Download presentation

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Published byKameron Warton Modified over 2 years ago

1
Memory Interface Analysis Using the Real-Time Model Checker UPPAAL Egle Sasnauskaite Marius Mikucionis Supervisor: Gerd Behrmann Co-cupervisor: Thomas Hune Aalborg University Computer science departement Software systems Engineering 31 May, 2002

2
Motivation Radar principles: 1. Frequency diversity 2. Sweep integration MI system: (adders, FIFO buffers,register, an arbiter, SDRAM): Synchronize. Storing data in the memory module Combine Sliding window sum calculation Sum d,i =e d,i +sum d-1,i - e d-m,i 2 1 1 2´´ 1´´ 2 e 0,3 e 1,3 e 2,3 e 3,3 e 0,4 e 1,4 e 2,4 e 4,4 e 1,2 e 0,2 e 2,2 e 3,2 e 4,2 e 3,4 2` 1`

3
The Main Goals To analyse and to model the MI between input, output and the memory. To verify the model within a reasonable amount of time and memory space. To optimise the model in terms of buffer sizes and an arbiter algorithm. To summarise the modelling methods for similar systems.

4
Modelling Modelling tool – UPPAAL (a modelling toolbox of symbolic simulation and verification) The model of the MI is a combination of timed automata with UPPAAL extensions

5
Verification Model based techniques – Simulation and automated model checking Verification method – Partial order reduction Optimisation technique for full verification – Heuristical periodical approximation

6
Partial-order Reduction Method Purpose – to avoid combinatorial explosion of states due to the modelling concurrency by interleaving. Implementation – by introducing additional components. Gain: Event serialization order and determinism Problem: State space is still too big to verify the model Disadvantage: Only particular ordering is examined

7
Heuristic Periodic Approximation Purpose – to predict how many states should be explored to fully verify the model Implementation: find smaller subsystems in the compound system, define periods of subsystems in a bigger system, calculate the system period, which is expected to be the least common multiple of the subsystem periods.

8
Definitions in Heuristical Periodical Approximation a i – delay-transition a i ´ – action-transition A state of an automaton changes if changes: Valuation of clocks Valuation of data variables Location of the automaton. S=(l, v) SiSi aiai S i+1 A Path l 0,v 0 a0a0 a` 0 l 0,v 0 ´l 1,v 1 a1a1 l 1,v 1 ´ a1`a1` l i,v i aiai l i,v i ´ ai´ai´ … A compressed path a k+1 a` k+1 a` k+n-1 l 0,v 0 a0a0 a` 0 l 0,v 0 ´ l k,v k akak l k,v k ´ ak`ak` l k+1,v k+1 l k+1,v k+1 ´ … l k+n-1,v k+n-1 l k+n-1,v´ k+n-1 a k+n-1 … A state cycle A period of a state cycle:

9
Memory Interface Architecture Bus1Bus2Arbiter 10-100MHz100MHz2x100MHz Timer Starter 2x100MHz Adder2 Adder1 Buff1Reg1 Buff6Reg6 Buff8 Buff7 Buff5 Buff4 Buff2 Buff0 Reg8 Reg7 Reg5 Reg4 Reg2 Reg0 Buff3Reg3 Memory

10
Serialization Example starter:=Starter(); timer:=Timer(21, 5, 3); bus1:=Bus(1, 0, wireCount0, 1, bus0Wire, begSig, endSig); buf0:=inBuffer(2, 0, 1024, 0, 0, 0, 1, bus0Wire, bus1Wire, begSig, endSig, 8, begBuff, endBuff, 32); buf1:=inBuffer(3, 1, 1024, 0, 1, 1, 3, bus0Wire, bus1Wire, begSig, endSig, 8, begBuff, endBuff, 32); buf2:=outBuffer(4, 2, 512, 512, 2, 5, 2, bus1Wire, bus0Wire, begBuff, endBuff, 32, begSig, endSig, 8);... buf8:=inBuffer(10, 8, 2048, 0, 8, 8, 17, bus0Wire, bus1Wire, begSig, endSig, 16, begBuff, endBuff, 32); bus2:=Bus(11, 1, wireCount1, 1, bus1Wire, begBuff, endBuff); reg0:=Register(12, 0, 0, 0, 0, bus1Wire, begBuff, endBuff, begMem, endMem); reg1:=Register(13, 1, 2, 1, 0, bus1Wire, begBuff, endBuff, begMem, endMem);... reg8:=Register(20, 8, 16, 8, 0, bus1Wire, begBuff, endBuff, begMem, endMem); arbiter:=Arbiter(0, 2, begMem, endMem);

11
Periods in the Model Arbiter int counter; const unsafe 15625/5; const refreshCycle 100/5; const maxSafe unsafe-6; const maxUnsafe unsafe+refreshCycle;

12
Small vs. Complete MI (without refresh) Adder2 Adder1 Buff1Reg1 Buff6Reg6 Buff8 Buff7 Buff5 Buff4 Buff2 Buff0 Reg8 Reg7 Reg5 Reg4 Reg2 Reg0 Buff3Reg3 Memory Buff1Reg1 Buff0Reg0 Memory Period length: 640ns=2 7 ·5ns Cycle start: 80ns Cycle end: 720ns Period length: 5760ns=2 7 ·3 2 ·5ns Cycle start: 520ns Cycle end: 6280ns

13
Small MI with Memory Refresh Verification space is proportional to LCM(P MI, P R )

14
Complete MI with Memory Refresh The verification space can hardly be characterized by LCM(P MI, P R ) 4E+6

15
Arbiter Algorithm Synthesis (future) Round-robin Heuristic (fullest buffer) Optimal No halting problem for particular buffer sizes: If algorithm exists it contains a finite cycle, since the number of states is finite If algorithm does not exist buffer over/under-flow in all verification branches

16
Conclusions The biggest challenge - state explosion problem. Proposed a UPPAAL model of MI which is small enough to verify with an approximate memory refresh timing. The model is flexible for various configurations. We used eight times smaller buffer sizes. We introduced ideas for optimisations in the future.

17
Questions?

Similar presentations

Presentation is loading. Please wait....

OK

Computer Architecture CS 215

Computer Architecture CS 215

© 2017 SlidePlayer.com Inc.

All rights reserved.

Ads by Google

Ppt on power line communication wiki Ppt on clinical data management Microsoft office ppt online shopping Ppt on afforestation in india Ppt on lower federal court systems Free download ppt on area related to circles Ppt on series and parallel circuits equations Ppt on models of marketing communication Maths ppt on rational numbers for class 8 Ppt on south african economy