Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Figures
Introduction
Analysis
Conclusion
References

Software Architectures and Embedded Systems

Profile image of Sam MalekSam MalekProfile image of Marija Mikic-rakicMarija Mikic-rakic

Abstract

Software architecture has emerged as an area of intense research over the past decade [25,32]. A number of approaches have been proposed to deal with architectural description and analysis [21], architectural styles [8], domain-specific and application family architectures [4,35], architecture-based dynamic system adaptation [29], and so forth. By and large, however, these approaches share assumptions that make them suited specifically to the domain of traditional, desktop-based, possibly distributed development platforms. Those (comparatively few) architecture-based solu-tions that have focused on software systems for embedded devices (e. g., [28]) have had to face some of the same challenges (e. g., applying solutions across an application family), but also appear to have had some different priorities (e. g., ensuring efficient, architecture-compliant sys-tem implementations).

Figures (6)
Table 1: — ADL Scope and Applicability Two other notations also deal with issues that are relevant to the embedded systems domain: Uni- Con [32] supports modeling of runtime (though not necessarily real-time) scheduling, while ROOM [31] targets real-time computation with a combination of message sequence charts and state charts. The more recent Avionics ADL [5] tries to marry several of these ideas into a single language.
Table 1: — ADL Scope and Applicability Two other notations also deal with issues that are relevant to the embedded systems domain: Uni- Con [32] supports modeling of runtime (though not necessarily real-time) scheduling, while ROOM [31] targets real-time computation with a combination of message sequence charts and state charts. The more recent Avionics ADL [5] tries to marry several of these ideas into a single language.
selection and combina ion of four types of interaction: symmetric (i.e., peer-to-peer) and asym- metric (i.e., master-slave), as well as synchronous and asynchronous. These facilities provided by Prism-SF are instantia ed into one or more architectural styles, which are, in turn, used in the design of specific systems. For illustration, Figure 2 shows a partial application architecture designed using an instance of Prism-SF in which e bhoth svmmetric and asymmetric connectors are included:
selection and combina ion of four types of interaction: symmetric (i.e., peer-to-peer) and asym- metric (i.e., master-slave), as well as synchronous and asynchronous. These facilities provided by Prism-SF are instantia ed into one or more architectural styles, which are, in turn, used in the design of specific systems. For illustration, Figure 2 shows a partial application architecture designed using an instance of Prism-SF in which e bhoth svmmetric and asymmetric connectors are included:
Software architectures provide design-level models and guidelines for composing software sys- tems. For these models and guidelines to be truly useful in a development setting, they must be accompanied by support for their implementation [18,32]. This is particularly important in the
Software architectures provide design-level models and guidelines for composing software sys- tems. For these models and guidelines to be truly useful in a development setting, they must be accompanied by support for their implementation [18,32]. This is particularly important in the
a. Number of events per second (top) and memory usage (bottom). Heterogeneity is another intrinsic characteristic of embedded systems [14,19]: unlike traditione software platforms, which have been standardized to a significant degree, many embedded sys tems run on one-of-a-kind hardware with special-purpose operating systems, programming lan guages, network protocols, data formats, and so forth. This poses a great challenge to embedde application developers. Techniques commonly employed to address heterogeneity in traditione software systems, such as XML encoding or platform independent programming languages (e.g. Java), also may not be viable options in the embedded systems domain due to resource scarcit and possible real-time requirements. Therefore, a practical architectural middleware solution 1 this domain needs to be either highly specialized (and thus narrowly applicable) or flexible order to overcome the unpredictable and the heterogeneous nature of embedded systems.
a. Number of events per second (top) and memory usage (bottom). Heterogeneity is another intrinsic characteristic of embedded systems [14,19]: unlike traditione software platforms, which have been standardized to a significant degree, many embedded sys tems run on one-of-a-kind hardware with special-purpose operating systems, programming lan guages, network protocols, data formats, and so forth. This poses a great challenge to embedde application developers. Techniques commonly employed to address heterogeneity in traditione software systems, such as XML encoding or platform independent programming languages (e.g. Java), also may not be viable options in the embedded systems domain due to resource scarcit and possible real-time requirements. Therefore, a practical architectural middleware solution 1 this domain needs to be either highly specialized (and thus narrowly applicable) or flexible order to overcome the unpredictable and the heterogeneous nature of embedded systems.
Current support for deployment in the Prism project is accomplished via an extension to MS Visio and a “skeleton” configuration in Prism-MW consisting of a special purpose Admin component and a distribution-enabled connector. The resulting tool, Prism-DE, is shown in Figure 4. Prism- DE allows one to specify a configuration of hardware hosts (with known IP addresses), operating system processes on each host, and software configurations (comprising software components and connectors) within each process. Once a suitable deployment is depicted, it is effected with a single button push. The Admin components on each host receive and instantiate (using Prism- MW’s API shown in Figure 3) the application-specific components. Further details of this pro- cess are discussed in [24]. Prism-DE then continuously monitors the network connectivity of the depicted hardware configuration. As indicated in the above discussion, Prism-DE currently sup-
Current support for deployment in the Prism project is accomplished via an extension to MS Visio and a “skeleton” configuration in Prism-MW consisting of a special purpose Admin component and a distribution-enabled connector. The resulting tool, Prism-DE, is shown in Figure 4. Prism- DE allows one to specify a configuration of hardware hosts (with known IP addresses), operating system processes on each host, and software configurations (comprising software components and connectors) within each process. Once a suitable deployment is depicted, it is effected with a single button push. The Admin components on each host receive and instantiate (using Prism- MW’s API shown in Figure 3) the application-specific components. Further details of this pro- cess are discussed in [24]. Prism-DE then continuously monitors the network connectivity of the depicted hardware configuration. As indicated in the above discussion, Prism-DE currently sup-

