Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 3 – uploaded by Arvindra Sehmi

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 3. Embedded-systems development life cycle and Microsoft technologies Because embedded devices contain both hardware and software components understanding the interactions between them are essential. Key skills in this area span electrical engineering and computer science; they also address the interrelationships among processor architectures, performance optimization, operating systems, virtual memory, concurrency, task scheduling, and synchronization. Developers should have a breadth of exposure to appreciate the utility of other fields in embedded systems, such as digital signal processing and feedback control. Finally, as embedded systems are not general operating systems, developers should understand the tight coupling between embedded applications and the hardware platforms that host them.

Figure 3 Embedded-systems development life cycle and Microsoft technologies Because embedded devices contain both hardware and software components understanding the interactions between them are essential. Key skills in this area span electrical engineering and computer science; they also address the interrelationships among processor architectures, performance optimization, operating systems, virtual memory, concurrency, task scheduling, and synchronization. Developers should have a breadth of exposure to appreciate the utility of other fields in embedded systems, such as digital signal processing and feedback control. Finally, as embedded systems are not general operating systems, developers should understand the tight coupling between embedded applications and the hardware platforms that host them.

Related Figures (3)

ES = embedded systems; EC = electronic components The nature and characteristics of distributed embedded The nature and characteristics of distributed embedded systems are explored below through some example scenarios drawn from the industry sectors mentioned above. This will help draw similarities to traditional distributed-systems development while also recognizing that there are unique systems-design implications, implementation issues, and approaches to solution development.
ES = embedded systems; EC = electronic components The nature and characteristics of distributed embedded The nature and characteristics of distributed embedded systems are explored below through some example scenarios drawn from the industry sectors mentioned above. This will help draw similarities to traditional distributed-systems development while also recognizing that there are unique systems-design implications, implementation issues, and approaches to solution development.
Figure 1. Technical imperatives for distributed embedded-systems development and research 10. Development
Figure 1. Technical imperatives for distributed embedded-systems development and research 10. Development
Figure 2. Embedded-device value chain When developing traditional business applications and systems, “devices” are standardized and readily available off-the-shelf computers, making a significant part of their value chain quite irrelevant to the development process. However, in embedded-systems design and development, a similar level of maturity or commoditization, if you like, of “devices” has not yet been achieved in the industry. As a result, development tool chains, processes, and methodologies are often proprietary and established for a specific goal. The vast majority of the industry in embedded development is using open-source software and custom development tools provided by the hardware vendors (SV, IHV) and open source communities. Time scales for the development of hardware and software at al levels in the device value chain can therefore be long as it requires proprietary or scarce skills and knowledge to put solutions together. In some cases, where DES and real- time scenarios are involved, especially in safety-critical situations, these time scales can easily span a decade. There are interesting offerings from the large operating systems and software tools vendors such as Microsoft that hold the promise of providing a more productive and “traditional” development experience for embedded- systems professionals (including academics and hobbyists) in many key solution scenarios. The hope is_ that eventually tool chains along the entire device value chain will become mostly standardized and _ interoperable enabling the embedded-systems industry to scale development as seen in traditional software development. Figure 3 shows some aspects of the embedded-systems development life cycle—which is strongly tied to the device value chain—and the Microsoft platform 1 1 . oe 1 4s = oon Se weer 1 ACSIJ Advances in Computer Science: an International Journal, Vol. 2, Issue 1, No.2, January 2 www.ACSIJ.org
Figure 2. Embedded-device value chain When developing traditional business applications and systems, “devices” are standardized and readily available off-the-shelf computers, making a significant part of their value chain quite irrelevant to the development process. However, in embedded-systems design and development, a similar level of maturity or commoditization, if you like, of “devices” has not yet been achieved in the industry. As a result, development tool chains, processes, and methodologies are often proprietary and established for a specific goal. The vast majority of the industry in embedded development is using open-source software and custom development tools provided by the hardware vendors (SV, IHV) and open source communities. Time scales for the development of hardware and software at al levels in the device value chain can therefore be long as it requires proprietary or scarce skills and knowledge to put solutions together. In some cases, where DES and real- time scenarios are involved, especially in safety-critical situations, these time scales can easily span a decade. There are interesting offerings from the large operating systems and software tools vendors such as Microsoft that hold the promise of providing a more productive and “traditional” development experience for embedded- systems professionals (including academics and hobbyists) in many key solution scenarios. The hope is_ that eventually tool chains along the entire device value chain will become mostly standardized and _ interoperable enabling the embedded-systems industry to scale development as seen in traditional software development. Figure 3 shows some aspects of the embedded-systems development life cycle—which is strongly tied to the device value chain—and the Microsoft platform 1 1 . oe 1 4s = oon Se weer 1 ACSIJ Advances in Computer Science: an International Journal, Vol. 2, Issue 1, No.2, January 2 www.ACSIJ.org
Related topics:
Computer ScienceDistributed ComputingDistributed Embedded Systems
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved