Your browser does not support JavaScript! Skip to main content
Free 30-day trial DO-178C Handbook RapiCoupling Preview DO-178C Multicore Training Multicore Resources
Rapita Systems
 

Industry leading verification tools

Rapita Verification Suite (RVS)

RapiTest - Functional testing for critical software RapiCover - Low-overhead coverage analysis for critical software RapiTime - In-depth execution time analysis for critical software RapiTask - RTOS scheduling visualization RapiCoverZero - Zero-footprint coverage analysis RapitimeZero - Zero-footprint timing analysis RapiTaskZero - Zero-footprint event-level scheduling analysis RVS Qualification Kits - Tool qualification for DO-178 B/C and ISO 26262 projects RapiCoupling - DCCC analysis

Multicore Verification

MACH178 - Multicore Avionics Certification for High-integrity DO-178C projects MACH178 Foundations - Lay the groundwork for A(M)C 20-193 compliance Multicore Timing Solution - Solving the challenges of multicore timing analysis RapiDaemon - Analyze interference in multicore systems

Other

RTBx - The ultimate data logging solution Sim68020 - Simulation for the Motorola 68020 microprocessor

RVS Software Policy

Software licensing Product life cycle policy RVS Assurance issue policy RVS development roadmap

Industry leading verification services

Engineering Services

V&V Services Data Coupling & Control Coupling Object code verification Qualification Training Consultancy Tool Integration Support

Latest from Rapita HQ

Latest news

Rapita partners with Asterios Technologies to deliver solutions in multicore certification
SAIF Autonomy to use RVS to verify their groundbreaking AI platform
RVS 3.22 Launched
Hybrid electric pioneers, Ascendance, join Rapita Systems Trailblazer Partnership Program
View News

Latest from the Rapita blog

How emulation can reduce avionics verification costs: Sim68020
Multicore timing analysis: to instrument or not to instrument
How to certify multicore processors - what is everyone asking?
Data Coupling Basics in DO-178C
View Blog

Latest discovery pages

Military Drone Certifying Unmanned Aircraft Systems
control_tower DO-278A Guidance: Introduction to RTCA DO-278 approval
Picture of a car ISO 26262
DCCC Image Data Coupling & Control Coupling
View Discovery pages

Upcoming events

DASC 2025
2025-09-14
DO-178C Multicore In-person Training (Fort Worth, TX)
2025-10-01
DO-178C Multicore In-person Training (Toulouse)
2025-11-04
HISC 2025
2025-11-13
View Events

Technical resources for industry professionals

Latest White papers

Mitigation of interference in multicore processors for A(M)C 20-193
Sysgo WP
Developing DO-178C and ED-12C-certifiable multicore software
DO178C Handbook
Efficient Verification Through the DO-178C Life Cycle
View White papers

Latest Videos

How to make AI safe in autonomous systems with SAIF
Rapita Systems - Safety Through Quality
Simulation for the Motorola 68020 microprocessor with Sim68020
AI-driven Requirements Traceability for Faster Testing and Certification
View Videos

Latest Case studies

GMV case study front cover
GMV verify ISO26262 automotive software with RVS
Kappa: Verifying Airborne Video Systems for Air-to-Air Refueling using RVS
Supporting DanLaw with unit testing and code coverage analysis for automotive software
View Case studies

Other Resources

 Webinars

 Brochures

 Product briefs

 Technical notes

 Research projects

 Multicore resources

Discover Rapita

Who we are

The company menu

  • About us
  • Customers
  • Distributors
  • Locations
  • Partners
  • Research projects
  • Contact us
  • Careers
  • Working at Rapita

Industries

  Civil Aviation (DO-178C)   Automotive (ISO 26262)   Military & Defense   Space

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 93 351 02 05
info@rapitasystems.com Rapita Systems S.L., Parc UPC, Edificio K2M, c/ Jordi Girona, 1-3, Barcelona 08034, Spain
Back to Top Contact Us

Robust partitioning for multicore systems doesn’t mean freedom from interference

Steven VanderLeest & Daniel Wright
2022-01-05

Partitioning is well understood for single core systems. Two types of partitioning exist: space (or resource) partitioning, where partitioned components are isolated by operating on different hardware devices or different regions in a single device, and time partitioning, where partitioned components are isolated by operating in non-overlapping time periods (time slices). Both types of isolation are well understood for single core systems, and are implemented in many real-time operating systems used in the aerospace domain through the use of scheduling architectures such as ARINC 653.