Related papers

The Past, Present, and Future for Software Architecture
Henk Obbink

IEEE Software, 2006

his special issue celebrates 10 years of software architecture conferences and workshops and the 10th anniversary of the first IEEE Software special issue on the topic in November 1995. We aim to address the latest thinking about creating, capturing, and

View PDFchevron_right
Towards Architectural Programming of Embedded Systems
Bernhard Rumpe, Arne Haber

Integrating architectural elements with a modern programming language is essential to ensure a smooth combination of architectural design and programming. In this position statement, we motivate a combination of architectural description for distributed, asynchronously communicating systems and Java as an example for such an integration. The result is an ordinary programming language, that exhibits architecture, data structure and behavior within one view. Mappings or tracing between different views is unnecessary. A prototypical implementation of a compiler demonstrates the possibilities and challenges of architectural programming.

View PDFchevron_right
Guest Editors' Introduction to the Special Section on Programming Architectures for Embedded Systems
Sandeep Shukla

Computers, IEEE Transactions on, 2008

EMBEDDED Systems are ubiquitous today. Starting from avionics control, automotive control, and industrial process control and all the way to handheld PDAs, cell phones, and biomedical prosthetic devices, all have embedded control enabled by embedded computing. According to some, embedded computing has seen some of the most explosive growth among all other fields in computing today. Some of the applications running on such embedded computing platforms are also safety-critical, real-time, and require an absolute guarantee of correctness, ...

View PDFchevron_right
A Brief Survey of Software Architecture
Riddhi Jesalpura

Software of today is becoming larger and more complex. More powerful ways of structuring complexity are consequently required, whether it is about development methodologies, structural programming, naming conventions, configuration management, or, as is discussed in this report, software architecture. A software system's architecture can be described as the " blueprint " of a system at the highest level of abstraction, describing the main components and their most important interactions. We discuss in more detail how architectures can be described and the uses of such descriptions. Much research so far has also been dedicated to methods and case studies, to make the research of practical interest. This report describes how the quality of the software can be ensured to a certain degree through informal approaches – not least because an architectural description provides a common understanding around which different stakeholders can meet and discuss a system. Formal approaches are also emerging, and there are a number of formal languages for description of a system's software architecture. This report presents a brief survey of the field of Software Architecture; both informal and formal approaches are covered and discussed. The report concludes with presenting the author's planned research, aiming at answering how component-based architectures can be designed to handle change.

View PDFchevron_right
A disciplined approach to the development of platform architectures
Kurt Keutzer

Microelectronics Journal, 2002

Silicon capability has enabled the embedding of an entire system on a single silicon die. These devices are known as systems-on-achip (SOC).

