Name
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
The synchronization of accesses to shared memory buffers in multi-core platforms can be realized through lock-based synchronization protocols. If the embedded application executing on the system has hard real-time constraints, the worst-case blocking times for accessing remotely shared resources can negatively impact the schedulability guarantee. In this case, wait-free communication protocols can be an effective alternative. In addition, in a model-based development process, wait-free buffers allow the realization of communication that provably preserves the signal flows and guarantees a correct implementation. Flow-preserving wait-free communication primitives require (in the general case) the execution of buffer updates procedures at task activation time, either by the kernel or by a hook procedure executing at the highest priority level. To minimize the interference of such procedures on the application-level tasks, we present and evaluate an FPGA implementation. Our FPGA implementation is compared with implementations of lock-based policies in terms of memory, time, and area overhead. |
Year | DOI | Venue |
|---|---|---|
2013 | 10.1109/ETFA.2013.6648017 | Emerging Technologies & Factory Automation |
Keywords | Field | DocType |
field programmable gate arrays,shared memory systems,FPGA,flow-preserving wait-free communication,lock-based synchronization protocol,model-based development process,multicore platform,shared memory buffer,wait-free buffer,wait-free communication protocol,wait-free data synchronization protocol | Synchronization,Shared memory,Computer science,Lock (computer science),Data synchronization,Field-programmable gate array,Real-time computing,Implementation,Distributed shared memory,Embedded system,Communications protocol | Conference |
ISSN | ISBN | Citations |
1946-0740 | 978-1-4799-0862-2 | 0 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.34 | 0 | 6 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Benjamin Nahill | 1 | 1 | 0.73 |
| Ari Ramdial | 2 | 0 | 1.01 |
| Haibo Zeng | 3 | 132 | 8.63 |
| Marco Di Natale | 4 | 1237 | 91.62 |
| Zeljko Zilic | 5 | 623 | 71.20 |
| Di Natale, M. | 6 | 252 | 20.01 |