The most rigorous separation is termed robust partitioning. This is defined for single core systems in the ARINC 653 standard, where it refers to complete isolation of separated components, i.e. the execution of one component can have no effect on the other. To put this another way, the execution time of each thread is completely free from interference by the other threads (Figure 1).

Partitioning for single core systems means freedom from interference
Figure 1. When threads in a single core system are scheduled according to e.g. ARINC 653 schedules, threads can be temporally isolated and free from interference

Most of the technology for partitioning of single core systems also applies to multicore systems. Multicore systems are more complex, however – for these systems, interference can exist between software hosted on different cores but running at the same time. Various interference channels can exist in such a system, such as for shared resources, and interference can increase software execution times and cause software to become non-deterministic (Figure 2). While the use of scheduling architectures such as ARINC 653 is enough to isolate partitioned software components in single core systems and ensure that the software is free from interference, this is not the case for multicore systems, where interference can be present even between (space) partitioned threads.

Partitioning for multicore systems doesnt mean freedom from interference
Figure 2. In a multicore system, interference can result from software running on different cores sharing use of common resources

For multicore systems, robust partitioning according to its understood single core definition (isolation and freedom from interference) cannot be guaranteed by using a scheduling architecture alone. Because of this, we could infer that robust partitioning is not possible in multicore systems. CAST-32A, however, provides guidance on robust partitioning1, stating that robust space partitioning is comparable for single core and multicore systems, and providing a definition of robust time partitioning for multicore systems, stating that “[robust time partitioning is] achieved when, as a result of mitigating the time interference between partitions hosted on different cores, no software partition consumes more than its allocation of execution time on the core(s) on which it executes, irrespective of whether partitions are executing on none of the other active cores or on all of the other active cores.”. A sensible interpretation of this definition is that robust time partitioning is achieved when each software partition is guaranteed to meet its critical timing deadlines even when interference is present. To meet CAST-32A objectives and provide evidence that the software is robustly partitioned, the platform and hosted software must be tested by the analysis of software execution times when multicore interference is present. While various strategies may be used to mitigate against the actual interference present, this analysis is still necessary to demonstrate robust partitioning.

A major benefit of demonstrating robust partitioning is that it enables the use of software with different criticality levels to be executed on the same computing platform, provided that they are segregated into different partitions. Otherwise, even software that could nominally be certified to a lower Design Assurance Level would be forced to certify to the highest assurance level of any software on the system. Demonstrating robust partitioning also enables incremental assurance, allowing each supplier to test their software partitions independently of other suppliers. In this case, certification artifacts can be generated incrementally and aggregated by the system integrator. To be able to demonstrate robust partitioning to multicore systems and achieve these benefits, unique techniques are needed to support the analysis of software execution times when multicore interference is present, such as MACH178.

DO-178C webinars

DO178C webinars

White papers

Mitigation of interference in multicore processors for A(M)C 20-193
Sysgo WP Developing DO-178C and ED-12C-certifiable multicore software
DO178C Handbook Efficient Verification Through the DO-178C Life Cycle
A Commercial Solution for Safety-Critical Multicore Timing Analysis

Related blog posts

Multicore timing analysis: to instrument or not to instrument

.
2025-05-16

How to certify multicore processors - what is everyone asking?

.
2024-12-09

Measuring response times and more with RapiTime

.
2023-03-10

Why mitigating interference alone isn’t enough to verify timing performance for multicore DO-178C projects

.
2022-11-17

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
    • Multicore Timing Analysis
    • Embedded Software Testing Tools
    • Worst Case Execution Time
    • WCET Tools
    • Code coverage for Ada, C & C++
    • MC/DC Coverage
    • Verifying additional code for DO-178C
    • Timing analysis (WCET) & Code coverage for MATLAB® Simulink®
    • Data Coupling & Control Coupling
    • Aerospace Software Testing
    • DO-178C
    • Meeting DO-178C Objectives
    • AC 20-193 and AMC 20-193
    • Meeting A(M)C 20-193 Objectives
    • Certifying eVTOL
    • Cerifying UAS

All materials © Rapita Systems Ltd. 2025 - All rights reserved | Privacy information | Trademark notice Subscribe to our newsletter