View PDFchevron_right
An Architecture Framework For Application-specific And Scalable Architectures
Apoorv Srivastava

The 16th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture

Two major limitations concerning the design of cost-effective application-specific architectures are the recurrent costs of system-software development and hardware implementation, in particular VLSI implementation, for each architecture. The Scalable ARChitecture Experiment (SCARCE) aims to provide a framework for application-specific processor design. The framework allows scaling of functionality, implementation complexity, and performance. The SCARCE framework consists and will consist of: an architecture framework defining the constraints for the design of application-specific aschitectures; tools for synthesizing architectures from application or application-area; VLSI cell libraries and tools for quick generation of application-specific processors; a system-software platform which can be reta.rgeted quickly to fit the applicationspecific architecture; This paper concentrates primarily on the architecture framework of SCARCE, but also presents briefly some software issues and outlines the process of generating VLSI processors.

View PDFchevron_right
Design and evolution of software architecture in practice
Elmer Sandvad

Proceedings Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems. TOOLS 32, 1999

With special focus on software architectural issues, we report from the first two major phases of a software development project. Our experience suggests that explicit focus on software architecture in these phases was an important key to success. More specifically: Demands for stability, flexibility and proper work organisation in an initial prototyping phase of a project are facilitated by having an explicit architecture. However, the architecture should also allow for certain degrees of freedom for experimentation. Furthermore, in a following evolutionary development phase, architectural redesign is necessary and should be firmly based on experience gained from working within the prototype architecture. Finally, to get it right, the architecture needs to be prototyped, or iterated upon, throughout evolutionary development cycles. In this architectural prototyping process, we address the difficult issue of identifying and evolving functional components in the architecture and point to an architectural strategya set of architectures, their context and evolution -that was helpful in this respect.

View PDFchevron_right
Software Architecture: The Next Step
Jan Bosch

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2004

This position paper makes the following claims that, in our opinion, are worthwhile to discuss at the workshop. 1) The first phase of software architecture research, where the key concepts are components and connectors, has matured the technology to a level where industry adoption is wide-spread and few fundamental issues remain.

View PDFchevron_right
focus Past, Present, and Future of Software Architecture
Philippe Kruchten

IEEE Software, 2006

his special issue celebrates 10 years of software architecture conferences and workshops and the 10th anniversary of the first IEEE Software special issue on the topic in November 1995. We aim to address the latest thinking about creating, capturing, and

View PDFchevron_right
Foundations for the Study of Software Architecture
Asma Labadi

The purpose of this paper is to build the foundation for software architecture. We rst develop an intuition for software architecture by appealing to several wellestablished architectural disciplines. On the basis of this intuition, we present a model of software architecture that consists of three components: elements, form, and rationale. Elements are either processing, data, or connecting elements. Form is de ned in terms of the properties of, and the relationships among, the elements | that is, the constraints on the elements. The rationale provides the underlying basis for the architecture in terms of the system constraints, which most often derive from the system requirements. We discuss the components of the model in the context of both architectures and architectural styles and present an extended example to illustrate some important architecture and style considerations. We conclude by presenting some of the bene ts of our approach to software architecture, summarizing our contributions, and relating our approach to other current w ork.

View PDFchevron_right

References (40)

