedded systems. We investigate scheduling analysis of multi-tasks applications running on real-time operating systems (RTOS in this article). Scheduling analysis on these types of system can be performed with the real-time scheduling theory, but applying it is a complicated task. To allow designer to automatically apply this theory, we propose several architectural design patterns. Each architectural design pattern models a classical task synchronization or communication protocol available in RTOSes. In this article, we focus on those design patterns composition. We show how to compose the proposed design patterns and how scheduling analysis can be run with them.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, BIP can also be viewed as an architecture description language (ADL) [38], and is used for systems modeling [5]. In particular, an AADL model (which is a superset of ADL [27]) can be transformed into a BIP model [13]. In addition, BIP supports a full set of tools [51] for manipulating the BIP model, source-to-source transformations, model transformations, code generation, and compositional verification [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modularizing behavioral and architectural crosscutting concerns in formal component-based systems – Application to the Behavior Interaction Priority framework

El-Hokayem¹,

Falcone²,

Jaber³

2018

Journal of Logical and Algebraic Methods in Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We define a method to modularize crosscutting concerns in Component-Based Systems (CBSs) expressed using the Behavior Interaction Priority (BIP) framework. Our method is inspired from the Aspect Oriented Programming (AOP) paradigm which was initially conceived to support the separation of concerns during the development of monolithic systems. BIP has a formal operational semantics and makes a clear separation between architecture and behavior to allow for compositional and incremental design and analysis of systems. We distinguish local from global aspects. Local aspects model concerns at the component level and are used to refine the behavior of components. Global aspects model concerns at the architecture level, and hence refine communications (synchronization and data transfer) between components. We formalize local and global aspects as well as their composition and integration into a BIP system through rigorous transformation primitives. We present AOP-BIP, a tool for Aspect-Oriented Programming of BIP systems, demonstrate its use to modularize logging, security, and fault tolerance in a network protocol, and discuss its possible use in runtime verification of CBSs. represent different concerns. A concern is defined in [15] as a "domain used as a decomposition criterion for a system or another domain with that concern". Domains include logging, persistence, and system policies such as security. Concerns are often found in different parts of a system, or in some cases multiple concerns overlap one region. These are called crosscutting concerns. Aspect-Oriented Programming (AOP) [34,52] aims at modularizing crosscutting concerns by identifying a clear role for each of them in the system, implementing each concern in a separate module, and loosely coupling each module to only a limited number of other modules. Essentially, AOP defines mechanisms to determine the locations of the concerns in the system execution by introducing joinpoints and pointcuts. Then, it determines what to do at these locations by introducing advices. Finally, it provides a mechanism to coordinate all the advices happening at a location by introducing a process called weaving.Motivations and challenges. In Component Based Systems (CBSs), crosscutting concerns arise at the levels of components [19,37] (building blocks) and architectures (communications). Integrating crosscutting concerns in CBSs allows users to reason about crosscutting concerns in separation, and favors correct-by-construction design. Defining an AOP paradigm for CBSs poses multiple challenges. While the execution of a sequential program can be seen as a sequence of instructions, the semantics of a CBS is generally more complex and relies on a notion of architecture imposing several constraints on their execution. As a consequence of these constraints, AOP matching, instrumentation and modifications need to be extended to account for the architecture (i.e., data transfer and rendez-vous between components). Multiple approaches [44,11,19,37,16] have sought to apply AOP for...

show abstract

Development of a Synchronous Subset of AADL

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

A Formal Approach for the Modeling of High-Level Architectures Aligned with System Requirements

A Formal Approach for the Modeling of High-Level Architectures Aligned with System Requirements

Composition of design patterns

Modularizing behavioral and architectural crosscutting concerns in formal component-based systems – Application to the Behavior Interaction Priority framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About