Your browser does not support JavaScript! Skip to main content
Free 30-day trial Customer portal Careers DO-178C Handbook
 
Rapita Systems
 

Industry leading verification tools & services

Rapita Verification Suite (RVS)

  RapiTest - Unit/system testing   RapiCover - Structural coverage analysis   RapiTime - Timing analysis (inc. WCET)   RapiTask - Scheduling visualization   RapiCoverZero - Zero footprint coverage analysis   RapiTimeZero - Zero footprint timing analysis   RapiTaskZero - Zero footprint scheduling analysis

Multicore verification

  MACH178   Multicore Timing Solution   RapiDaemons

Services

  V & V Services   Qualification   Training   Tool Integration  Support

Industries

  Aerospace (DO-178C)   Automotive (ISO 26262)   Space

Other

  RTBx   Mx-Suite   Software licensing   Product life cycle policy  RVS development roadmap

Latest from Rapita HQ

Latest news

RVS 3.18 Launched
Solid Sands partners with Rapita Systems
Danlaw Acquires Maspatechnologies - Expanding Rapita Systems to Spain
Rapita co-authored paper wins ERTS22 Best paper award
View News

Latest from the Rapita blog

Measuring response times and more with RapiTime
Why mitigating interference alone isn’t enough to verify timing performance for multicore DO-178C projects
There are how many sources of interference in a multicore system?
Supporting modern development methodologies for verification of safety-critical software
View Blog

Latest discovery pages

do178c DO-178C Guidance: Introduction to RTCA DO-178 certification
matlab_simulink MATLAB® Simulink® MCDC coverage and WCET analysis
code_coverage_ada Code coverage for Ada, C and C++
amc-20-193 AMC 20-193
View Discovery pages

Upcoming events

Aerospace Tech Week Europe 2023
2023-03-29
Aeromart Montreal 2023
2023-04-04
Certification Together International Conference
2023-05-10
View Events

Technical resources for industry professionals

Latest White papers

DO178C Handbook
Efficient Verification Through the DO-178C Life Cycle
A Commercial Solution for Safety-Critical Multicore Timing Analysis
Compliance with the Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE) standard
View White papers

Latest Videos

Streamlined software verification with RVS 3.18
Sequence analysis with RapiTime
Visualize call dependencies with RVS thumbnail
Visualize call dependencies with RVS
Analyze code complexity thumbnail
Analyze code complexity with RVS
View Videos

Latest Case studies

Supporting ISO 26262 ASIL D software verification for EasyMile
RapiCover’s advanced features accelerate the certification of military UAV Engine Control
Front cover of whitepaper collins
Delivering world-class tool support to Collins Aerospace
View Case studies

Other Downloads

 Webinars

 Brochures

 Product briefs

 Technical notes

 Research projects

Discover Rapita

Who we are

The company menu

  • About us
  • Customers
  • Distributors
  • Locations
  • Partners
  • Research projects
  • Contact us

US office

+1 248-957-9801
info@rapitasystems.com
Rapita Systems, Inc.
41131 Vincenti Ct.
Novi
MI 48375
USA

UK office

+44 (0)1904 413945
info@rapitasystems.com
Rapita Systems Ltd.
Atlas House
Osbaldwick Link Road
York, YO10 3JB
UK

Spain office

+34 930 46 42 72
info@rapitasystems.com
Rapita Systems S.L.
Parc UPC, Edificio K2M
c/ Jordi Girona, 1-3, Office 306-307
Barcelona 08034
Spain

Working at Rapita

Careers

Careers menu

  • Current opportunities & application process
  • Working at Rapita
Back to Top

Hardware acceleration features that make real-time hard – pipelined architectures

Breadcrumb

  1. Home
  2. Blog
  3. Hardware acceleration features that make real-time hard – pipelined architectures
2012-11-28

In a recent blog post we observed how the presence of advanced hardware features in modern processors makes it more difficult to establish the worst-case execution time (WCET) of an application. Continuing this theme, let’s examine the use of pipelined processor architectures and the effect that this has on WCET in real-time systems.

Pipelined processor architectures explained

The inclusion of a pipeline increases the instruction throughput of a processor by increasing the number of operations that the CPU can perform simultaneously. Typically, a pipelined architecture will divide each instruction into a sequence of steps, where each step can be executed in a single clock cycle. An example of this is the classic RISC pipeline, which divides the execution of an instruction into five separate stages. More modern designs use longer pipelines allowing increased maximum throughput and higher clock speeds.

How do pipelined processor architectures affect WCET in real-time systems?

Although the use of a pipeline increases the overall instruction throughput, it becomes more difficult to predict the length of time that it will take to execute a given instruction. This is particularly the case where the result of one instruction is used as a parameter to the next, as the pipeline must wait until the result is ready before it can continue processing. This is known as a stall in the pipeline.

A major cause of pipeline stalls is branches in the code, which are typically implemented as conditional jumps based on the state of a condition flag or other register value. Until the calculation of the condition is complete, the CPU is unable to fetch the next instruction, and so the pipeline stalls until the branch destination is known.

The length of the stall depends on the number of stages in the pipeline prior to the execution stage, so architectures with longer pipelines generally experience longer stall periods. In code with large numbers of branches, this can result in the pipeline being stalled for a significant proportion of the total execution time, reducing the overall throughput of the pipeline.

Overcoming pipeline stalls with branch prediction algorithms

To combat this problem, modern processors incorporate branch prediction algorithms that aim to reduce the number of pipeline stalls caused by branches. Branch prediction aims to guess the outcome of a branch instruction before it is executed, allowing the CPU to continue executing instructions in the time where it would otherwise experience a pipeline stall. The most naïve form of branch prediction assumes that all branches are always taken: statistically, this approach results in correct prediction of branches half the time. Advanced branch prediction algorithms are able to correctly predict which branch will be taken in excess of 90% of the time.

What effect does branch prediction have on WCET?

The use of branch prediction in CPUs greatly increases the total instruction throughput of the processor, but causes problems for WCET analysis. Because of the delaying effect of a pipeline stall, the execution time of a branch may be considerably longer if the branch predictor is incorrect than it would be if the correct outcome was predicted. This leads to a significant difference between average-case execution and the potential worst-case time. Assuming that the branch prediction is always incorrect for every branch will ensure that the WCET value is not optimistic, but often leads to measurements that are highly pessimistic. Static analysis techniques employ statistical methods to derive an upper bound on the number of branch predictions that will be incorrect, but this is a complex procedure that must be repeated for each analysis.

RapiTime and WCET

For measurement-based techniques, such as end-to-end it becomes increasingly important to ensure that the worst-case path through the code is adequately exercised and that the data used is sufficiently representative to expose all the possible incorrect branch predictions.

RapiTime combines the structural model of the code derived during instrumentation with the timing data it derives from the execution trace. Using this combined data, RapiTime predicts the worst-case path through the code and the worst-case execution time.

RapiTime's approach to testing and the detailed information provided in the RapiTime report can be used to ensure that testing is effective and provide assurance that the calculated WCET value is correct.

DO-178C webinars

DO178C webinars

White papers

DO178C Handbook Efficient Verification Through the DO-178C Life Cycle
A Commercial Solution for Safety-Critical Multicore Timing Analysis
Compliance with the Future Airborne Capability Environment (FACE) standard
5 key factors to consider when selecting an embedded testing tool

Related blog posts

How did the first real-time embedded system also produce the first timing bug?

.
2019-07-16

Unboxing the new RTBx

.
2017-07-25

Optimising for code size might not do what you expect - a GCC and PowerPC example

.
2015-02-09

Lesser used PowerPC instructions

.
2014-02-25

Pagination

  • Current page 1
  • Page 2
  • Page 3
  • Page 4
  • Next page Next ›
  • Last page Last »
  • Solutions
    • Rapita Verification Suite
    • RapiTest
    • RapiCover
    • RapiTime
    • RapiTask
    • MACH178

    • Verification and Validation Services
    • Qualification
    • Training
    • Integration
  • Latest
  • Latest menu

    • News
    • Blog
    • Events
    • Videos
  • Downloads
  • Downloads menu

    • Brochures
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
    • Case Studies
    • Product briefs
    • Technical notes
    • Software licensing
  • Company
  • Company menu

    • About Rapita
    • Careers
    • Customers
    • Distributors
    • Industries
    • Locations
    • Partners
    • Research projects
    • Contact
  • Discover
    • AMC 20-193
    • What is CAST-32A?
    • Multicore Timing Analysis
    • MC/DC Coverage
    • Code coverage for Ada, C & C++
    • Embedded Software Testing Tools
    • Aerospace Software Testing
    • Automotive Software Testing
    • Certifying eVTOL
    • DO-178C
    • WCET Tools
    • Worst Case Execution Time
    • Timing analysis (WCET) & Code coverage for MATLAB® Simulink®

All materials © Rapita Systems Ltd. 2023 - All rights reserved | Privacy information | Trademark notice Subscribe to our newsletter