  1. R. Allen and D. Garlan. A Formal Basis for Architectural Connection. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 213-249, July 1997.
  2. D. Batory, L. Coglianese, S. Shafer, and W. Tracz. The ADAGE Avionics Reference Archi- tecture. A1AA Computing in Aerospace-10, San Antonio, Texas, March 28-30 1995.
  3. G. Booch, J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson. The Unified Modeling Language User Guide. Addison Wesley, 1999.
  4. J. Bosch. Design and Use of Software Architectures: Adopting and Evolving a Product-Line Approach. Addison-Wesley (Pearson Education), May 2000.
  5. E. Colbert, B. Lewis, and S. Vestal. Developing Evolvable, Embedded, Time-Critical Sys- tems with MetaH. 34th International Conference on Technology of Object-Oriented Lan- guages and Systems (TOOLS 34), Santa Barbara, August 2000.
  6. L. Coglianese and R. Szymanski, DSSA-ADAGE: An Environment for Architecture-based Avionics Development, In Proceedings of AGARD, 1993.
  7. D. Daniel, R. Rasmussen, G. Reeves, A. Sacks. Software Architecture Themes In JPL's Mis- sion Data System. AIAA Space Technology Conference and Exposition, Albuquerque, NM, September 1999.
  8. E. M. Dashofy, A. Van der Hoek, R. N. Taylor. An Infrastructure for the Rapid Development of XML-based Architecture Description Languages. 24the International Conference on Soft- ware Engineering, Orlando, Florida, May 2002.
  9. R. T. Fielding. Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-Based Software Architec- tures. Ph.D Thesis, University of California Irvine, June 2000.
  10. M. M. Gorlick and R. R. Razouk. Using Weaves for Software Construction and Analysis. 13th International Conference on Software Engineering, Austin, TX, May 1991.
  11. R. S. Hall, D. M. Heimbigner, and A. L. Wolf. A Cooperative Approach to Support Software Deployment Using the Software Dock. 21st International Conference on Software Engineer- ing, Los Angeles, CA, May 1999.
  12. B. Hayes-Roth et. al. A Domain-Specific Software Architecture for Adaptive Intelligent Sys- tems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 21, No. 4, April 1995.
  13. IONA Orbix/E Datasheet. http://www.iona.com/whitepapers/orbix-e-DS.pdf
  14. E. A. Lee. Embedded Software. Advances in Computers (Marvin V. Zelkowitz, ed.), Vol. 56, Academic Press, London, 2002.
  15. LIME. http://lime.sourceforge.net/
  16. J. Magee, J. Kramer. Dynamic structure in software architectures. 4th ACM SIGSOFT sym- posium on Foundations of software engineering, San Francisco, CA, October 1996.
  17. C. Mascolo et. al. XMIDDLE: A Data-Sharing Middleware for Mobile Computing. Personal and Wireless Communications, Kluwer, April 2002.
  18. N. Medvidovic, N. R. Mehta, M. Mikic-Rakic: A Family of Software Architecture Imple- mentation Frameworks. The Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture 2002, Montreal, Canada, August 2002.
  19. N. Medvidovic, M. Mikic-Rakic, N. Mehta, S. Malek. Software Architectural Support for Handheld Computing. IEEE Computer, special issue on handheld computing, September 2003.
  20. N. Medvidovic, D. S. Rosenblum, and R. N. Taylor. A Language and Environment for Archi- tecture-Based Software Development and Evolution. 21st International Conference on Soft- ware Engineering, Los Angeles, CA, May 1999.
  21. N. Medvidovic and R. N. Taylor. A Classification and Comparison Framework for Software Architecture Description Languages. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, January 2000.
  22. Microsoft .NET. http://www.microsoft.com/net/
  23. M. Mikic-Rakic and N. Medvidovic. Adaptable Architectural Middleware for Programming- in-the-Small-and-Many. ACM/IFIP/USENIX International Middleware Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 2003.
  24. M. Mikic-Rakic and N. Medvidovic. Architecture-Level Support for Software Component Deployment in Resource Constrained Environments. Component Deployment, IFIP/ACM Working Conference, Berlin, Germany, June 20-21, 2002.
  25. D.E. Perry and A. L. Wolf. Foundations for the Study of Software Architecture. ACM SIG- SOFT Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 17, No.4, pages 40-52, October 1992.
  26. Project JXTA. http://www.jxta.org/
  27. M. Rakic, N. Medvidovic. Increasing the Confidence in Off-the-Shelf Components: A Soft- ware Connector-Based Approach. 2001 Symposium on Software Reusability (SSR 2001), Tor- onto, Canada, May 2001.
  28. R. V. Ommering. Building Product Populations with Software Components. 24th Interna- tional Conference on Software Engineering, Orlando, Florida, May 2002.
  29. P. Oreizy, N. Medvidovic, and R. N. Taylor. Architecture-Based Runtime Software Evolu- tion. 20th International Conference on Software Engineering, Kyoto, Japan, April 1998.
  30. D. Schmidt. TAO. http://www.cs.wustl.edu/~schmidt/TAO.html
  31. B. Selic. Real-Time Object-Oriented Modeling (ROOM). 2nd IEEE Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium, June, 1996
  32. M. Shaw, R. DeLine, D. Klein, T. Ross, D. Young, G. Zelesnik. Abstractions for Software Architecture and Tools to Support Them. IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, April 1995.
  33. M. Shaw and D. Garlan. Software Architecture: Perspectives on an Emerging Discipline. Prentice Hall, 1996.
  34. Sun Microsystems. JINI(TM) Network technology. http://wwws.sun.com/software/jini/
  35. W. Tracz. Domain-Specific Software Architecture Pedagogical Example. ACM Software Engineering Notes, July 1995.
  36. University of Southern California's "Software Engineering for Embedded Systems" class website: http://sunset.usc.edu/classes/cs599_2002/index.html
  37. S. Vestal. MetaH Programmer's Manual, Version 1.09. Technical Report, Honeywell Technol- ogy Center, April 1996.
  38. B. Werger. A Situated Approach to Scalable Control for Strongly Cooperative Robot Teams. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Southern California, May 2001.
  39. X2000/Mission Data System (MDS) project. http://x2000.jpl.nasa.gov/nonflash/technology/ mds.html
  40. S. S. Yau and F. Karim, Context-Sensitive Middleware for Real-time Software in Ubiquitous Computing Environments. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Object-oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing 2001, Magdeburg, Germany.

