1. www.thalesgroup.com Filling the Gap Between System Design & Performance Verification Rafik HENIA, Laurent RIOUX, Nicolas SORDON Thales Research & Technology

2. 2 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track  Characterized by :  High complexity  Strict Time-to-market constraints  Strong real-time requirements Real-Time Embedded Applications Challenge :  Reliable model-based performance verification approach at early design stages to avoid costly timing errors  Requires bridging the gap between design model and performance verification activities  Requires seamless integration of performance verification methods in the design process complexity time-criticality money  Issue :  Traditional V-cycle not suitable any more since performance verification activities only start when development and integration are completed  Performance issues are more difficult and expensive to fix at this stage

3. 3 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track Current Design Approach at THALES MyCCM (Make your Component Connector Model)  Component-based design approach  Components encapsulate functional code  Components connected through communication ports  Construction of applications by assembling components  Code generation of non-functional code  Supported by UML modelers and Thales MDE internal modeling tools Separation of concerns between functional and non-functional code Black-box components for easy application prototyping Reuse of components

4. 4 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track Software Defined Radio  Signal modulation implementation using software rather than hardware  Easy reprogramming to fit different situations with the same hardware  Typically used by armies to guarantee confidentiality of communications  Strong real-time constraints Use Case Context

5. 5 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track Design Use Case – Software Defined Radio

6. 6 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track ? From Design Model to Performance Analysis ? Required by SymTA/S  Application model  Mapping  Timing characteristics  Scheduling characteristics Available in modeling tool  Application model  Mapping Modeling tool SymTA/S

7. 7 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track Modeling tool SymTA/S ? Performance Viewpoint From Design Model to Performance Analysis ? Security Viewpoint Safety Viewpoint Performance Viewpoint  A model view from the performance engineering perspective  Separation of concerns to master the system design complexity

8. 8 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track Performance Viewpoint UML-profile MARTE  OMG standard  Concepts for real-time constraints modeling  Concepts for target platform modeling  Syntax is not user-friendly !

9. 9 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track Performance Viewpoint UML-profile MARTE  OMG standard  Concepts for real-time constraints modeling  Concepts for target platform modeling  Syntax is not user-friendly !  Syntax adaptation required

10. 10 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track Available in design tool  Application model  Mapping  Timing characteristics  Scheduling characteristics Required by SymTA/S  Application model  Mapping  Timing characteristics  Scheduling characteristics ? Performance Viewpoint Semantic Gap between Design Model to Performance Analysis ? A task produces output data at the end of its execution semantic gap

11. 11 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track Performance Viewpoint Design Model Semantic asynchronous communication synchronous communication

12. 12 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track Design Model Transformation Task 1 Task 2 Task 1,a Task 1,b Modeling tool SymTA/S

13. 13 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track From Design Model to Performance Analysis via Pivot Model Pivot analysis model MainStream Engineering Spectra Cx Performance Viewpoint Pivot analysis model  Introduce a minimum of independence from modeling and analysis tools

14. 14 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track From Performance Analysis Back to Design Model Performance Viewpoint Pivot analysis model Analysis results adaptation Transformation rules required to inject the analysis results in the design model

15. 15 / Date /Référence DAC 2013 Designer/User Track  We developed a framework allowing the automation of the model-based performance verification activities at the early design stages  Essential to decrease design time and increase productivity  We meet the industrial needs through:  Viewpoint concept to achieve a clear separation between design main stream and performance engineering activities  Adapted DSL (Domain-Specific Language) for performance (MARTE)  Transformation rules from design model to performance analysis model via pivot model, thus allowing bridging the semantic gap separating them  Transformations rules adapting performance analysis results to design model Summary