Related papers

Using Operational Architecture to Model Embedded Software
Doo-Hwan Bae

2006 13th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC'06), 2006

Almost methods in embedded software modeling take software architecture as one of the crucial parts of the design process. Since a principal role of embedded software is the interaction with its environments, architectures that describe the dynamic aspects are also needed. Although such architectural view is significantly important in embedded software development, the existing approaches do not practically guide the architectural design based on the dynamic aspects. In this paper, we propose an operational architecture to represent the dynamic aspects of an embedded software. Also we explain how to use our operational architecture in the process of embedded software modeling. Our operational architecture effectively reflects interactionbased dynamic behavior of the system, and gives traceability between requirements and design model.

View PDFchevron_right
A Family of Software Architecture Implementation Frameworks
Marija Mikic-rakic

Software Architecture, 2002

Software architectures provide high-level abstractions for representing the structure, behavior, and key properties of software systems. Various architecture description languages, styles, tools, and technologies have emerged over the past decade. At the same time, there has been comparatively little focus on techniques and technologies for transforming architectural models into running systems. This often results in significant differences between conceptual and concrete architectures, rendering system evolution and maintenance difficult. Furthermore, it calls into question the ability of developers to consistently transfer the key architectural properties into system implementations. One solution to this problem is to employ architectural frameworks. Architectural frameworks provide support for implementing, deploying, executing, and evolving software architectures. This paper describes the design of and our experience with a family of architectural frameworks that support implementation of systems in a specific architectural style-C2. These frameworks have been implemented in different programming languages and used on different hardware platforms, including resource constrained (e.g., hand held) devices. The frameworks are lightweight and extensible, and allow application monitoring and analysis at run time. To date, the C2 frameworks have been used in the development of over 100 applications by several academic and industrial organizations. The paper discusses the issues we have encountered in implementing and using the frameworks, as well as the approaches adopted to resolve these issues.

View PDFchevron_right
Using Software Architectures for Designing Distributed Embedded Systems
Henrik Iskov Christensen

Wicsa, 2003

In this paper, we outline an ongoing project of designing distributed embedded systems for closed-loop process control. The project is a joint effort between software architecture researchers and developers from two companies that produce commercial embedded process control systems. The project has a strong emphasis on software architectural issues and terminology in order to envision, design and analyze design alternatives. We present two results. First, we outline how focusing on software architecture, architectural issues and qualities are beneficial in designing distributed, embedded, systems. Second, we present two different architectures for closed-loop process control and discuss benefits and reliabilities.

View PDFchevron_right
A report on the first european conference on software architecture (ECSA'2007)
Carlos E Cuesta

2009

Software Architecture, defined as the formal study of the structures and patterns of complex software systems, is already in its second decade as a regular discipline within Software Engineering. Not so long ago, architectures were simply left implicit. Today this would not be possible anymore; software applications cannot be conceived as isolated monoliths. Almost any software piece is now part of another system, and these systems have become themselves distributed, more complex, and larger.

View PDFchevron_right
Architecture-centric software engineering
Jan Bosch

Proceedings of the 24th international conference on Software engineering - ICSE '02, 2002

View PDFchevron_right
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved