0521197163

This page intentionally left blank
BUILDING PARALLEL, EMBEDDED, AND REAL-TIME

APPLICATIONS WITH ADA
The arrival and popularity of multi-core processors have sparked a renewed interest
in the development of parallel programs. Similarly, the availability of low-cost
microprocessors and sensors has generated a great interest in embedded real-time
programs. This book provides students and programmers whose backgrounds are in
traditional sequential programming with the opportunity to expand their capabilities
into parallel, embedded, real-time, and distributed computing. It also addresses the
theoretical foundation of real-time scheduling analysis, focusing on theory that is
useful for actual applications.
Written by award-winning educators at a level suitable for undergraduates and
beginning graduate students, this book is the rst truly entry-level textbook in the
subject. Complete examples allowreaders to understand the context in which a new
concept is used, and enable them to build and run the examples, make changes, and
observe the results.
john w. mccormi ck is Professor of Computer Science at the University of
Northern Iowa.
frank si nghoff is Professor of Computer Science at Universit e de
Bretagne Occidentale (University of Brest).
j er ome hugues is Associate Professor in the Department of Mathematics,
Computer Science, and Control at the Institute for Space and Aeronautics Engi-
neering (ISAE), Toulouse.
BUILDING PARALLEL, EMBEDDED,
AND REAL-TIME APPLICATIONS
WITH ADA
JOHN W. MCCORMICK
University of Northern Iowa
FRANK SINGHOFF
Universit e de Bretagne Occidentale
J

ER

OME HUGUES
Institute for Space and Aeronautics
Engineering (ISAE), Toulouse
cambri dge uni versi ty press
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town,
Singapore, S ao Paulo, Delhi, Tokyo, Mexico City
Cambridge University Press
The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK
Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521197168
C
J. W. McCormick, F. Singhoff, and J. Hugues 2011
This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception
and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements,
no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2011
Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge
A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication data
McCormick, John W., 1948
Building parallel, embedded, and real-time applications with Ada / John W. McCormick,
Frank Singhoff, Jerome Hugues.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-521-19716-8 (hardback)
1. Ada (Computer program language) 2. Parallel programming (Computer science)
3. Embedded computer systems Programming. 4. Real-time data processing.
5. Multiprocessors Programming.
I. Singhoff, Frank. II. Hugues, Jerome. III. Title.
QA76.73.A35M375 2011
004
.35 dc22 2010053214

ISBN 978-0-521-19716-8 Hardback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or
accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to
in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such
websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
The photograph on the cover shows astronaut Stephen K. Robinson standing on the end of the International Space
Stations robotic manipulator system, Canadarm 2. This arm, built by MacDonald, Dettwiler, and Associates Ltd
for the Canadian Space Agency, is 17.6 m long when fully extended. It has seven motorized joints, each a complex
embedded real-time system. Given its crucial role on the space station, the reliability of Canadarm 2 must be
impeccable. The software for these joints and for the workstation that the astronauts use to control them is written
in Ada. This book provides an introduction to the concepts of concurrent programming, embedded systems, and
real-time constraints necessary for understanding and developing the software for such systems.
Contents
List of illustrations page viii
List of tables x
Foreword xi
Preface xiii
1 Introduction and overview 1
1.1 Parallel programming 2
1.2 Distributed programming 11
1.3 Real-time systems 12
Summary 19
Exercises 20
2 Sequential programming with Ada 23
2.1 Control structures 26
2.2 Subprograms 30
2.3 The Ada type model 35
2.4 Blocks and exceptions 62
2.5 Programming in the large 65
2.6 Object-oriented programming 76
2.7 Low-level programming 82
Summary 102
Exercises 103
3 Task basics 107
3.1 Dening tasks 107
3.2 The task life cycle 109
3.3 Task hierarchies 113
3.4 Exceptions 117
3.5 The implementation of Ada tasking 119
3.6 Other task features 119
vi Contents
Summary 121
Exercises 122
4 Communication and synchronization based on shared
objects 126
4.1 Mutual exclusion 126
4.2 The protected object 130
4.3 Synchronization 134
4.4 The protected entry 135
4.5 Restrictions 140
4.6 Entry queues 141
4.7 Some useful concurrent patterns 143
4.8 Requeue and private operations 149
4.9 Pragmas Atomic and Volatile 153
4.10 Interrupts 155
Summary 161
Exercises 162
5 Communication and synchronization based on direct
interaction 166
5.1 The rendezvous 166
5.2 The selective accept statement 171
5.3 Entry call options 180
5.4 State machines 181
Summary 191
Exercises 192
6 Distributed systems with Ada 195
6.1 What are distributed systems? 195
6.2 Middleware, architectures, and concepts 200
6.3 DSA, the Distributed Systems Annex 202
6.4 PolyORB: compilation chain and run-time for the DSA 212
6.5 Advanced DSA concepts 215
6.6 CORBA, the Common Object Request Broker
Architecture 221
6.7 Advanced CORBA concepts 236
6.8 CORBA versus the DSA 247
Summary 248
Exercises 250
7 Real-time systems and scheduling concepts 251
7.1 Task characteristics 253
7.2 Real-time schedulers 257
Contents vii
7.3 Dependent tasks 278
Summary 285
Exercises 286
8 Real-time programming with Ada 294
8.1 Expressing time 295
8.2 Implementing periodic tasks 298
8.3 Ada implementation of the car application 303
8.4 Handling shared resources 305
8.5 The Ada scheduling model 308
8.6 Ravenscar 312
8.7 POSIX 1003.1b and its Ada binding 314
8.8 POSIX implementation of the car application 324
8.9 Ada tasks versus POSIX processes 328
Summary 329
Exercises 330
9 Tools for building and verifying real-time
applications 333
9.1 Ada run-times to implement real-time applications 334
9.2 Some variants of the GNAT run-time 339
9.3 Validating scheduling of a system 347
Summary 355
Exercises 356
References 359
Index 365
Illustrations
1.1 An example of an embedded system 16
2.1 The Ada type hierarchy 37
2.2 Distribution of model numbers 41
2.3 Access variables 58
2.4 A linked list implementation of a stack of characters 60
2.5 Class diagram for commercial ovens 78
2.6 Association between register bits and enunciation lights 84
2.7 Memory mapped input/output 87
2.8 Port mapped input/output 89
2.9 Example digital to analog converter 90
3.1 The basic states of a task 110
3.2 The substates of executable 112
3.3 Parent tasks are suspended during the activation of a child
task 115
4.1 The read/write lock 133
4.2 The read lock 134
4.3 Entry queues for the protected bounded buer 142
4.4 Tasks in the entry queues have precedence over those delayed
behind the lock 143
5.1 Statement sequencing in rendezvous 167
5.2 State machine diagram notation 182
5.3 State diagram for car headlights 183
5.4 State diagram for a large induction motor 188
6.1 Overview of a middleware 197
6.2 Distribution models 198
6.3 Interaction using a middleware 200
6.4 Ada user code and the Ada run-time 212
6.5 Sequence of actions for synchronous calls 216
6.6 Sequence of actions for asynchronous calls 216
6.7 Overview of CORBA 222
List of illustrations ix
6.8 Components of an IOR 242
6.9 Hierarchy of POAs 245
7.1 Parameters of a periodic task 257
7.2 Example of scheduling with preemptive xed priority scheduler
and Rate Monotonic priority assignments 262
7.3 Example of scheduling with non-preemptive xed priority sched-
uler and Rate Monotonic priority assignments 263
7.4 Task i worst case response time 266
7.5 Template for analysis with exhaustive simulations 271
7.6 Analysis with exhaustive simulations 271
7.7 Scheduling with a preemptive EDF scheduler 274
7.8 Scheduling with a non-preemptive EDF scheduler 275
7.9 A priority inversion 279
7.10 A scheduling sequence with PIP 281
7.11 A scheduling sequence with ICPP 282
7.12 Task release time jitter 284
7.13 Holistic analysis 285
8.1 A comparison of the drift in release times for using relative and
absolute delays 301
8.2 Adas scheduling model 309
8.3 Example of an application using several dierent dispatching
policies 312
8.4 POSIX 1003.1b scheduling model 317
8.5 Drawing to ll 331
9.1 Layered design of an Ada program 340
9.2 Characterizing the parameters of a task with Cheddar 351
9.3 Output of the Cheddar tool: feasibility tests 352
9.4 Output of the Cheddar tool: simulation 353
Tables
2.1 Magnitude of range gate error when modeling time as a oating
point real number 41
2.2 The layout of the control status register 91
5.1 A state transition table for the state machine of Figure 5.3 186
6.1 IDL-to-Ada mapping rules 227
7.1 Dynamic priorities handled by Earliest Deadline First 273
7.2 A simple comparison of xed priority scheduling and EDF 277
8.1 Some chapters of the POSIX 1003 standard 315
Foreword
The task of programming is a dicult one. Over the decades there have
been many promises to eliminate this diculty. It is interesting to recall
that Fortran was rst promoted on the basis that it would do away with
programming, and allow scientists to enter their mathematical equations
directly into the computer. Yet, the diculty of programming has not gone
away, and indeed, the task is more dicult now, especially because of the
widespread introduction of parallelism into all realms of programming.
In universities today, many professors nd that students shy away from
dicult problems and challenges. As a result computer science programs
have been made easier and more fun, and many recent textbooks reect
this worrisome trend. What we need is not students who nd easy stu fun,
we need students who nd dicult challenges fun!
In this climate a textbook that tackles the most dicult area of program-
ming, the creation of complex embedded systems in which parallelism and
real-time concerns play a major role, is very welcome. We entrust our lives to
such complex systems all the time these days, in cars, planes, trains, medical
equipment, and many other circumstances.
This book addresses the task of teaching the complex elements required
to create such systems. The choice of Ada, though unfamiliar for say the
creation of simple web programs, is a natural one for two reasons. First, it
is the only language in common use where tasking and parallelism play an
important rst-class citizen role (C/C++ rely entirely on external libraries
for such support, and the support for such concepts in Java is very weak).
Second, Ada is indeed a language of choice for building complex systems
of this kind. For example, much of the avionics in the new Boeing 787
Dreamliner is written in Ada, as is the new air trac control system
in England. The choice of Ada as a vehicle is thus a good one, and actually
xii Foreword
makes it easier for students to grasp the critical new concepts, even though
they may have been exposed to other languages previously.
This book is an important addition to the arsenal of teaching materials
for a well-educated computer science graduate. It is also eminently readable,
and, perhaps I can even say it is fun to read. Despite the potentially dry na-
ture of this subject matter, it is presented in an entertaining and accessible
manner that reects the remarkable teaching skills of its authors.
Robert Dewar
AdaCore
Preface
The arrival and popularity of multi-core processors have sparked a renewed
interest in the development of parallel programs. Similarly, the availability
of low cost microprocessors and sensors has generated a great interest in em-
bedded real-time programs. This book provides students and programmers
with traditional backgrounds in sequential programming the opportunity
to expand their capabilities into these important emerging paradigms. It
also addresses the theoretical foundations of real-time scheduling analysis,
focusing on theory that is useful for real applications.
Two excellent books by Burns and Wellings (2007; 2009) provide a com-
plete, in depth presentation of Adas concurrent and real-time features. They
make use of Adas powerful object-oriented programming features to create
high-level concurrent patterns. These books are required reading for soft-
ware engineers working with Ada on real-time projects. However, we found
that their coverage of all of Adas concurrent and real-time features and the
additional level of abstraction provided by their clever use of the object-
oriented paradigm made it dicult for our undergraduate students to grasp
the fundamental concepts of parallel, embedded, and real-time program-
ming. We believe that the subset of Ada presented in this book provides
the simplest model for understanding the fundamental concepts. With this
basic knowledge, our readers can more easily learn the more detailed aspects
of the Ada language and the more widely applicable patterns presented by
Burns and Wellings. Readers can also apply the lessons learned here with
Ada to the creation of systems written in more complex languages such as
C, C++, and real-time Java.
The rst chapter gives an overview of and motivation for studying par-
allel, embedded, and real-time programming. The fundamental terminology
of parallel, concurrent, distributed, real-time, and embedded systems is pre-
sented in the context of two cooks sharing resources to prepare food.
xiv Preface
The rst six sections of Chapter 2 provide a brief introduction to se-
quential programming with Ada. Only those Ada constructs relevant to the
remainder of the book are presented. In conjunction with the on-line learn-
ing references provided, our students whose backgrounds did not include
Ada were able to come quickly up to speed with their peers who had some
previous Ada experience. Students with some Ada background found this
chapter an excellent review of the language. The nal section of this chap-
ter provides detailed coverage of Adas low-level programming constructs.
These features allow the program to interact with hardware almost al-
ways necessary in an embedded system. These features are illustrated with
a complete example of a device driver for a sophisticated analog to digital
converter.
Chapter 3 introduces the notion of the task, Adas fundamental construct
for parallel execution. We show how tasks are created, activated, run, and
completed. We use state diagrams to illustrate the life cycle of a task. We
present the parent-child and master-dependent task hierarchies. We conclude
this chapter with a brief discussion of some less frequently used tasking
features: abortion, identication, and programmer-dened attributes.
Chapter 4 introduces the most widely used construct for communication
and synchronization between tasks the protected object. The need for mu-
tual exclusion, introduced with cooking examples in Chapter 1, is revisited
in the context of an Ada program with multiple tasks incrementing a shared
variable. After demonstrating this classic problem, we introduce encapsu-
lation of shared data within a protected object. We illustrate the locking
mechanisms provided by protected functions and procedures with several
gures. The need for synchronization, again introduced with cooking exam-
ples in Chapter 1, is revisited and the solution based on the protected entry
is discussed and illustrated. We provide additional practice with protected
objects by developing a number of useful concurrent patterns semaphores,
barriers, and broadcasts. The use of requeue is motivated with a problem of
allocating a limited number of pencils. The chapter concludes with a discus-
sion of interrupts. We return to the analog to digital converter introduced
in Chapter 2 and replace the polling logic with an interrupt handler.
Chapter 5 looks at the use of direct task interaction through the ren-
dezvous. We begin by illustrating the behavior of simple entry calls and
accepts. Then we discuss the variations of the selective accept statement
that provides the server with more control over its interactions with clients.
We introduce the use of both relative and absolute delays. Next we discuss
the entry call options which give a client more control over its interaction
Preface xv
with a server. We conclude this chapter with a discussion on the implemen-
tation of state machines for both passive and active objects.
Distribution is an important issue in software engineering and is the topic
of Chapter 6. While it is easy to motivate the advantages of distribution,
the details take more eort. We introduce middleware and discuss the major
problems with distributed applications. We provide an introduction to two
approaches for distributing an Ada program. The Distributed Systems An-
nex (DSA) provides a solution for a pure Ada application. We develop the
software for a very simple distributed student information system through
three examples of increasing complexity. For those who want more details,
we provide information on more advanced DSA concepts. While CORBA
requires a larger amount of code to implement a distributed system than
the DSA, it is more commonly used in industry. Not only is there more sup-
port for CORBA than the DSA, it provides an easy integration of dierent
programming languages in a single application. We use the same example of
a distributed student information system to develop a CORBA-based solu-
tion. Again, we provide additional details for those wanting a more advanced
understanding of CORBA. We introduce and use the PolyORB tool for our
DSA and CORBA examples.
Chapter 7 is an introduction to the theoretical foundations of real-time
scheduling analysis, focusing on theory that is useful for real applications.
This presentation is independent of any programming language. We begin
with an introduction of the characteristics of a task relevant to scheduling
analysis. We dene the characteristics of schedulers and discuss xed priority
scheduling and earliest deadline rst scheduling. Ensuring that all tasks
meet their deadlines is paramount to any hard real-time system. We show
you how to calculate and use processor utilization factors and worst case
response times to verify schedulability. We begin by analyzing examples
with independent tasks. Then we add the complexities of resource sharing
with dierent priority inheritance protocols.
In Chapter 8 we explain how to write real-time applications in Ada that
are compliant with the scheduling theory discussed in the previous chapter.
In particular, we show how to implement periodic tasks, activate priority
inheritance protocols, and select an appropriate scheduler. The rst six sec-
tions discuss how we can use Adas Real-Time Systems Annex to implement
compliant applications. The remainder of the chapter is devoted to imple-
menting such applications with POSIX. We conclude with a comparison of
the two approaches.
Our Ada applications do not run alone. They execute within a run-time
conguration consisting of the processor and the environment in which the
xvi Preface
application operates. Our nal chapter introduces the reader to run-time
environments. We discuss three variants of the GNAT run-time: ORK+,
MaRTE, and RTEMS. We examine the eect of the run-time on the analysis
of schedulability and the determination of task characteristics such as worst
case execution time. The schedulability tools MAST and Cheddar are also
introduced.
Resources
A website with the complete source code for all examples and some of the
exercises in the book may be found at www.cambridge.org/9780521197168.
Solutions to all of the exercises are available to qualied instructors. Please
visit www.cambridge.org/9780521197168.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the many individuals who have helped us with this
project. The comments, corrections, and suggestions made by our technical
reviewers, Alexander Mentis and Pat Rogers, have enormously improved and
enriched this book. We are grateful to them both. In addition to providing
many useful comments and corrections, Dan Eilers compiled many of our
examples with the ICC Ada compiler to ensure we did not use any GNAT-
specic constructs.
It is sometimes dicult for those of us with years of experience to write
for those who are just beginning. The students in the Real-Time Systems
class at the University of Northern Iowa did not hesitate to point out those
portions of the manuscript, including the exercises, they felt needed further
explanation.
Anyone who has written a textbook can appreciate the amount of time
and eort involved and anyone related to a textbook author can tell you
at whose expense that time is spent. John thanks his wife Naomi for her
support and understanding.
Frank would like to thank all his Masters students who have for the past
10 years tested his courses and exercises on real-time systems. In 2002, we
began work on Cheddar, a simple tool whose goal is to provide students
with a better understanding of real-time scheduling. We were helped by
dierent partners and contributors: special thanks to Pierre Dissaux, Alain
Plantec, Jerome Legrand, Laurent Pautet, Fabrice Kordon, Peter Feiler,
Jerome Hugues, Yvon Kermarrec and all the others that are listed on the
Cheddar website. Finally, many thanks Magali for your patience during all
my busy days o!
Preface xvii
Jerome would like to thank all his friends and colleagues for the memorable
years he spent working on PolyORB at Telecom ParisTech: Laurent Pautet,
Fabrice Kordon, and all our Masters students that helped us at that time;
Bob Du and Thomas Quinot from AdaCore; and Vadim Godunko for all his
personal contributions to the project. Participating in such a large project,
and seeing it now as a project used in the industry, is a great pleasure.
Finally, Id like to thank Alice for letting me write this book near the replace
over the long winter nights!
John W. McCormick
University of Northern Iowa
mccormick@cs.uni.edu
Frank Singho
Universite de Bretagne Occidentale
singhoff@univ-brest.fr
Jerome Hugues
Institute for Space and Aeronautics
Engineering (ISAE), Toulouse
jerome.hugues@isae.fr
1
Introduction and overview
The arrival and popularity of multi-core processors have sparked a renewed
interest in the development of parallel programs. Similarly, the availability
of low-cost microprocessors and sensors has generated a great interest in
embedded real-time programs. Ada is arguably the most appropriate lan-
guage for development of parallel and real-time applications. Since it was
rst standardized in 1983, Adas three major goals have remained:
Program reliability and maintenance
Programming as a human activity
Eciency
Meeting these goals has made Ada remarkably successful in the domain
of mission-critical software. It is the language of choice for developing soft-
ware for systems in which failure might result in the loss of life or prop-
erty. The software in air trac control systems, avionics, medical devices,
railways, rockets, satellites, and secure data communications is frequently
written in Ada. Ada has been supporting multiprocessor, multi-core, and
multithreaded architectures as long as it has existed. We have nearly 30
years of experience in using Ada to deal with the problem of writing pro-
grams that run eectively on machines using more than one processor. While
some have predicted it will be another decade before there is a programming
model for multi-core systems, programmers have successfully used the Ada
model for years. In February 2007, Karl Nyberg won the Sun Microsystems
Open Performance Contest by building an elegant parallel Ada application
(Nyberg, 2007). The parallel Ada code he wrote a decade earlier provided
the foundation of this success.
It is estimated that over 99% of all the microprocessors manufactured
these days end up as part of a device whose primary function is not com-
puting (Turley, 1999). Todays airplanes, automobiles, cameras, cell phones,
2 Introduction and overview
GPS receivers, microwave ovens, mp3 players, tractors, and washing ma-
chines all depend on the software running on the microprocessors embedded
within them. Most consumers are unaware that the software in their new
washing machine is far more complex than the software that controlled the
Apollo moon landings. Embedded systems interact with the world through
sensors and actuators. Ada is one of the few programming languages to
provide high-level operations to control and manipulate the registers and
interrupts of these input and output devices.
Most programs written for embedded systems are real-time programs. A
real-time program is one whose correctness depends on both the validity
of its calculations and the time at which those calculations are completed
(Burns and Wellings, 2009; Laplante, 2004). Users expect that their wireless
phone will convert and transmit their voice quickly and regularly enough
that nothing in their conversation is lost. Audio engineers quantify quickly
into the maximum amount of time that the analog to digital conversion,
compression, and transmission will take. They specify a set of deadlines.
A deadline is a point in time by which an activity must be completed.
Software engineers have the responsibility of ensuring that the computations
done by the software are completed by these deadlines. This responsibility
is complicated by the parallel nature of most real-time embedded software.
One embedded processor may be responsible for a number of related control
operations. Our wireless phone should not lose any of the video it captures
simultaneously with our talking. The software engineer must ensure that
all of the tasks competing for processor cycles nish their computations on
time.
1.1 Parallel programming
A parallel program is one that carries out a number of operations simulta-
neously. There are two primary reasons for writing parallel programs. First,
they usually execute faster than their sequential counterparts. The prospect
of greater performance has made parallel programming popular in scientic
and engineering domains such as DNA analysis, geophysical simulations,
weather modeling, and design automation. There are theoretical limits on
how much speedup can be obtained by the use of multiple processors. In
1967, Gene Amdahl published a classic paper (Amdahl, 1967) that showed
that if P is the fraction of a sequential program that can be run in parallel
on N processors, the maximum speedup is given by the formula
1
(1 P) +
P
N
Thus, for example, if 80% of our program can be run in parallel, the maxi-
mum speedup obtained with four processors is
1
(1 0.8) +
0.8
4
= 2.5
The second reason for writing parallel programs is that they are frequently
better models of the processes they represent. More accurate models are
more likely to behave in the manner we expect. As the real world is inherently
parallel, embedded software that interacts with its environment is usually
easier to design as a collection of parallel solutions than as a single sequential
set of steps. Parallel solutions are also more adaptable to new situations than
sequential solutions. Well show you some examples later in this chapter
where the parallel algorithm is far more exible than the sequential version.
Before beginning our discussion of parallel programming, lets take a brief
look at the hardware on which such programs execute.
1.1.1 Flynns taxonomy
Michael Flynn (1974) described a simple taxonomy of four computer archi-
tectures based on data streams and instruction streams. He classies the
classic Von Neumann model as a Single stream of Instructions executing on
Single stream of Data (SISD). An SISD computer exhibits no parallelism.
This is the model to which novice programmers are introduced as they learn
to develop algorithms.
The simplest way to add parallelism to the SISD model is to add multi-
ple data streams. The Single stream of Instructions executing on Multiple
streams of Data (SIMD) architecture is often called array or vector pro-
cessing. Originally developed to speed up vector arithmetic so common in
scientic calculations, an SIMD computer applies a single instruction to mul-
tiple data elements. Lets look at an example. Suppose we have the following
declarations of three arrays of 100 real values.
subtype I ndex Range i s I n t e g e r range 1 . . 1 0 0 ;
type Vect or i s ar r ay ( I ndex Range ) of Fl oat ;
A, B, C : Vect or ; Three a r r a y v a r i a b l e s
We would like to add the corresponding values in arrays B and C and store
the result in array A. The SISD solution to this problem uses a loop to apply
the add instruction to each of the 100 pairs of real numbers.
f or I ndex i n I ndex Range l oop
A ( I ndex ) := B ( I ndex ) + C ( I ndex ) ;
end l oop ;
Each iteration of this loop adds two real numbers and stores the result in
array A. With an SIMD architecture, there are multiple processing units for
carrying out all the additions in parallel. This approach allows us to replace
the loop with the simple arithmetic expression
A := B + C;
that adds all 100 pairs of real numbers simultaneously.
The Multiple stream of Instructions executing on a Single stream of Data
(MISD) architecture is rare. It has found limited uses in pattern match-
ing, cryptology, and fault-tolerant computing. Perhaps the most well-known
MISD system is the space shuttles digital y-by-wire ight control sys-
tem (Knoll, 1993). In a y-by-wire system, the pilots controls have no direct
hydraulic or mechanical connections to the ight controls. The pilots input
is interpreted by software which makes the appropriate changes to the ight
control surfaces and thrusters. The space shuttle uses ve independent pro-
cessors to analyze the same data coming from the sensors and pilot. These
processors are connected to a voting system whose purpose is to detect and
remove a failed processor before sending the output of the calculations to
the ight controls.
The most common type of parallel architecture today is the MIMD (Mul-
tiple stream of Instructions executing on Multiple streams of Data) archi-
tecture. Nearly all modern supercomputers, networked parallel computers,
clusters, grids, SMP (symmetric multiprocessor) computers and multi-core
computers are MIMD architectures. These systems make use of a number
of independent processors to execute dierent instructions on dierent sets
of data. There is a great variety in the ways these processors access mem-
ory and communicate among themselves. MIMD architectures are divided
into two primary groups: those that use shared memory and those that use
private memory.
The simplest approach to shared memory is to connect each processor
to a common bus which connects them to the memory. The shared bus
and memory may be used for processors to communicate and to synchro-
nize their activities. Multi-core processors reduce the physical space used by
placing multiple processors (cores) on a single chip. Each core usually has its
own small memory cache and shares a larger on-chip cache with its counter-
parts. In more complicated schemes, multiple processors may be connected
to shared memory in hierarchical or network congurations.
When each processor in an MIMD system has its own private memory,
communication among them is done by passing messages on some form of
communication network. There are a wide variety of interconnection net-
works. In static networks, processors are hardwired together. The connec-
tions in a static network can be made in a number of congurations including
linear, ring, star, tree, hypercube, and so on. Dynamic networks use some
form of programmable switches between the processors. Switching networks
may range from simple crossbar connections between processors in a single
box to the internet-connecting processors on dierent continents.
1.1.2 Concurrent programming
With the many dierent organizations of parallel hardware available, it
might seem that a programmer would need a detailed understanding of
the particular hardware they are using in order to write a parallel program.
As usual in our discipline, we are saved by the notion of abstraction. The
notion of the concurrent program as a means for writing parallel programs
without regard for the underlying hardware was rst introduced by Edsger
Dijkstra (1968). Moti Ben-Ari (1982) elegantly summed up Dijkstras idea
in three sentences.
Concurrent programming is the name given to programming notation and tech-
niques for expressing potential parallelism and solving the resulting synchronization
and communication problems. Implementation of parallelism is a topic in computer
systems (hardware and software) that is essentially independent of concurrent pro-
gramming. Concurrent programming is important because it provides an abstract
setting in which to study parallelism without getting bogged down in the imple-
mentation details.
When a sequential program is executed, there is a single thread of control.
The instructions are executed one at a time in the order specied by the
program. A concurrent program is a collection of sequential processes.
1
Each
of these processes has its own thread of control that executes its instructions
one at a time, its own set of registers, and its own stack for local variables,
parameters, etc. Given adequate hardware, each process may execute on its
own processor using shared or private memory. A concurrent program may
1
The term process has specic and sometimes dierent meanings in the context of particular
operating systems. The term process in the context of concurrent programming is a general
term for a sequence of instructions that executes concurrently with other sequences of
instructions.
also execute on a single processor system by interleaving the instructions
of each process. Between these extremes is the more common situation of
having N processes executing on M processors where N > M. In this case,
the execution of instructions from N processes is interleaved among the M
processors.
If the processes in a concurrent program are independent, we can write
each process in the same manner in which we write a sequential program.
There are no special concerns or requirements that the programmer must
address. However, it is rare that the processes in a concurrent program are
truly independent. They almost always need to share some resources or
communicate with each other to solve the problem for which the concurrent
program was written. Sharing and communication require programming lan-
guage constructs beyond those needed in sequential programs. In this chap-
ter we introduce the problems that we must resolve in concurrent programs
with interacting processes. Later, we present the Ada language features and
techniques for solving them.
Synchronization is a problem faced in any activity involving concurrent
processing. For example, suppose that Horace and Mildred are cooperating
in the cooking for a dinner party. They expect that the work will go faster
with two people (processors) carrying out the instructions in the recipes. For
the preparation of scalloped potatoes, Horace has taken on the responsibility
of peeling the potatoes while Mildred will cut them into thin slices. As it is
easier to peel a whole potato rather than remove peels from individual slices
of potato, the two have agreed to synchronize their operations. Mildred will
not slice a potato until Horace has peeled it. They worked out the following
algorithms:
Horaces scalloped potato instructions
while there are still potatoes remaining do
Peel one potato
Wait until Mildred is ready for the potato
Give Mildred the peeled potato
end while
Mildreds scalloped potato instructions
loop
Wait until Horace has a peeled potato
Take the peeled potato from Horace
Slice the potato
Place the potato slices in the baking dish
Dot the potato slices with butter
Sprinkle with our
Exit loop when Horace has peeled the last potato
end loop
Communication among processes is another activity present in nearly all
concurrent activities. Communication is the exchange of data or control
signals between processes. In our cooking example, Horace communicates
directly with Mildred by handing her a peeled potato (data). Further com-
munication is required to let Mildred know that he has peeled the last potato
(a control signal).
What happens when Mildreds potato slicing is interrupted by a phone
call? When Horace nishes peeling a potato, he must wait for Mildred to
complete her phone call and resume her slicing activities. Horaces frustra-
tion of having to hold his peeled potato while Mildred talks to her mother
can be relieved with a more indirect communication scheme. Instead of hand-
ing a peeled potato directly to Mildred, he can place it in a bowl. Mildred
will take potatoes out of the bowl rather than directly from Horace. He can
now continue peeling potatoes while Mildred handles the phone call. Should
Horace need to answer a knock at the front door, Mildred may be able to
continue working on the potatoes that he piled up in the bowl while she
was on the phone. The bowl does not eliminate all waiting. Mildred cannot
slice if there is not at least one potato in the bowl for her to take. She must
wait for Horace to place a peeled potato into the bowl. Horace cannot con-
tinue peeling when the bowl is completely full. He must wait for Mildred to
remove a potato from the bowl to make room for his newly peeled potato.
Our concurrent scalloped potato algorithm is an example of the producer-
consumer pattern. This pattern is useful when we need to coordinate the
asynchronous production and consumption of information or objects. In
Chapter 4 well show you how Adas protected object can provide the func-
tionality of the potato bowl and in Chapter 5 you will see how Adas ren-
dezvous allows processes to communicate directly with each other.
Mutual exclusion is another important consideration in concurrent pro-
gramming. Dierent processes typically share resources. It is usually not
acceptable for two processes to use the same resource simultaneously. Mu-
tual exclusion is a mechanism that prevents two processes from simultane-
ously using the same resource. Lets return to our cooking example. Suppose
that Mildred is currently preparing the cake they plan for dessert while Ho-
race is preparing the marinade for the meat. Both require use of the 5 ml
(1 teaspoon) measuring spoon. Mildred cannot be measuring salt with the
spoon at the same time Horace is lling it with soy sauce. They must take
their turns using the shared spoon. Here are the portions of their cooking
algorithms they worked out to accomplish their sharing:
Horaces marinade instructions
Wait until the 5 ml measuring spoon is on the spoon rack
Remove the 5 ml measuring spoon from the rack
Measure 10 ml of soy sauce
Wash and dry the 5 ml measuring spoon
Return the 5 ml measuring spoon to the spoon rack
Mildreds cake instructions
Measure 5 ml of salt
This example illustrates a set of steps for using a shared resource. First,
some pre-protocol is observed to ensure that a process has exclusive use of
the resource. In our cooking example, Horace and Mildred use the fact that
the rack on which they hang their measuring spoons cannot be accessed by
two people at the same time in their small kitchen. Second, the resource is
used for a nite amount of time by a single thread of control (a person in
our cooking example). This stage of mutual exclusion is called the critical
section. A critical section is a sequence of instructions that must not be
accessed concurrently by more than one thread of execution. In our example,
the critical section is the use of the 5 ml measuring spoon. After the critical
section, the fourth and nal step, the post-protocol, is carried out. The
post-protocol signals an end of the exclusive use of the shared resource.
In our example, the post-protocol consists of cleaning the measuring spoon
and returning it to the spoon rack.
Mutual exclusion is a static safety property (Ben-Ari, 1982). The require-
ment that each critical section excludes other processes from using the re-
source (Mildred and Horace cannot both be lling the 5 ml spoon) does
not change during the execution of the instructions. It is possible to have
safety features that adversely aect the dynamic behavior of a system. For
example, we could make a hand-held electric power saw completely safe by
cutting o the power cord. However, such a drastic safety measure precludes
us from using the saw for its primary purpose. The safety provided by mutual
exclusion can also disrupt our system so that its goals remain unfullled.
Returning to our cooking example, Mildred and Horace have devised the
following algorithms for sharing two dierent measuring spoons.
Horaces deadly embrace
Measure 20 ml of soy sauce
Mildreds deadly embrace
Measure 20 ml of salt
These steps certainly prevent Horace and Mildred from using the same
measuring spoon simultaneously. The cooking for most dinner parties goes
without problem. However, one day, when the guests arrive they nd no
meal and Horace and Mildred waiting in the kitchen. This is an example
of deadlock. Deadlock means that no process is making progress toward
the completion of its goal. Can you see what happened in the kitchen that
fateful day?
Use of scenarios is a common way to uncover the potential for deadlock
in a concurrent program. A scenario is one possible sequence of events in
the execution of a concurrent set of instructions. Here is one scenario that
results in the deadlock observed in the kitchen.
1. Mildred nds that the 15 ml measuring spoon is available
2. Mildred removes the 15 ml measuring spoon from the rack
3. Horace nds that the 5 ml measuring spoon is available
4. Horace removes the 5 ml measuring spoon from the rack
5. Horace nds that the 15 ml measuring spoon is not available and waits
6. Mildred nds that the 5 ml measuring spoon is not available and waits
Our two cooks become deadlocked when each of them holds the measuring
spoon that the other needs to continue. This problem may arise any time that
a process requires multiple resources simultaneously. How is it possible that
previous dinner parties have come o without problem? Here is a scenario in
which everything goes smoothly with the sharing of the measuring spoons.
6. Mildred measures 20 ml of salt
7. Mildred washes and dries the 5 ml measuring spoon
8. Mildred returns the 5 ml measuring spoon to the spoon rack
12. Mildred washes and dries the 15 ml measuring spoon
13. Mildred returns the 15 ml measuring spoon to the spoon rack
16. and so on . . . Each cook has used both spoons successfully
The simplest solution to the form of deadlocking seen in the rst scenario is
to forbid the simultaneous use of multiple resources. In our kitchen we could
restructure the two algorithms so that each cook takes one measuring spoon,
uses it, and returns it before taking the second spoon. There is no reason
that each cook needs both measuring spoons at a given time. However, there
are times when processes do need multiple resources simultaneously. For
example, a cook may need both a measuring spoon and a bowl to complete
a particular mixing chore. A common solution for avoiding deadlock in this
situation is to require that all processes obtain the resources in the same
order. If our two cooks are required to obtain the 5 ml spoon before obtaining
the 15 ml spoon, they will avoid deadlock. The rst cook to take the 5 ml
spoon will be able to obtain the 15 ml spoon as well. The second cook will
wait for the 5 ml spoon to be returned to the rack and will not, in the
meantime, try to obtain the 15 ml spoon.
Now that you understand scenarios, you may notice another potential
problem in our mutual exclusion examples. Suppose one cook observes that
the 5 ml measuring spoon is on the rack. But before they remove it, the
other cook also observes that the spoon is on the rack and removes it. The
rst cook is now baed by the disappearance of the spoon they recently
observed. Our pre-protocol consisted of two separate steps: observing and
removing. For this example and for all other mutual exclusion protocols
to succeed, the pre-protocol must be completed as an atomic action. An
atomic action is an action that cannot be interrupted. The observation
of the spoon must be immediately followed by its removal. Fortunately for
our cooks, the kitchen is so small that when one cook is checking the spoon
rack, there is no room for the other cook to approach it. Our observe and
remove is done as an atomic action.
1.2 Distributed programming 11
Liveness is an important dynamic property of concurrent programs. Live-
ness means that every process in a concurrent program makes progress to-
ward its goals. Deadlock is the most serious violation of liveness. Starvation
is a more localized violation of liveness. Starvation is the indenite post-
ponement of some of the processes in a concurrent program while others do
make progress toward their goals. Lets look at an example of starvation in
our kitchen example. Suppose Horace and Mildred need to repeatedly use
the 5 ml measuring spoon. It is possible, though unlikely, that every time
Horace checks for the 5 ml measuring on the rack he nds it is not there.
Mildred has managed to beat him to the spoon each time. Every time she
replaces the spoon, she returns to take it again before Horace gets the op-
portunity to check for it. Horaces starvation violates our human concept of
fairness. In a real kitchen, Horace and Mildred would certainly take turns
using the spoon so that each of them makes progress towards their goals.
Fairness in a concurrent program means that each process has an equal
opportunity to move forward toward its goal. As we will see later, we often
assign dierent priorities to dierent tasks making a conscious decision to
be unfair.
You now have a basic understanding of some of the problems associated
with concurrent programming. In Chapter 3 youll learn how to create pro-
cesses (called tasks) in an Ada program. Chapters 4 and 5 describe solutions
to Ada task synchronization and communication necessary to construct a
concurrent program in Ada.
1.2 Distributed programming
A distributed program is one whose concurrent processes are assigned to
dierent computers connected by a network. There is a distributed version
of the dinner party called a potluck. In this version of dinner, each person or
couple is expected to cook one dish at their home and bring it to a central
location for the dinner. Some communication is necessary between homes
to coordinate the dishes most people would not want a dinner of eight
desserts and no other courses. Each participant uses the resources in their
own home to prepare their dish.
Distributed programming usually requires abstractions beyond those
needed for non-distributed concurrent programming. These abstractions pro-
vide the tools necessary for dealing with heterogeneous environments, net-
work connections of varying response times, and potential network failures.
A main goal of distributed programming is to provide a more powerful ap-
plication than is possible on a single machine. Scalability, the property of a
design to be easily enlarged, is a highly desirable property for distributed ap-
plications. Two well-known distributed processing systems are SETI@home,
which uses over 300,000 active computers to analyze radio telescope data
to nd evidence of intelligent signals from space, and Folding@home, which
uses over 200,000 computers to simulate protein folding to better understand
biological systems. The processors in both of these distributed systems are
connected by the internet. It is also common to use a private network for
communication among processors making up a distributed system. The Na-
tional Ignition Facility at the University of California Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory uses a private network to connect the 300 front-end
processors that control the 192-beam, 1.8-Megajoule, 500-Terawatt laser
used for inertial connement fusion and high-energy-density experimental
studies (Carey et al., 2003). The control software at the facility is a mixed
language environment of Ada (for functional controls) and Java (for user
interface and database back end). CORBA (discussed in Chapter 6) is used
to communicate between languages and processors.
The great potentials of distributed applications come with additional risks.
Distributed programs are best suited for applications that do not require
large amounts of communication between processes. The delay (latency)
between the time a message is sent to a process and the time a response is
received is much greater going through a network than over a local bus. If
the distributed program is not well designed, failure of a small number of
computers in the network can completely disrupt the application. Diagnosing
problems in distributed applications is usually more dicult than in non-
distributed applications as the analysis may require connections to a widely
dispersed set of computers.
Chapter 6 describes two approaches to building a distributed Ada pro-
gram. The rst approach uses features from the Distributed Systems Annex
(DSA) in the Ada library. The second describes the use of the CORBA
middleware for communication between the distributed processes.
1.3 Real-time systems
There are many denitions of a real-time system but, as you would expect, all
include the concept of time. A particular activity must be completed within
a specied time limit, its deadline. A non-real-time program is considered
correct when the output is that described in the programs specication.
You have probably spent a good deal of time verifying programs you have
written by testing them with various input values. You may have even used
proof checkers such as the one available with SPARK Ada (Barnes, 2003) to
verify a program mathematically. A real-time programs correctness depends
on both the correctness of the outputs and their timeliness (Stankovic, 1988).
A real-time program that calculates the correct answer after the deadline
has passed is not correct.
You may have noticed that our earlier discussions were on concurrent
programming while this section discusses real-time systems. The only time-
related property of a concurrent program is liveness. Liveness is concerned
with every process making progress toward its goal. It makes no assumptions
concerning the absolute or relative speeds at which the processes execute
their instructions. A concurrent program is independent of the hardware on
which it is executing. In order to determine whether or not our software
can meet its real-time deadlines, we must have a good understanding of
the hardware on which it executes. We must consider the entire system
(hardware and software) in our analysis of real-time applications.
1.3.1 Classication of real-time systems
Dont all programs have deadlines? A monthly billing program needs to
complete the printing of invoices before they can be mailed at the end of the
month. The automated teller machine should dispense cash to a customer
immediately after their request. In both of these cases, missing the deadline
is not a failure of the software, but a degradation of the service it provides.
We will still get the invoices to our customers and the bank customer may
be a little annoyed for having to wait longer than they would like. We call
a system whose performance is only degraded by a missed deadline a soft
real-time system. A soft real-time system need only produce the correct
answers; missing deadlines is only an inconvenience. Of course, such incon-
veniences in a commercial application may result in sluggish sales. A hard
real-time system is one in which a single missed deadline leads to com-
plete failure of the system. The y-by-wire system described earlier is an
example of a hard real-time system. The aircraft will likely crash if the sys-
tem does not complete current calculations required for moving the control
surfaces by a deadline. The deadline in this case is imposed by the aircrafts
aerodynamics. Control systems for automobile engines, chemical plants, oil
reneries, and nuclear power plants are all hard real-time systems. Some
people (Burns and Wellings, 2009; Laplante, 2004) include a third category
of real time systems. A rm real-time system is one in which a few missed
deadlines are acceptable, but missing more than a few may lead to system
failure. A video analysis application may miss deadlines on a few frames and
still be acceptable. How many missed deadlines are acceptable depends on
the quality of service (QoS) expected by the users of the system.
It is really the system requirements that characterize a particular system
as soft, rm, or hard real-time. The specication for a payroll processing
program does not generally contain a requirement such as an employees
taxes must be calculated within 53 milliseconds of obtaining their gross
pay and number of deductions. A specication for an automated teller
machine may state that the system should respond to customer requests
in a timely manner without specifying an exact number of seconds. The
specication for a video analysis program may specify some acceptable level
of quality but say nothing about a deadline for completing the processing of
one video frame. On the other hand, the specication for software running
an engine control unit inside a race car will specify strict deadlines for the
computations that determine the quantity of fuel injected into each cylinder.
If the computations are not completed within that deadline, the engine could
experience a catastrophic failure.
The desired behaviors of real-time systems are sometimes dierent than
those for a concurrent program. For example, starvation, which is generally
seen as something to avoid in a concurrent program, may be expected in a
real-time system.
A common myth equates real-time systems and fast systems. The deter-
ministic nature of real-time systems is the dening characteristic, not the
speed at which they execute. It is true that many deadlines specied for
real-time systems are short. And a specication with many short deadlines
certainly challenges the designer and implementer to create ecient, fast
code. So it is not dicult to see why people equate real-time and fast. But,
keep in mind that it is possible to have a slow real-time system.
1.3.2 Embedded systems
You may have noticed that all of the examples of hard real-time systems
given in the last section are embedded systems. The engine control com-
puter in our race car is a component of that car that is no less important
to winning a race than its tires. Similarly, the y-by-wire aircraft, chemical
plant, oil renery, and nuclear power plant all use computers to produce
results that are more than computations. An embedded system interacts
with its environment through sensors (input devices) and actuators (out-
put devices). Each embedded system must respond to sensor events and
meet deadlines imposed by its environment. The engine control units dead-
lines are imposed by the movements of the mechanical parts making up that
engine. Because deadlines are imposed by environmental constraints, it might
be argued that all hard real-time systems are embedded systems.
You might think that in order to meet short deadlines, an embedded
system would benet from the use of multiple processors. However, many
embedded systems are mass market products. The economy of scale is an
incentive to manufacture many units of a particular model car or cellular
phone. In such a manufacturing environment, a great deal of money can be
saved by shaving a few cents o the cost of each individual unit. So most
such embedded systems are implemented with a single processor that has the
minimum performance required for the application. Running a concurrent
program on a single processor requires the interleaving of instructions from
each process. Switching the processor from executing the instructions of one
process to those of another process is known as a context switch. A context
switch requires the processor to save its current state (typically the values of
all the registers) and restore the state of the process being resumed. The time
required for the context switches may be a signicant fraction of the total
execution time. So you might assume that sequential programming would
be far more common than concurrent programming in embedded systems.
But just the opposite is usually true. Because the real world is a parallel
system, it is easier to design an embedded system using concurrent rather
than sequential programming techniques. The cost of context switching is
small in relation to the reduction in development and maintenance eorts.
Lets look at an example. Our cooks, Horace and Mildred, have started a
small commercial venture to manufacture their popular tomato apple chut-
ney. They have purchased a large pressure cooker with an embedded micro-
processor. The cooker has a sensor called a thermocouple that is used to
measure the internal temperature. The electronics associated with the ther-
mocouple produce a voltage that is proportional to the temperature at the
tip of the probe. The output of the thermocouple is connected to an analog
to digital converter (ADC) that converts the analog voltage to a 12-bit un-
signed integer which can be read by the processor. A second sensor produces
a voltage that is proportional to the pressure within the cooker. It is con-
nected to a second ADC. The cooker is heated by a gas ame whose intensity
is set by a valve connected to a rotary actuator. A voltage sent to the actu-
ator determines the setting of the gas valve. Our processor is connected to
the actuator through a digital to analog converter (DAC) which converts a
12-bit unsigned integer to a voltage. The cooker has a vent to relieve excess
pressure. The amount of venting is controlled by a second valve/actuator
that is connected to a second DAC. Figure 1.1 is a representation of the
pressure cooker system.
Gas Valve
A
D
C
DAC
DAC
Processor
Pressure Relief Valve
Thermocouple
Pressure Transducer
Pressure Cooker
A
D
C
123 C
89 kPa
Displays
Figure 1.1 An example of an embedded system
Mildred develops the following algorithm to maintain optimal cooking
conditions for their chutney:
Initial sequential control algorithm for cooking tomato apple
chutney
loop
Input the pressure value from the ADC connected to the pressure transducer
Calculate a new relief valve setting
Output the new relief valve setting to the DAC connected to the relief valve
Display the pressure
Input the temperature value from the ADC connected to the thermocouple
Calculate a new gas valve setting
Output the new gas valve setting to the DAC connected to the gas valve
Display the temperature
Wait until 5 seconds have elapsed from the start of the loop iteration
end loop
This simple algorithm adjusts the relief valve and gas valve every ve
seconds. The input, calculations, and output must be completed within this
ve-second window. Failure to meet this deadline may result in a catas-
trophic event. Now after running a few tests, our cooks discover that the
pressure uctuates beyond acceptable limits. They consult with a friend
who is a control engineer. He suggests that they decrease the period for
pressure regulation from ve seconds to two seconds and decrease the pe-
riod for temperature regulation from ve seconds to four seconds. Here is
Mildreds second algorithm.
Final sequential control algorithm for cooking tomato
apple chutney
loop
Wait until 2 seconds have elapsed from the start of the last pressure input
Wait until 2 seconds have elapsed from the start of the last pressure input
end loop
The loop in this algorithm has a period of four seconds. The temperature is
adjusted once during that time and the pressure is adjusted twice. This sec-
ond algorithm provides adequate control of the cooking conditions for their
tomato apple chutney recipe. However, they nd that with these periods,
the pressure control is unstable when they use it to cook an experimental
batch of mango chutney. After analyzing the uctuations, their control en-
gineer friend suggests that mango chutney requires a pressure adjustment
every 1.5 seconds and a temperature adjustment every 2.5 seconds. It takes
a lot of trial and error for Mildred to develop her sequential algorithm for
mango chutney.
Sequential control algorithm for cooking mango chutney
loop
Wait until 1.5 seconds have elapsed from the last pressure input
Wait until 0.5 seconds have elapsed from the last temperature input
end loop
The loop in this algorithm has a period of 7.5 seconds. The temperature
is adjusted three times during this period and the pressure is adjusted ve
times. This algorithm seems quite complicated for such a seemingly simple
task. It is fortunate that the two sensor periods had the common factor of 0.5
seconds or the algorithm could have been even longer. This simple embedded
system controls just two process variables. Imagine the complexity of the
sequential software if we were to expand our system to include the control
of pH and sugar content of the chutneys.
Now lets look at a concurrent version of the pressure cooker control algo-
rithm. We create one process for each of our control variables. The processor
will execute these two processes concurrently.
Control pressure for mango chutney
loop
end loop
Control temperature for mango chutney
loop
end loop
The concurrent algorithm for cooking the mango chutney is signicantly
shorter and easier to understand than the sequential one. Another advan-
tage of this approach is that we can use the same program for all of our
pressure cooker recipes. With the sequential approach, we had to write dif-
ferent algorithms for our two chutneys, each with its own set of customized
delays. In our concurrent version, we simply replace the delay time in the
last statement of each process with a variable whose value could be entered
from a keypad. Because the interleaving of the instructions in the two pro-
cesses is non-deterministic, the concurrent approach requires signicantly
more eort to show that each of the deadlines can be met. Chapters 7 and 8
describe how to demonstrate that our concurrent Ada programs will meet all
their deadlines. But before that, you will learn the sequential and concurrent
features of Ada necessary for writing real-time applications.
Summary
Ada is arguably the most appropriate language for development of parallel
and real-time applications.
Over 99% of processors manufactured are used in embedded systems.
A parallel program is one that carries out a number of operations simul-
taneously.
Flynns taxonomy categorizes parallel architectures into four simple groups:
SISD, SIMD, MISD, and MIMD.
Concurrent programming provides notations and techniques for writing
parallel programs without the need to understand the details of the
underlying architecture.
Synchronization is the coordination of processes to reach a common goal.
Communication is the exchange of data or control signals between pro-
cesses.
A scenario is one possible sequence of events in the execution of a concur-
rent set of instructions.
Mutual exclusion is a mechanism that prevents two processes from simul-
taneously using the same resource.
An atomic action is an action that cannot be interrupted.
Liveness is a property of concurrent programs that indicates that every
process is making progress toward its goal.
Deadlock is the state in which no process is making progress toward the
completion of its goal.
Starvation is the indenite postponement of some of the processes in a
concurrent program.
A distributed program is one whose concurrent processes are assigned to
dierent computers connected by a network.
A deadline is a point in time by which an activity must be completed.
A soft real-time system need only produce the correct answers; missing a
deadline is only an inconvenience.
A hard real-time system fails when a single deadline is missed.
A rm real-time system may miss a few deadlines, but missing more than
a few may lead to system failure.
An embedded system interacts with its environment through sensors (in-
put) and actuators (output).
Most embedded systems are hard real-time systems they must respond
to sensor events and meet deadlines imposed by their environment.
Concurrency provides a simpler programming model for embedded sys-
tems than sequential programming.
Exercises
1.1 Suppose that 75% of a particular sequential program can be run in
parallel. Use Amdahls equation to determine the amount of speedup
obtained by running this program on 8 processors. On 16 processors.
1.2 Cluster computing and grid computing are two forms of MIMD com-
puting. Search the internet to nd out more about these two hardware
congurations. What is the primary dierence between these systems?
For what sorts of applications is each most suited?
1.3 Name two reasons for using parallel programming rather than sequen-
tial programming.
Exercises 21
1.4 What is the relationship between parallel and concurrent program-
ming?
1.5 Rewrite the algorithms that Horace and Mildred followed for peeling
and slicing potatoes to incorporate a bowl to hold the potatoes that
Horace has peeled. Be sure to handle the cases of the empty bowl and
the completely full bowl.
1.6 Dene the term scenario.
1.7 Write a scenario for the algorithms you wrote for Exercise 1.5. Assume
that the bowl holds a maximum of three potatoes. Just after slicing the
rst potato, Mildred is called away to answer the phone. She spends
more time on the phone than it takes to peel four potatoes. There are
a total of ve potatoes to prepare.
1.8 Modify the scenario you wrote for Exercise 1.7. This time, while Mildred
is on the phone, Horace is called away to answer the front door. Mildred
returns to resume slicing before Horace returns to the kitchen.
1.9 Dene the terms pre-protocol, post-protocol, critical section, and atomic
action.
1.10 Dene the terms deadlock, liveness, starvation, and fairness.
1.11 Search the internet for a denition of the term livelock.
1.12 We gave one scenario for the deadly embrace algorithms that did not
result in a deadlock. Write a dierent scenario that also does not result
in a deadlock. Remember that checking for a spoon and removing it
from the rack are done as an atomic action.
1.13 We gave one scenario for the deadly embrace algorithms that resulted
in a deadlock. Write a dierent scenario that also results in a deadlock.
Remember that checking for a spoon and removing it from the rack are
done as an atomic action.
1.14 Rewrite the algorithms that Horace and Mildred followed for obtaining
and using two measuring spoons. Eliminate the possibility of deadlock
by removing the need for one cook to have the two spoons simultane-
ously. Remember that checking for a spoon and removing it from the
rack are done as an atomic action.
1.15 Rewrite the algorithms that Horace and Mildred followed for obtaining
and using two measuring spoons. Eliminate the possibility of deadlock
by ensuring that each cook obtains the two spoons in the same order.
Remember that checking for a spoon and removing it from the rack are
done as an atomic action.
1.16 Distributed systems can be implemented with CORBA. Most of
CORBA architectures are client-server oriented. Search the internet
for a description of client-server architectures.
1.17 Dierentiate between soft real-time systems and hard real-time sys-
tems.
1.18 List some examples of software that have no deadlines.
1.19 Can you think of an embedded system that is not a hard real-time
system? Conversely, can you think of a hard real-time system that is
not an embedded system?
1.20 Dene the term context switch.
1.21 Search the internet for examples of processors which are typically used
in embedded systems. Look for low-cost and high-quality processors.
1.22 Name some items in your home that might be embedded systems.
1.23 Write a sequential algorithm for the pressure cooker example that ad-
justs the pressure relief valve every 1.2 seconds and the gas control
valve every 1.8 seconds.
1.24 To ensure that all deadlines of our pressure cooker example are met,
we must determine the worst case execution time (WCET) of each
statement of the sequential algorithm. Search the Internet for a de-
nition of worst case execution time and some methods for determining
worst case execution times. Well make use of WCET in Chapters 7, 8,
and 9.
2
Sequential programming with Ada
In this chapter we will introduce you to the basic sequential features of
the Ada programming language. You may nd it useful to skim this chap-
ter on rst reading and then return to it when you encounter an unfa-
miliar language feature in later chapters. One chapter is not adequate to
discuss all aspects of sequential programming with Ada. We discuss those
that are most relevant to concurrent, embedded, and real-time programming
and the examples used in this book. Barnes (2006) presents a comprehen-
sive description of the Ada programming language. Ben-Ari (2009) does an
excellent job describing the aspects of Ada relevant to software engineer-
ing. Dale et al. (2000) provide an introduction to Ada for novice program-
mers. You can nd Ada implementations of the common data structures in
Dale and McCormick (2007). There are also many Ada language resources
available online that you may nd useful while reading this chapter including
English (2001), Riehle (2003), and Wikibooks (2010a). We will often refer
you to the ARM, the Ada Reference Manual (Taft et al., 2006), which is
available in both print and electronic forms.
1
DeRemer and Kron (1975) distinguished the activities of writing large
programs from those of writing small programs. They considered large pro-
grams to be systems built from many small programs (modules), usually
written by dierent people. It is common today to separate the features
of a programming language along the same lines. In the rst part of this
chapter we present the aspects of Ada required to write the most basic
programs. Then well discuss some of Adas features that support the de-
velopment of large programs. Finally, well look at those features that allow
our Ada program to interact directly with hardware. Lets start with a simple
example that illustrates the basic structure of an Ada program. The
1
http://www.ada-auth.org/arm.html provides the ARM in multiple formats.
24 Sequential programming with Ada
following program prompts the user to enter two integers and displays their
average.
wi th Ada . Text I O ;
wi th Ada . I nt e g e r Te x t I O ;
wi th Ada . Fl oat Te x t I O ;
procedure Aver age i s
Di s pl a y t he aver age of two numbers e nt e r e d by t he us e r
A : I n t e g e r ;
B : I n t e g e r ;
M : Fl oat ;
begi n
Ada . Text I O . Put Li ne ( I tem => Ent er two i n t e g e r s . ) ;
Ada . I nt e g e r Te x t I O . Get ( I tem => A) ;
Ada . I nt e g e r Te x t I O . Get ( I tem => B) ;
M := Fl oat (A + B) / 2 . 0 ;
Ada . Text I O . New Li ne ;
Ada . Text I O . Put ( I t em => The aver age of your i n t e g e r s i s ) ;
Ada . Fl oat Te x t I O . Put ( I tem => M,
For e => 1 ,
Af t => 2 ,
Exp => 0 ) ;
Ada . Text I O . New Li ne ;
end Aver age ;
The bold words in all our examples are reserved words. You can nd a
list of all 72 reserved words in section 2.9 of the ARM. The rst three lines
of the program are context clauses. The with clauses specify what library
units our program requires. In this example, we use input and output op-
erations from three dierent library units: one for the input and output of
strings and characters (Ada.Text IO), one for the input and output of inte-
gers (Ada.Integer Text IO), and one for the input and output of oating
point real numbers (Ada.Float Text IO). Following the context clauses is
the specication of our program. In this example the specication consists of
the name Average and no parameters. The name is repeated in the last line
that marks the end of this program unit. The line that begins with the two
adjacent hyphens is a comment. Comments start with two adjacent hyphens
and extend to the end of the line.
Following the program units specication is the declarative part. In
our example, we declare three variables. Variables A and B are declared
to be of type Integer, a language-dened whole number type with an
implementation-dened range. Variable M is declared to be of type Float, a
language-dened oating point number type with an implementation-dened
precision and range. The initial value of all three variables is not dened.
Sequential programming with Ada 25
All but one of the executable statements in our example are calls to pro-
cedures (subprograms) in various library packages. In the rst statement, we
call the procedure Put Line in the library package Ada.Text IO. Ada allows
us to overload subprogram names. The use of the library package name as a
prex makes it perfectly clear which put procedure we are calling. Some Ada
programmers prefer to eliminate these package name prexes by including
an additional context clause called the use clause. Well show you examples
of the use clause and positional parameter association at the end of this
section.
Except for procedure New Line, all of the procedures called in the exam-
ple require parameters. Ada provides both named and positional parameter
association. You are probably very familiar with positional parameter asso-
ciation in which the formal and actual parameters are associated by their
position in the parameter list. With named parameter association, the order
of parameters in our call is irrelevant. Our example uses named association
to match up the formal and actual parameters. To use named association,
we give the name of the formal parameter followed by the arrow symbol,
=>, followed by the actual parameter. In our call to procedure Put Line, the
formal parameter is Item and the actual parameter is the string literal of our
prompt. When there is but a single parameter, named parameter association
provides little useful information. But when there are multiple parameters,
as in the call to Ada.Float Text IO.Put, named parameter association pro-
vides information that makes both reading and writing the call easier. The
formal parameters Fore, Aft, and Exp in this call supply information on
how to format the real number. Details on the formatting of real numbers
are given in section A.10.9 of the ARM.
The only statement in our example that is not a procedure call is the
assignment statement that calculates the average of the two integers entered
by the user. The arithmetic expression in this assignment statement includes
three operations. First, the two integers are added. Then the integer sum is
explicitly converted to a oating point number. Finally, the oating point
sum is divided by two. The explicit conversion (casting) to type Float is
necessary because Ada makes no implicit type conversions. The syntax of
an explicit type conversion is similar to that of a function call using the type
as the name of the function.
Here is a shorter version of our example that illustrates the use of use
clauses and positional parameter association. Throughout the remainder of
this book we will make use of prexing and named parameter association
when it makes the code clearer.
wi th Ada . Text I O ; use Ada . Text I O ;
wi th Ada . I nt e g e r Te x t I O ; use Ada . I nt e g e r Te x t I O ;
wi th Ada . Fl oat Te x t I O ; use Ada . Fl oat Te x t I O ;
procedure Aver age i s
Di s pl a y t he aver age of two numbers e nt e r e d by t he us e r
A : I n t e g e r ;
B : I n t e g e r ;
M : Fl oat ;
begi n
Put Li ne ( Ent er two i n t e g e r s . ) ;
Get (A) ;
Get (B) ;
M := Fl oat (A + B) / 2 . 0 ;
New Li ne ;
Put ( The aver age of your i n t e g e r s i s ) ;
Put (M, 1 , 2 , 0 ) ;
New Li ne ;
end Aver age ;
2.1 Control structures
Ada provides two statements for making decisions: the if statement and the
case statement. Section 5.3 of the ARM gives the details of the if state-
ment and section 5.4 gives the details of the case statement. Ada provides a
loop statement with several dierent iteration schemes. These schemes are
described in detail in section 5.5 of the ARM. In this section well provide
examples of each control structure.
2.1.1 If statements
Here are some examples of various forms of the if statement.
i f A < 0 then
Put Li ne ( A i s ne ga t i v e ) ;
end i f ;
i f A > B then
Put Li ne ( A i s g r e a t e r than B ) ;
el s e
Put Li ne ( A i s not g r e a t e r than B ) ;
end i f ;
i f A = B then
Put Li ne ( A and B ar e e qual ) ;
e l s i f A > B then
Put Li ne ( A i s g r e a t e r than B ) ;
el s e
Put Li ne ( A i s l e s s than B ) ;
end i f ;
i f A > B and A > C then
Put Li ne ( A i s g r e a t e r than both B and C ) ;
e l s i f B > A and B > C then
Put Li ne ( B i s g r e a t e r than both A and C ) ;
e l s i f C > A and C > B then
Put Li ne ( C i s g r e a t e r than both A and B ) ;
end i f ;
While these examples show only one statement for each choice, you may
use a sequence of statements. Ada provides the following equality, relational,
and logical operators commonly used in the Boolean expressions of if state-
ments.
Equality operators
= equal
/= not equal
Relational operators
< less than
<= less than or equal to
> greater than
>= greater than or equal to
Logical operators
not logical negation
and logical conjunction
or logical disjunction
xor exclusive or
and then short circuit and
or else short circuit or
Boolean expressions which include both and and or operators must include
parentheses to indicate the desired order of evaluation. Section 4.5 of the
ARM gives a complete listing and description of all of Adas operators and
the six precedence levels.
2.1.2 Case statement
The case statement selects one of many alternatives based on the value of
an expression with a discrete result. Here is an example of a case statement.
case Ch i s
when a . . z =>
Put Li ne ( Ch i s a l owe r c a s e l e t t e r ) ;
when A . . Z =>
Put Li ne ( Ch i s an upper cas e l e t t e r ) ;
when 0 . . 9 =>
Put Li ne ( Ch i s a d i g i t ) ;
when . | ! | ? =>
Put Li ne ( Ch i s a s e nt e nc e t e r mi na t i o n c ha r a c t e r ) ;
when others =>
Put Li ne ( Ch i s some ot he r c h a r a c t e r ) ;
end case ;
The case selector may be any expression that has a discrete result. In
our example the expression is the character variable Ch. Variable Ch is of
the language-dened type Character, a character type whose 256 values
correspond to the 8-bit Latin-1 values. Ada also provides 16-bit and 32-bit
character types which are described in section 3.5.2 of the ARM.
Our example contains ve case alternatives. The determination of which
alternative is executed is based on the value of the case selector. While
our example shows a single executable statement for each alternative, you
may use a sequence of statements. Each alternative is associated with a
set of discrete choices. In our example, these choices are given by ranges
(indicated by starting and ending values separated by two dots), specic
choices (separated by vertical bars), and the nal choice, others, which
handles any selector values not given in previous choice sets. The others
alternative must be given last. Ada requires that there be an alternative
for every value in the domain of the discrete case selector. The others
alternative is frequently used to meet this requirement.
2.1.3 Loop statements
Adas loop statement executes a sequence of statements repeatedly, zero
or more times. The simplest form of the loop statement is the innite loop.
While it may at rst seem odd to have a loop syntax for an innite loop, such
loops are common in embedded software where the system runs from the
time the device is powered up to when it is switched o. Here is an example
based on our pressure cooker temperature control algorithm from Chapter 1.
l oop
ADC. Read ( Temper atur e ) ; Read t he t emper at ur e f rom t he ADC
Ca l c u l a t e Va l v e
( Current Temp => Temperature , Ca l c u l a t e t he new
New Set t i ng => Va l v e Se t t i n g ) ; gas v a l v e s e t t i n g
DAC. Wr i t e ( Va l v e Se t t i n g ) ; Change t he v a l v e s e t t i n g
del ay 1 . 5 ; Wai t 1. 5 s econds
end l oop ;
We use an exit statement within a loop to terminate the execution of that
loop when some condition is met. The exit statement may go anywhere in
the sequence of statements making up the loop body. Here is a loop that
reads and sums integer values until it encounters a negative sentinel value.
The negative value is not added to the sum.
Sum := 0;
l oop
Get ( Val ue ) ;
exi t when Val ue < 0;
Sum := Sum + Val ue ;
end l oop ;
There are two iteration schemes that may be used with the loop statement.
The while iteration scheme is used to create a pretest loop. The loop body is
executed while the condition is true. The loop terminates when the condition
is false. The following loop uses a while iteration scheme to calculate the
square root of X using Newtons method.
Approx := X / 2 . 0 ;
whi l e abs (X Approx 2) > Tol er ance l oop
Approx := 0. 5 ( Approx + X / Approx ) ;
end l oop ;
Put ( The s quar e r oot of ) ;
Put ( I tem => X, For e => 1 , Af t => 5 , Exp => 0 ) ;
Put ( i s appr ox i mat e l y ) ;
Put ( I tem => Approx , For e => 1 , Af t => 5 , Exp => 0 ) ;
New Li ne ;
This program fragment uses two operators not found in some program-
ming languages. abs returns the absolute value of its operand and ** is used
to raise a number to an integer power.
The for iteration scheme is used to create deterministic counting loops.
Here is a simple example of this scheme.
f or Count i n 5 . . 8 l oop
Put ( Count ) ;
New Li ne ;
end l oop ;
As you can probably guess, this loop displays the four integers 5, 6, 7, and
8. Lets look at the details underlying the for iteration scheme. The variable
Count in this example is called the loop parameter. The loop parameter is
not dened in a declarative part like normal variables. Count is dened only
for the body of this loop. The range 5..8 denes a discrete subtype with four
values. The body of the loop is executed once for each value in this discrete
subtype. The values are assigned to the loop parameter in increasing order.
Within the body of the loop, the loop parameter is treated as a constant;
we cannot modify it. To make our loops more general, we can replace the
literals 5 or 8 in our example with any expression that evaluates to a discrete
type. Well revisit this topic when we discuss types and subtypes later in
this chapter.
If we add the reserved word reverse to the for loop, the values are as-
signed to the loop parameter in decreasing order. The following for loop
displays the four numbers in reverse order.
f or Count i n r ever s e 5 . . 8 l oop
Put ( Count ) ;
New Li ne ;
end l oop ;
Reversing the order of the values in our example range creates a subtype
with a null range a subtype with no values. A for loop with a null range
iterates zero times. Such a situation often arises when the range is dened
by variables. Each of the following for loops displays nothing.
A := 9;
B := 2;
f or Count i n A . . B l oop With a n u l l r ange , t h i s
Put ( Count ) ; l oop i t e r a t e s z e r o t i mes
New Li ne ;
end l oop ;
f or Count i n r ever s e A . . B l oop With a n u l l r ange , t h i s
Put ( Count ) ; l oop i t e r a t e s z e r o t i mes
New Li ne ;
end l oop ;
2.2 Subprograms
A subprogram is a program unit whose execution is invoked by a subprogram
call. Ada provides two forms of subprograms: the procedure and the function.
We use a procedure call statement to invoke a procedure. You saw examples
of procedure call statements in the program Average at the beginning of this
chapter. We invoke a function by using its name in an expression. A function
returns a value that is used in the expression that invoked it. The denition of
a subprogram can be given in two parts: a declaration dening its signature
and a body containing its executable statements. Alternatively, we can skip
2.2 Subprograms 31
the subprogram declaration and use the specication at the beginning of
the body to dene the signature. We will take this second approach in this
section and use separate declarations when we discuss packages later in this
chapter. Section 6 of the ARM provides the details on Adas subprograms.
2.2.1 Procedures
Lets start with an example that illustrates the major features of a procedure.
Here is a program called Example. For the time being, ignore the shading
in this program listing. We will use the shading later in our discussion of
scope.
procedure Exampl e i s
Li mi t : constant I n t e g e r := 1 000 ;
procedure Bounded I ncr ement ( Val ue : i n out I n t e g e r ;
Bound : i n I n t e g e r ;
Changed : out Bool ean ) i s
begi n
i f Val ue < Bound then
Val ue := Val ue + 1;
Changed := True ;
el s e
Changed := Fa l s e ;
end i f ;
end Bounded I ncr ement ;
Val ue : I n t e g e r ;
Modi f i ed : Bool ean ;
begi n
Put Li ne ( Ent er a number ) ;
Get ( Val ue ) ;
Bounded I ncr ement ( Bound => Li mi t ,
Val ue => Val ue ,
Changed => Modi f i ed ) ;
i f Modi f i ed then
Put ( Your number was changed t o ) ;
Put ( I tem => Val ue , Width => 1 ) ;
New Li ne ;
end i f ;
end Exampl e ;
The rst thing you might notice is that our program is itself a proce-
dure. It is called the main procedure. We dened another procedure called
Bounded Increment in the main subprograms declarative part. Execution
of our program begins with the call to procedure Put Line that displays the
prompt Enter a number. The program then obtains a value from the user,
calls procedure Bounded Increment, and nally, based on the actions of the
procedure just called, it may display a message.
Now that we have shown you the order of execution in this program,
lets look at some other features. The declarative part of procedure Example
contains four denitions: the named constant Limit, the procedure Bounded
Increment, and the variables Value and Modified. Named constants are
assigned values which we may not change. This program also introduces the
language-dened type Boolean with possible values True and False.
Now lets look at some of the details needed to write procedures.
Parameter modes
Many programming languages require that programmers assign parameter
passing mechanisms such as pass-by-value and pass-by-reference to their
parameters. Ada uses a higher level means based on the direction of data ow
of the parameter rather than the passing mechanism. Procedure Bounded
Increment illustrates all of the three dierent modes we can assign to a
parameter.
in Used to pass data from the caller into the procedure. Within
the procedure, an in mode parameter is treated as a constant.
The actual parameter may be any expression whose result
matches the type of the formal parameter. In our example,
parameter Bound is assigned mode in.
out Used to pass results out of the procedure back to its caller.
You should treat the formal parameter as an uninitialized
variable. The actual parameter must be a variable whose type
matches that of the formal parameter. In our example, pa-
rameter Changed is assigned mode out.
in out Used to modify an actual parameter. A value is passed in,
used by the procedure, possibly modied by the procedure,
and returned to the caller. It is like an out mode parameter
which is initialized to the value of the actual parameter. Since
a value is returned, the actual parameter must be a variable.
In our example, parameter Value is assigned mode in out.
A common mistake made by novice Ada programmers is to select mode in
out for all parameters regardless of the data ow requirements of their appli-
cation. By using the most appropriate mode, the Ada compiler can provide
2.2 Subprograms 33
additional feedback on potential errors in our programs. While the three pa-
rameter modes are dened in terms of use rather than passing mechanism,
section 6.2 of the ARM provides the details of the mechanisms actually used
to implement the mode abstractions.
Scope
The scope of an identier determines where in the program that identier
may be used. We have already seen one example of scope in our discussion
of the for loop. The scope of a loop parameter is the body of the loop.
You may not reference the loop parameter outside the body of the loop.
The scope of most every other identier in an Ada program is based on
the notion of declarative regions. Each subprogram denes a declarative
region. This region is the combination of the subprogram declaration and
body. A declarative region is more than the declarative part we dened
earlier.
Lets look at the declarative regions dened in program Example on page
31. The declarative region of procedure Example begins after its name and
ends with its end keyword. We used a light gray box to highlight this
declarative region. Similarly, the declarative region for procedure Bounded
Increment begins just after its name and ends with its end keyword. The
darker gray box highlights this declarative region. These gray boxes make it
easy to see that Bounded Increments declarative region is nested within the
declarative region of Example. Notice that this declarative region contains
the denition of Bounded Increments three parameters.
Where a particular identier may be used is determined from two rules.
The scope of an identier includes all the statements following its deni-
tion, within the declarative region containing the denition. This includes
all nested declarative regions, except as noted in the next rule.
The scope of an identier does not extend to any nested declarative re-
gion that contains a locally dened homograph.
2
This rule is sometimes
called name precedence. When homographs exist, the local identier takes
precedence within the procedure.
Based on these rules, the variables Value and Modified may be used
by the main procedure Example but not by procedure Bounded Increment.
The constant Limit could be used in both procedure Example and pro-
cedure Bounded Increment. Because Limit is declared within procedure
Examples declarative region, Limit is said to be local to Example. As Limit
2
A dierent identier with the same name.
is declared in procedure Bounded Increments enclosing declarative region,
Limit is said to be global to Bounded Increment. The three parameters,
Value, Bound, and Changed, are local to procedure Bounded Increment.
While global constants are useful, the use of global variables is usually
considered a bad practice. We use the style of always declaring variables after
procedures so that the variables may not be accessed by those procedures.
Section 8.2 of the ARM provides the complete description of the scope of
declarations.
2.2.2 Functions
Functions return a value that is used in the expression that invoked the func-
tion. While many programming languages restrict return values to scalars,
an Ada function may return a composite value such as an array or record.
All function parameters must be mode in.
3
This mode restriction encourages
programmers to create pure functions functions that have no side eects.
Here is an example of a function that is given a real value and acceptable
error tolerance. It returns an approximation of the square root of the value.
f uncti on Sqr t (X : i n Fl oat ; Tol er ance : i n Fl oat ) r etur n Fl oat i s
Approx : Fl oa t ; An appr oxi mat i on of t he s quar e r oot of X
begi n
Approx := X / 2 . 0 ;
whi l e abs (X Approx 2) > Tol er ance l oop
Approx := 0. 5 ( Approx + X / Approx ) ;
end l oop ;
r etur n Approx ;
end Sqr t ;
The signature of this function includes its parameters and the type of the
value that it returns. Approx is a local variable that holds our approxima-
tion of the square root of X. Execution of the return statement completes
the execution of the function and returns the result to the caller. Should
control reach the end of a function without encountering a return state-
ment, an exception is raised. You may have multiple return statements in
a function. Should you need to calculate a square root in your programs,
it would be better to use the function Sqrt in the Ada library package
Ada.Numerics.Elementary Functions than our example code.
3
This restriction will be removed in Ada 2012.
2.3 The Ada type model
A type is dened by a set of possible values (its domain) and a set of prim-
itive operations on those values. In all of our previous examples we used
language-dened types such as Integer, Float, and Boolean. Ada allows us
to dene our own simple and complex types. Adas type model is perhaps
the single feature that gives Ada a signicant advantage over other program-
ming languages. It allows us to create accurate models of the real world and
provide valuable information to the compiler so it can identify errors before
the program is executed. Four principles govern the type system (Wikibooks,
2010a):
Strong typing Types are incompatible with one another. It is not pos-
sible to mix apples and oranges. We can, however, use explicit type con-
versions to cast a value of one type to another type when we do need to
combine values of dierent types.
Static typing Types are checked by the compiler allowing type errors to
be found earlier in the development life cycle.
Abstraction Types model the real world or the problem at hand. The
Ada programmer need not be concerned about how the computer repre-
sents the data internally. But, as we shall see later, we may use represen-
tation clauses to specify exactly how a type is represented at the bit level.
We can map specic types to specic hardware.
Name equivalence Two types are compatible if and only if they have
the same name not if they just happen to have the same size or bit
representation (structural equivalence). You can declare two oating point
types with the same precision and ranges that are totally incompatible.
Lets look at an example program with an obvious error.
wi th Ada . Fl oat Te x t I O ; use Ada . Fl oat Te x t I O ;
procedure Bad Types i s
Room Length : Fl oat ; l e ngt h of room i n f e e t
Wal l Thi c kne s s : Fl oat ; t h i c k n e s s of wa l l i n i nc he s
Tot al : Fl oat ; i n f e e t
begi n
Get ( Room Length ) ;
Get ( Wal l Thi c kne s s ) ;
Tot al := Room Length + 2. 0 Wal l Thi c kne s s ;
Put ( I tem => Tot al , For e => 1 , Af t => 1 , Exp => 0 ) ;
end Bad Types ;
In this example we have dened three variables, each of which holds a real
number. The programmer ignored the comments given with each of these
variable declarations and neglected to convert the wall thickness measure-
ment from inches to feet before adding it to the room length measurement.
While the error in this short program is obvious, nding similar errors in
large programs requires a great deal of eort in testing and debugging. Adas
type model helps to eliminate a wide class of errors from our programs. But,
as the example illustrates, we can still have such errors in our Ada programs
when we do not take full advantage of the type system to model our values.
Figure 2.1 shows the relationships among Adas various types. The hier-
archy in this gure is similar to a class inheritance hierarchy. Type Boolean
is an enumeration type. An enumeration type is a discrete type. The types
whose names are in italics in Figure 2.1, such as Ada data types, are ab-
stract entities used to organize the classication of types. The set of op-
erations available for all Ada types
4
include assignment (:=) and equality
testing (= and /=).
Figure 2.1 shows that types are divided into two groups: atomic and
composite. A composite type is one whose values may be decomposed into
smaller values. A string type is a composite type. A string value is composed
of characters. We can access and use the individual characters making up
a string. An atomic type is one whose values cannot be decomposed into
smaller values. A character type is an atomic type. A character value can-
not be decomposed into smaller values. Integers and real numbers are also
atomic types.
2.3.1 Scalar types
A scalar type is an atomic type with the additional property of ordering.
We can compare scalar values with the relational operators (<, <=, >, and
>=). Characters, integers, and real numbers are all scalar types.
One of the principles of object-oriented programming is the development
of classes that accurately model the objects in the problem. We can apply
this same approach to the design of our scalar types. By using scalar types
that more accurately reect the nature of the data in a problem we are
solving, we can write better programs. One research study on the nature of
costly software faults indicates that poor models of scalar quantities were
responsible for nearly 90% of the errors in the cases studied (Eisenstadt,
1997; McCormick, 1997). Ada allows programmers to dene their own scalar
data types that accurately model the scalar values in the problem domain.
4
Assignment and equality testing are not available for Adas limited types; types for which
copying is not allowed. A limited type is a type that includes the reserved word limited,
synchronized, task, or protected in its denition or in the denition of a component of a
composite type.
Ada data types
Composite Atomic
Array Record Task Access Scalar
Discrete Real
Character
Enumeration Integer
Boolean Signed Modular
Floating
point
Fixed
point
Ordinary Decimal
Protected
Figure 2.1 The Ada type hierarchy
Although we wont say that using well-designed scalar types will eliminate
90% of costly faults, they certainly give us a valuable tool for the production
of quality software.
Figure 2.1 shows that there are two kinds of scalar types. Real types pro-
vide the mechanisms for working with real numbers. A discrete type is a
scalar type with the additional property of unique successors and predeces-
sors. Well look at specic real and discrete types in the next sections.
Real types
The storage and manipulation of real numbers is the substance of the dis-
cipline of numerical analysis. The underlying problem with computations
involving real numbers is that very few real numbers can be represented
exactly in a computers memory. For example, of the innite number of real
numbers in the interval between 1.0 and 2.0, only about 1016 are represented
exactly in the IEEE 754 single precision representation. The numbers with
exact representations are called model numbers. The remaining numbers
are approximated and represented by the closest model number.
Floating point types Here is a revised version of our simple program for
adding room dimensions. In place of the language-dened type Float, we
have dened two new oating point types: Feet and Inches. Since the vari-
ables Room Length and Wall Thickness are now dierent types, the Ada
compiler will catch the inappropriate addition of feet and inches we had in
our earlier erroneous program.
procedure Good Types i s
type Feet i s di gi t s 4 range 0. 0 . . 100. 0;
type I nc he s i s di gi t s 3 range 0. 0 . . 1 2 . 0 ;
package Feet I O i s new Ada . Text I O . Fl oat I O ( Feet ) ;
package I nc h I O i s new Ada . Text I O . Fl oat I O ( I nc he s ) ;
f uncti on To Feet ( I tem : i n I nc he s ) r etur n Feet i s
begi n
r etur n Feet ( I tem ) / 1 2 . 0 ;
end To Feet ;
pragma I n l i n e ( To Feet ) ;
Room Length : Feet ;
Wal l Thi c kne s s : I nc he s ;
Tot al : Feet ;
begi n
Feet I O . Get ( Room Length ) ;
I nc h I O . Get ( Wal l Thi c kne s s ) ;
Tot al := Room Length + 2. 0 To Feet ( Wal l Thi c kne s s ) ;
Feet I O . Put ( I tem => Tot al , For e => 1 , Af t => 1 , Exp => 0 ) ;
end Good Types ;
The addition of feet and inches requires that we convert a value from one
unit to another. We have included a function that makes this conversion.
The function To Feet rst does an explicit type conversion (three inches is
converted to three feet) which is then divided by twelve to complete the unit
conversion.
Our two new oating point types are dened by the type denitions at
the beginning of the program. To dene a new oating point type, we must
specify the minimum number of decimal digits we require in the mantissa
in the oating point numbers. This number follows the word digits in
the type denition. The specication of a range for a oating point type is
optional. If the range is omitted, the compiler will create a oating point
type with the widest range possible.
We select the minimum number of digits in the mantissa based on the
expected precision of our largest value. For our room length, we selected 100
feet as the upper bound of our domain. We estimated that the precision of a
measurement of a 100 foot long room is a tenth of a foot. Therefore, we need
four digits of precision to represent 100.0 three account for the digits to
the left of the decimal point and one for the digit to the right of the decimal
point. Should we use a laser range nder with a precision of a thousandth
of a foot in place of a tape measure, we would increase the number of digits
of precision to six, three on each side of the decimal point. Similarly we
estimated that the precision of a measurement of a twelve inch thick wall
is a tenth of an inch. So we need a total of three digits of precision for our
wall thickness type. The precisions we select are minimums we will accept.
The Ada compiler will select the most ecient oating point representation
available on the hardware with at least the precision we specify. The most
common representations used are those specied by the IEEE 754 standard
for oating point representation. We usually consider the precisions specied
in our oating point type denitions as documentation on the precision of
our actual data.
We cannot use the procedures in the library package Ada.Float Text IO
to do input and output with values of type Feet and Inches. Ada provides
a generic library package that may be instantiated to obtain packages for
doing input and output with our own oating point types. You can see the
two instantiations for packages Feet IO and Inch IO immediately following
the denitions of our two oating point types. We prexed our get and put
procedure calls with the names of these newly created packages so you can
clearly see that we are not calling procedures from the library.
The program Good Types includes the pragma Inline. A pragma is a
compiler directive. There are language-dened pragmas that give instruc-
tions for optimization, listing control, etc. Pragma Inline, requests that the
subprogram be expanded inline, thereby eliminating the overhead of a sub-
program call. In our example, we get the advantage of abstraction without
the usual cost of a function call.
Fixed point types As illustrated in Figure 2.1, Ada provides support for two
representations of real numbers: xed point and oating point. Fixed point
numbers provide a xed number of digits before and after the radix point.
When we write a real number on paper, we usually use a xed point format
such as
12.75 0.00433 1258.1
In a oating point number, the radix point may oat to any location.
Floating point is the computer realization of scientic notation. A oating
point value is implemented as two separate numbers, a mantissa and an
exponent. The following are all valid representations of 1258.1.
.12581 10
4
1.2581 10
3
12.581 10
2
125.81 10
1
1258.1 10
0
12581. 10
1
Floating point is by far the more commonly used representation for real
numbers. In most programming languages, oating point is the only type
available for representing real numbers. Floating point types support a much
wider range of values than xed point types. However, xed point types have
two properties that favor their use in certain situations. First, xed point
arithmetic is performed with standard integer machine instructions. Inte-
ger instructions are typically faster than oating point instructions. Some
inexpensive embedded microprocessors, microcontrollers, and digital signal
processors (DSPs) do not support oating point arithmetic. In such cases,
xed point is the only representation available for real numbers.
The second advantage of xed point is that the maximum representa-
tional error is constant throughout the range of the type. The maximum
representational error for a oating point type depends on the magnitude of
the number. This dierence is a result of the distribution of model numbers
in each of the representations. The distance between model oating point
numbers varies through the range; it depends on the value of the exponent.
The distance between model xed point numbers is constant throughout the
range.
Figure 2.2 illustrates the dierence in model number distributions. Fig-
ure 2.2a shows the model numbers for a very simple oating point repre-
sentation. There are ten model numbers between 1.0 and 10.0, ten model
numbers between 0.1 and 1.0, and ten model numbers between 0.01 and
0.1. Figure 2.2b shows the model numbers for a simple xed point repre-
sentation. The distance between model numbers is constant throughout the
range. The representational error for a particular real number is equal to the
dierence between it and the model number used to represent it. Figure 2.2
shows that the representational error for a oating point number gets larger
as the number gets larger while the representational error for a xed point
number is constant throughout its range.
Does the choice of real number representation really make a dierence in
our applications? On February 25, 1991, a Patriot missile defense system
operating at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, during Operation Desert Storm failed
to track and intercept an incoming Scud [missile]. This Scud subsequently
a) A simple floating point type (digits = 1)
b) A simple fixed point type (delta = 0.25)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Figure 2.2 Distribution of model numbers
hit an Army barracks, killing 28 Americans (Blair et al., 1992). The Patriot
battery failed because of a software problem related to the storage and use
of oating point numbers. The system stored time, in tenths of a second, in
a oating point variable. Table 2.1, taken from the Government Accounting
Oce report, shows the magnitude of the error in representing this time
as a oating point value. As with all oating point representations, the
magnitude of the error increases with the magnitude of the value.
Absolute Approximate shift in
Time inaccuracy missile range gate
Hours Seconds (seconds) (meters)
0 0.0 0.0 0
1 3600.0 0.0034 7
8 28800.0 0.0275 55
20 72000.0 0.0687 137
48 172800.0 0.1648 330
72 259200.0 0.2472 494
100 360000.0 0.3433 687
Table 2.1 Magnitude of range gate error when modeling time as a oating
point real number
Table 2.1 shows that the oating point representation error grows as the
number grows. After 20 hours, the time is o enough that the target is
outside the range gate and the Patriot missile fails to launch against a threat.
After the tragedy, the software was corrected by replacing the oating point
time variables with xed point variables. Let us note that Adas predened
type Duration is a xed point type for seconds.
To declare a xed point type, we specify the maximum distance between
model number that we are willing to accept. The maximum representational
error is half of this distance. We may also specify an optional range for the
type. Here are two examples.
type Thi r ds i s del t a 1. 0 / 3. 0 range 0. 0 . . 100 000 . 0 ;
type Vol t s i s del t a 2. 0( 12) range 0. 0 . . 5 . 0 ;
Thirds is a xed point type with a specied distance of
1
3
(0.33333. . . )
between model numbers and Volts is a xed point type with a specied
distance of
1
4096
(0.000244140625) between model numbers.
Both of these types are called ordinary xed point types. The actual dis-
tance between model numbers in our xed point type may be smaller than
our request. The actual distance between model numbers is the largest power
of two that is less than or equal to the value given for delta. So while we
specied a delta value of
1
3
for Thirds, the actual delta used is the power
of two,
1
4
(2
2
). The delta we specied for Volts is a power of two so it is
used directly. Because the distance between model numbers is some power
of two, ordinary xed point types are sometimes called binary xed point
types.
Neither oating point nor ordinary xed point types are appropriate for
currency calculations. Neither is capable of accurate storage of decimal frac-
tions that are so important in commercial applications. Adas decimal xed
point types are the more appropriate choice for such values. Here is an ex-
ample.
type Do l l a r s i s del t a 0. 01 di gi t s 12;
For decimal xed point types, we must specify both a delta that is a power
of ten and the number of decimal digits. A range is optional. A value of type
Dollars contains twelve decimal digits. Since the distance between model
numbers is 0.01, two of these digits are to the right of the decimal point
leaving ten digits for the left side of the decimal point.
We use the generic packages Ada.Text IO.Fixed IO and Ada.Text IO.
Decimal IO to instantiate packages for the input and output of ordinary
and decimal xed point types. You may nd the details for the available
I/O operations in section A.10.9 of the ARM. Here are the instantiations
for our example types.
package Thi r ds I O i s new Ada . Text I O . Fi xe d I O ( Thi r ds ) ;
package Vol t s I O i s new Ada . Text I O . Fi xe d I O ( Vol t s ) ;
package Dol l a r I O i s new Ada . Text I O . Deci mal I O ( Do l l a r s ) ;
Adas rules that prevent the mixing of dierent types are more relaxed for
xed point type multiplication and division. Multiplication and division are
allowed between any two xed point types. The type of the result is deter-
mined by the context. So, for example, if we assign the result of multiplying
a Volts value and a Thirds value to a Volts variable, the result type of
the multiplication would be Volts. Similarly, if we assign the same product
to a Thirds variable, the result type of the multiplication would be Thirds.
Additionally, a xed point value may be multiplied or divided by an integer
yielding the same xed point type.
2.3.2 Discrete types
Recall that a scalar type is an atomic type with the additional property of
ordering. A discrete type is a scalar type with the additional property of
unique successors and predecessors. The language-dened types Boolean,
Character, and Integer are all discrete types. In the next sections well
look at dening our own discrete types.
Enumeration types
An enumeration type provides a means for dening a type by enumerating
(listing) all the values in the domain. The following program illustrates the
denition and use of three enumeration types.
procedure Enum Example i s
type Day Type i s ( Monday , Tuesday , Wednesday , Thursday ,
Fr i day , Sat ur day , Sunday ) ;
type Tr a f f i c L i g h t Co l o r i s ( Red , Green , Yel l ow ) ;
type Pi x e l Co l o r i s ( Red , Green , Bl ue , Cyan ,
Magenta , Yel l ow , Bl ack , Whi te ) ;
package Day IO i s new Ada . Text I O . Enumer at i on I O ( Day Type ) ;
f uncti on Next Day ( Day : i n Day Type ) r etur n Day Type i s
begi n
i f Day = Day Type Las t then
r etur n Day Type F i r s t ;
el s e
r etur n Day Type Succ ( Day ) ;
end i f ;
end Next Day ;
Today : Day Type ;
Tomorrow : Day Type ;
Count : I n t e g e r ;
begi n
Put Li ne ( What day i s t oday ? ) ;
Day IO . Get ( Today ) ;
Tomorrow := Next Day ( Today ) ;
Put ( Tomorrow i s ) ;
Day IO . Put ( I tem => Tomorrow ,
Width => 1 ,
Set => Ada . Text I O . Lower Case ) ;
New Li ne ;
i f Today > Tomorrow then
Put Li ne ( Today must be Sunday ) ;
end i f ;
New Li ne ;
Put Li ne ( The week days ar e ) ;
f or Day i n Monday . . Fr i da y l oop
Day IO . Put ( Day ) ;
New Li ne ;
end l oop ;
New Li ne ( 2 ) ;
f or Col or i n Tr a f f i c L i g h t Co l o r l oop
Put Li ne ( Tr a f f i c L i g h t Co l o r I mage ( Col or ) ) ;
end l oop ;
New Li ne ( 2 ) ;
Count := 0;
f or Col or i n Pi x e l Co l o r range Red . . Yel l ow l oop
Count := Count + 1;
end l oop ;
Put ( I tem => Count , Width => 1 ) ;
end Enum Example ;
Each of our three enumeration types is dened by listing literals for all of
the values in the domain. These literals are case insensitive. We could also
have typed MONDAY or monday for the rst value of Day Type. Notice that
the Red is both a Pixel Color literal and a Traffic Light Color literal.
We may instantiate packages for the input and output of enumeration
values. In our example program, we instantiated the package Day IO to allow
us to get and put day values. You may nd the details of the input and
output operations available for enumeration values in section A.10.10 of the
ARM. Like the dening literals, the input values are not case sensitive. For
output, we may select between all uppercase or all lowercase values. The
rst portion of the main procedure in our example calls procedures get and
put in package Day IO to get a day and display the next day.
Our main subprogram calls the function Next Day to determine the day
that follows the day entered by the user. This function has our rst use of
attributes. An attribute is an operator that yields a characteristic of a type
or object. Some attributes require parameters. Here are the most common
attributes for scalar types.
First Returns the lower bound of the type
Last Returns the upper bound of the type
Image Returns a string equivalent to the given value
And here are two additional attributes available for discrete types.
Succ Returns the successor of the given value
Pred Returns the predecessor of the given value
Lets look at the attributes used in program Enum Example. The expression
Day TypeLast (read day type tick last) in the if statement of our function
uses the attribute Last to determine the last (largest) value in the domain
of the type. As you might expect, the attribute First returns the rst
(smallest) value in the domain of the type. The attribute Succ requires
a parameter. It returns the successor of the value passed to it. Because
there is no successor for the value Sunday in type Day Type, passing Sunday
to the successor attribute function raises an exception (a run time error)
that would halt this ow of execution. The purpose of the if statement in
function Next Day is to avoid this exception by returning the rst day of
our type (Monday) for the one case where the successor function fails. The
attribute Pred returns the predecessor of a value passed to it. An exception
is raised on an attempt to use this function to determine the predecessor of
the smallest value in the types domain. You may nd descriptions of the
attributes available for all scalar types in section 3.5 of the ARM. Additional
attributes for all discrete types are described in section 3.5.5. Sections 3.5.8
and 3.5.10 describe attributes available for all oating point and xed point
types.
The next portion of the main subprogram of our example illustrates the
use of relational operators with enumeration values. These operators use the
order of the literals in each enumeration type denition. Day Type denes an
order of days in which Monday is the smallest day and Sunday is the largest
day. The if statement that asks whether Today is greater than Tomorrow is
true only when Today is Sunday.
The remainder of our example program illustrates additional variations
of the for loop. Our previous for loop examples used only integer loop pa-
rameters. A loop parameter may be of any discrete type. Recall that a loop
parameter is not declared before the loop. It takes its type from the discrete
subtype following the reserved word in. The loop parameter Day in the rst
for loop in our example program takes its type, Day Type, from that of the
range Monday..Friday.
The second loop in our example program uses a type name rather than
a range. This loop iterates through all three values of type Traffic Light
Color displaying each value. We used another approach for displaying the
trac light colors in this loop. The Image attribute function returns an
uppercase string equivalent to the enumeration parameter. We then used
Ada.Text IO.Put Line to display this string. The advantage of the Image
attribute is its simplicity. However, it does not provide the control available
for formatting enumeration values available in the put procedures created
in instantiations of enumeration I/O packages.
The nal loop illustrates a solution to a typical problem with duplicate
enumeration literals. The range Red..Yellow could be either type Traffic
Light Color or type Pixel Color. We explicitly indicated the type desired,
Pixel Color, for the loop parameter in this for loop.
The language-dened types Boolean, Character, Wide Character, and
Wide Wide Character are all enumeration types. You can see their deni-
tions in section A.1 of the ARM. Because all three character types share
common literals, the type of a character range is usually ambiguous. Here
is a for loop with a syntax error resulting from the ambiguity of the type of
the range.
f or Le t t e r i n a . . z l oop
***ERROR*** ambiguous character literal
We resolve the ambiguity by giving the range an explicit type.
f or Le t t e r i n Char ac t e r range a . . z l oop
Integer types
Most programmers use the integer type dened in their language for all
variables that hold whole numbers. As we saw earlier, in our room length
example, using the same type for dierent quantities may result in logic
errors requiring debugging eort. By again using dierent and appropriate
types for our integers, we can have more condence in our software. In the
next sections well look at Adas two dierent integer types.
Signed integers To dene a new signed integer type, we need only specify
the range. Here are the denitions of three signed integer types and the
declaration of a variable of each of those types.
type Pome i s range 0 . . 120;
type Ci t r u s i s range 17 . . 30;
type Bi g Range i s range 20 . . 1 000 000 000 000 000 000 ;
Appl es : Pome ;
Oranges : Ci t r u s ;
Fr u i t : Bi g Range ;
The range of each type is specied by a smallest and largest value, not
by some storage unit size such as a byte or word. Should we assign a value
to Apples that is outside of the range constraint given for Pome, the Ada
run-time system will raise a Constraint Error exception. Because they are
dierent types, a comparison of Apples and Oranges is illegal. Of course,
should you really want to combine apples and oranges in an expression, you
can use explicit type conversions as in
Fr u i t := Bi g Range ( Appl es ) + Bi g Range ( Oranges ) ;
Operations available for signed integers include +, -, *, /, **, abs, rem, and
mod. The rem (remainder on division) and mod (the mathematical modulo
operation) operators return the same result when both of their operands are
positive. Should one of your operands be negative, you should consult the
formal denitions of these two similar operators given in section 4.5.5 of the
ARM. The attributes First, Last, Succ, Pred, and Image discussed
for enumeration values are also available for signed integers.
To do input and output of our own integer types we need to instantiate a
package from the generic integer I/O package available in the Ada library.
Here are the instantiations for the three integer types we dened.
package Pome IO i s new Ada . Text I O . I n t e g e r I O (Pome ) ;
package Ci t r u s I O i s new Ada . Text I O . I n t e g e r I O ( Ci t r u s ) ;
package Bi g I O i s new Ada . Text I O . I n t e g e r I O ( Bi g Range ) ;
Modular integers Modular integer types are unsigned integer types that use
modular arithmetic. The value of a modular integer variable wraps around
after reaching an upper limit. To dene a modular integer type we need
only specify a modulus. Here are some modular integer type denitions and
variable declaration.
type Di g i t i s mod 10; r ange i s f rom 0 t o 9
type Byte i s mod 256; r ange i s f rom 0 t o 255
type Nybbl e i s mod 16; r ange i s f rom 0 t o 15
type Word i s mod 232; r ange i s f rom 0 t o 4 , 294 , 967 , 295
Val ue : Nybbl e ;
The following assignment statement illustrates the modular nature of this
type.
Val ue := 12 + 8; Val ue i s a s s i gne d 4
In addition to the usual arithmetic operators, the logical operators and,
or, xor, and not are available for modular integer types. These operators
treat the values as bit patterns. The result of the not operator for a modular
type is dened as the dierence between the high bound of the type and the
value of the operand. For a modulus that is a power of two, this corresponds
to a bit-wise complement of the binary representation of the value of the
operand.
Again, we must instantiate packages to do input and output with the
types we dene. You can nd the details on these packages and the get and
put procedures in section A.10.8 of the ARM. Here are the instantiations
for our four modular types.
package Di g i t I O i s new Ada . Text I O . Modul ar I O ( Di g i t ) ;
package Byt e I O i s new Ada . Text I O . Modul ar I O ( Byte ) ;
package Nybbl e I O i s new Ada . Text I O . Modul ar I O ( Nybbl e ) ;
package Word IO i s new Ada . Text I O . Modul ar I O ( Word ) ;
2.3.3 Subtypes
By dening our own types, we make our programs easier to read, safer from
type errors, and allow range checking at run time. In some cases, values
with dierent constraints are related so closely that using them together in
expressions is common and desired. Although explicit type conversion allows
us to write such expressions, Ada provides a better solution the subtype.
Subtypes allow us to create a set of values that is a subset of the domain
of some existing type. Subtypes inherit the operations from their base type.
Subtypes are compatible with the type from which they were derived and
all other subtypes derived from that type. A subset is dened by specifying
an existing type and an optional constraint. Lets look at some examples.
subtype Lower cas e i s Char ac t e r range a . . z ;
subtype Negat i ve i s I n t e g e r range I nt e ge r F i r s t . . 1;
subtype Weekday i s Day Type range Monday . . Fr i da y ;
subtype Weekend i s Day Type range Sat ur day . . Sunday ;
type Pounds i s di gi t s 6 range 0. 0 . . 1. 0E+06;
subtype UPS Weight i s Pounds range 1. 0 . . 100. 0;
subtype FedEx Wei ght i s Pounds range 0. 1 . . 1 . 0 ;
subtype Column Number i s Ada . Text I O . Count ; A synonym
Tot al : Pounds ;
Box : UPS Weight ;
Envel ope : FedEx Wei ght ;
The domain of the subtype Lowercase is a subset of the domain of the
language-dened type Character. Objects of subtype Lowercase may be
combined with or used in place of objects of type Character. Similarly, the
domain of the subtype Negative is a subset of the domain of the language-
dened type Integer. The domain of subtypes Weekday and Weekend are
both subsets of the programmer-dened type Day Type. The following as-
signment statement illustrates the combining of subtypes with the same base
type.
Addi ng two d i f f e r e n t s ubt ype s wi t h same bas e t ype
Tot al := Box + Envel ope ;
Subtype denitions may also be used to create synonyms subtypes with
the same domain as their base type. Synonyms are often used to provide a
more problem-specic name for a type whose name is more general or to
eliminate the need to prex a type name dened in a package. The subtype
Column Number is an example of such a synonym.
There are two commonly used language-dened subtypes dened in Ada.
Positive is a subtype of Integer with a range that starts at one. Natural
is a subtype of Integer with a range that starts at zero.
2.3.4 Array types
Arrays are composite types whose components are the same type. We access
a specic component by giving its location via an index. Dening an array
type requires two types: one type or subtype for the component and one
type or subtype for the index. The component may be any type. The index
may be any discrete type. Here are some examples of array denitions.
type I ndex Type i s range 1 . . 1 0 0 0 ;
type I n v e n t o r y Ar r a y i s ar r ay ( I ndex Type ) of Nat ur al ;
subtype Lower cas e i s Char ac t e r range a . . z ;
type Per cent i s range 0 . . 1 0 0 ;
type Fr equency Ar r ay i s ar r ay ( Lower case ) of Per cent ;
type On Cal l Ar r ay i s ar r ay ( Day Type ) of Bool ean ;
I nv e nt o r y : I nv e nt o r y Ar r a y ;
Cont r ol : Fr equency Ar r ay ;
Unknown : Fr equency Ar r ay ;
On Cal l : On Cal l Ar r ay ;
Variable Inventory is an array of 1000 natural numbers indexed from 1
to 1000. Control and Unknown are arrays of 26 percentages indexed from a
to z. On Call is an array of seven Boolean values indexed from Monday to
Sunday.
Ada provides a rich set of array operations. Lets start with a selection
operation. We use indexing to select a particular component in an array. We
can use indexing to obtain a value from an array or change a value in an
array. Here are some examples using the variables we just dened.
I nv e nt o r y ( 5) := 1 234 ;
Cont r ol ( a ) := 2 Cont r ol ( a ) ;
On Cal l ( Sunday ) := Fa l s e ;
Tot al Days := 0;
f or Day i n Day Type l oop
i f On Cal l ( Day ) then
Tot al Days := Tot al Days + 1;
end i f ;
end l oop ;
Assignment is another operation available with arrays. As usual, strong
typing requires that the source and target of an assignment statement be the
same type. The following assignment statement makes the array Unknown a
copy of the array Control.
Unknown := Cont r ol ;
We can use the equality operators to compare two arrays of the same
type. If the array components are discrete values, we can also compare two
arrays with any of the relational operators. The relational operators are
based on lexicographical order (sometimes called dictionary order) using the
predened order relation of the discrete component type. We frequently use
relational operators with arrays of characters (strings). Here is an example
that uses two of the array variables we dened earlier.
i f Cont r ol = Unknown then
Put ( The v a l ue s i n t he two a r r a y s ar e i d e n t i c a l ) ;
e l s i f Cont r ol < Unknown then
Put ( The v a l ue s i n Cont r ol come l e x i c o g r a p h i c a l l y &
be f or e t hos e i n Unknown ) ;
end i f ;
Slicing is another selection operation. It allows us to work with sub-arrays.
We use slicing to read a portion of an array or write a portion of an array.
A range is used to specify the portion of interest. Here are two examples of
slicing.
Copy el ement s 1120 i n t o l o c a t i o n s 110
I nv e nt o r y (1 . . 10) := I nv e nt o r y (11 . . 20) ;
Copy el ement s 211 i n t o l o c a t i o n s 110
I nv e nt o r y (1 . . 10) := I nv e nt o r y (2 . . 11) ;
Our second example illustrates slice assignment with overlapping ranges.
Such assignments are useful in shuing the components in an array when
inserting or deleting components in an array-based list.
While indexing and slicing both access components, their results are quite
dierent. The indexing operation accesses a single component. The slic-
ing operation accesses an array. So while the expressions Inventory(5)
and Inventory(5..5) are very similar, their result types are very dier-
ent. Inventory(5) is a natural number while Inventory(5..5) is an array
consisting of one natural number.
Our slicing examples also illustrate the sliding feature of array assignment.
The index ranges of the source and target of these assignments are dierent.
The ten values in the source array slide into the target array. The ranges of
the indices of the source and target may be dierent. The two restrictions
for array assignment are that the target and source be the same type and
that the number of components is the same.
We dene multidimensional arrays by dening multiple indices. The fol-
lowing examples illustrate two ways to dene an array in which we use two
indices to locate a component.
type Row I ndex i s range 1 . . 1000;
type Col I nde x i s range 5 . . +5;
type Two D Array i s ar r ay ( Row I ndex , Col I nde x ) of Fl oat ;
type One Row i s ar r ay ( Col I nde x ) of Fl oat ;
type Anot her 2D Ar r ay i s ar r ay ( Row I ndex ) of One Row ;
Canary : Two D Array ; A 2 di me ns i ona l a r r a y v a r i a b l e
Fi nch : Anot her 2D Ar r ay ; An a r r a y of a r r a y s v a r i a b l e
The syntax for indexing a two-dimensional array is dierent from that for
indexing an array of arrays. Here are examples of each kind.
As s i gn z e r o t o row 12 , col umn 2 of t he 2D a r r a y
Canary ( 12 , 2) := 0 . 0 ;
As s i gn z e r o t o t he second component of t he 12 t h a r r a y
Fi nch ( 12) ( 2) := 0 . 0 ;
Slicing is limited to one-dimensional arrays. We cannot slice the array vari-
able Canary. However, we can slice an array in our array of arrays variable
Finch.
Constrained and unconstrained array types
All the previous array examples were of constrained arrays. A constrained
array type is an array type for which there is an index range constraint. An
unconstrained array type denition provides only the type of the index, it
does not specify the range of that type. Here is an example.
type Fl oa t Ar r a y i s ar r ay ( Po s i t i v e range <>) of Fl oat ;
This statement denes the unconstrained array type Float Array. The
components of this array type are type Float and the index of this array
is subtype Positive. We did not specify the range of the positive index.
The box symbol, <>, indicates that this is the denition of an unconstrained
array type. Since there is no range constraint for this array type, we cannot
use an unconstrained array type to declare an array variable because the
compiler cannot determine how much memory to allocate to such an array
variable.
I l l e g a l : Fl oa t Ar r a y ; Thi s d e c l a r a t i o n w i l l not compi l e
The two important uses of unconstrained array types are as a base for a
constrained array subtype and for the type of a formal parameter. Here are
examples of constrained array subtypes.
subtype Smal l Ar r ay i s Fl oa t Ar r a y (1 . . 10) ;
subtype Lar ge Ar r ay i s Fl oa t Ar r a y (1000 . . 9999) ;
Smal l : Smal l Ar r ay ; An a r r a y of 10 Fl oa t v a l ue s
Lar ge : Lar ge Ar r ay ; An a r r a y of 9 , 000 Fl oa t v a l ue s
Since the arrays Small and Large have the same base type, we can com-
bine them in expressions like these.
Lar ge (1001 . . 1010) := Smal l ; Copy 10 v a l ue s
i f Smal l /= Lar ge (2001 . . 2010) then Compare 10 v a l ue s
Copy 21 v a l ue s
Lar ge (2001 . . 2021) := Smal l & 14. 2 & Smal l ;
end i f ;
The second assignment statement in the above example illustrates another
array operation, concatenation. The & operator may be used to concate-
nate two arrays, an array and a component, or two components. The result
in all cases is an array. In our example, we created a 21-component array by
concatenating a copy of array Small with the value 14.2 and a second copy
of Small.
Here is an example of a subprogram specication with an unconstrained
array parameter.
f uncti on Aver age ( Val ues : i n Fl oa t Ar r a y ) r etur n Fl oat i s
The formal parameter Values will match any actual parameter that is a
constrained array subtype of Float Array. The formal parameter will take
on the index constraint of the actual parameter. Here are some calls to
function Average using our two previously dened array variables.
Avg := Aver age ( Smal l ) ; Aver age of 10 v a l ue s
Avg := Aver age ( Lar ge ) ; Aver age of 9 , 000 v a l ue s
Avg := Aver age ( Lar ge ( 2 0 0 1 . . 2 0 1 0 ) ) ; Aver age of 10 v a l ue s
Avg := Aver age ( Lar ge & Smal l ) ; Aver age of 9 , 010 v a l ue s
Array attributes
As you just saw, we can pass dierent size arrays to function Average. We
do not need to pass the size of the array or its starting or ending indices.
The function makes use of attributes to obtain the properties of the actual
array parameter. Earlier we introduced some of the most commonly used
attributes for discrete types. There are attributes for array types as well.
The attributes most commonly used with arrays are
First Returns the lower bound of the index range
Last Returns the upper bound of the index range
Length Returns the number of components in the array
(Last First + 1)
Range Returns the index range of the array (First .. Last)
Here is the complete code for function Average which uses two of these
attributes.
f uncti on Aver age ( Val ues : i n Fl oa t Ar r a y ) r etur n Fl oat i s
Sum : Fl oa t ;
begi n
Sum := 0 . 0 ;
f or I ndex i n Val ues Range l oop
Sum := Sum + Val ues ( I ndex ) ;
end l oop ;
r etur n Sum / Fl oa t ( Val ues Length ) ;
end Aver age ;
When working with unconstrained array parameters, you should not make
any assumptions about the rst or last index values. While many arrays use
1 as a starting index, you should use the attributes rather than make such
an assumption.
Section 3.6 of the ARM provides the details on array types and attributes.
There you may also nd how to use attributes with multi-dimensional arrays.
Strings
We conclude our discussion of unconstrained arrays with a very brief discus-
sion of Adas predened xed-length string type. Type String is predened
as an unconstrained array of characters with a positive index.
Type St r i n g i s de f i ne d i n Ada . St andar d as
type St r i n g i s ar r ay ( Po s i t i v e range <>) of Char ac t e r ;
Here is a complete program that uses type String to illustrate con-
strained array subtypes, slicing, unconstrained array parameters, and array
attributes.
procedure Pal i ndr ome i s
f uncti on I s Pa l i ndr ome ( I tem : i n St r i n g ) r etur n Bool ean i s
begi n
i f I tem Length <= 1 then
Al l s t r i n g s of l e ngt h 0 and 1 ar e pal i ndr ome s
r etur n True ;
e l s i f I tem ( I tem F i r s t ) /= I tem ( I tem Las t ) then
The f i r s t and l a s t l e t t e r of t he s t r i n g ar e d i f f e r e n t
r etur n Fa l s e ;
el s e
F i r s t and l a s t c h a r a c t e r s match , check t he r e mai ni ng
r etur n I s Pa l i ndr ome ( I tem ( I tem F i r s t + 1 . . I tem Las t 1 ) ) ;
end i f ;
end I s Pa l i ndr ome ;
Max Length : constant Po s i t i v e := 100;
subtype Li ne Type i s St r i n g (1 . . Max Length ) ;
Li ne : Li ne Type ; Cha r a c t e r s e nt e r e d by us e r
Count : Nat ur al ; Number of c h a r a c t e r s e nt e r e d
begi n
Put Li ne ( Ent er a l i n e . I l l t e l l you i f i t i s a pal i ndr ome . ) ;
Ge t Li ne r e ads c h a r a c t e r s t o end of l i n e
Las t i s t he i nde x of t he l a s t c h a r a c t e r r ead
Ge t Li ne ( I tem => Li ne , Las t => Count ) ;
S l i c e o f f gar bage be f or e c a l l i n g I s Pa l i ndr ome
i f I s Pa l i ndr ome ( Li ne (1 . . Count ) ) then
Put Li ne ( i s a pal i ndr ome ) ;
el s e
Put Li ne ( i s not a pal i ndr ome ) ;
end i f ;
end Pal i ndr ome ;
In addition to the predened xed-length string, the Ada library denes
bounded varying-length strings and unbounded varying-length strings. See
section A.4 of the ARM for details on the wealth of string operations avail-
able.
2.3.5 Record types
Arrays are homogeneous composite data types the components are all of
the same type. Records are heterogeneous composite types the compo-
nents may be dierent types. In an array we access a specic component
by giving its position in the collection. We access a specic component in a
record by giving its name. The following declarations dene a simple record
type for an inventory system.
subtype Par t I D i s I n t e g e r range 1000 . . 9999;
type Do l l a r s i s del t a 0. 01 di gi t s 7 range 0. 0 . . 10 000 . 0 ;
type Par t Rec i s
record
ID : Par t I D ;
Pr i c e : Do l l a r s ;
Quant i t y : Nat ur al ;
end record ;
Par t : Par t Rec ;
Di s count : Do l l a r s ;
There are three components (elds) dened in type Part Rec. Each com-
ponent is identied by a name. The name is used with the variable name to
select a particular component in the record. Here are some examples that
illustrate component selection.
Par t . ID := 1234;
Par t . Pr i c e := 1 856 . 2 5 ;
Par t . Quant i t y := 597;
Di s count := 0. 15 Par t . Pr i c e ;
Record aggregates
In the above example, we used three assignment statements to give the
record variable Part a value. We can use a record aggregate to assign a value
to a record variable with a single assignment statement. A record aggregate
is a record value written as a collection of component values enclosed with
parentheses. The association of values in the aggregate and the record eld
may be given by position or by name. Here are examples of each.
Par t := ( 1234 , 1 856 . 25 , 597) ; As s i gn v a l ue s by p o s i t i o n
Par t := ( ID => 1234 , As s i gn v a l ue s by name
Quant i t y => 597 ,
Pr i c e => 1 856 . 2 5 ) ;
When using named association in a record aggregate, we can order the
elds as we like.
Discriminants
We often parameterize record types with one or more discriminants. A dis-
criminant is a record component on which other components may depend.
The following declarations use a discriminated record to dene an array-
based list of inventory records. The discriminant, Max Size, is used to dene
the index constraint of the array component.
type Par t Ar r ay i s ar r ay ( Po s i t i v e range <>) of Par t Rec ;
type I n v e n t o r y L i s t ( Max Si ze : Po s i t i v e ) i s
record
Si z e : Nat ur al := 0;
I t ems : Par t Ar r ay ( 1 . . Max Si ze ) ;
end record ;
When we use a discriminated record in the declaration of an object, we
supply an actual value for the discriminant. The following declaration denes
an inventory list that holds a maximum of 1000 part records.
I nv e nt o r y : I n v e n t o r y L i s t ( Max Si ze => 1000) ;
Inventory is a record with three components: Max Size, Size, and Items.
The last component is an array of part records. Here is some code that
accesses the information in this data structure.
Append a new par t t o t he i n v e n t o r y l i s t
i f I nv e nt o r y . Si z e = I nv e nt o r y . Max Si ze then
Put Li ne ( The i n v e n t o r y l i s t i s f u l l ) ;
el s e
I nv e nt o r y . Si z e := I nv e nt o r y . Si z e + 1;
I nv e nt o r y . I t ems ( I nv e nt o r y . Si z e ) := New Part ;
end i f ;
The declaration of the record type Inventory List also illustrates the
use of optional initial values for record components. Whenever an object of
type Inventory List is created, its Size component is set to zero. As no
initial value was specied for the array component Items, its initial value is
undened.
While ordinary record components can be any constrained type, discrim-
inants are limited to discrete types and access (pointer) types. Well use
discriminants again in later chapters to parameterize task-related composite
types. Section 3.7 of the ARM gives the complete details of discriminants.
2.3.6 Derived types
Subtypes allow us to dene subsets of existing types whose values may be
combined with any other subtype that shares the same base type. Sometimes
we would like to create a new type that is similar to an existing type yet is
a distinct type. Here is an example of a denition of a derived type.
De f i ne a f l o a t i n g poi nt t ype
type Ga l l ons i s di gi t s 6 range 0. 0 . . 100. 0;
De f i ne a new t ype d e r i v e d f rom Ga l l ons
type I mp e r i a l Ga l l o n s i s new Ga l l ons ;
Type Imperial Gallons is a derived type. Gallons is the parent of
Imperial Gallons. Derived types are not limited to scalar types. We can
derive types from array and record types as well. The domain of the derived
type is a copy of the domain of the parent type. But since they are dierent
types, values of one type may not be assigned to objects of the other type.
We may use explicit type conversions to convert a value of one type to a
value of the other type.
The most common use of derived types is in the creation of class hier-
archies associated with object-oriented programming. A detailed discussion
of classes and inheritance is not in the scope of this book. We will provide
a brief introduction to these topics in Section 2.6. You can nd the details
of object-oriented programming with Ada in the references given at the be-
ginning of this chapter. We will nd another use for derived types in our
discussion of low-level programming features at the end of this chapter.
2.3.7 Access types
An access value holds the location of some other value. Access types are often
called pointers. There are two kinds of access types, those that designate
objects and those that designate subprograms. In this section, we restrict
our discussion to access types that designate objects. Well look at access
types that designate subprograms in Chapter 5. When we dene an access
type, we explicitly state what type of object the access value designates.
Here are the denitions of two dierent access types and a variable of each
of those types.
type I n t e g e r Pt r i s access I n t e g e r ;
type St r i n g Pt r i s access St r i n g ;
N : I n t e g e r Pt r ;
S : St r i n g Pt r ;
N contains the location of an integer object and S contains the location
of a string object. The initial value of all access variables is null. Null is a
nonexistent location used to indicate that the access value is not currently
designating an object. Figure 2.3a shows the initial values of N and S.
a) Initial values of N and S
b) After execution of the assignment statements
N := new Integer;
S := new String (1..7);
null
null
N
S
N
S
?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
? ? ? ? ? ? ?
? means undefined value
N
S
42
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
M i l d r e d
c) After execution of the assignment statements
N.all := 42;
S.all := "Mildred";
Figure 2.3 Access variables
The operations on access values are limited to assignment, equality test-
ing, and dereferencing. As usual in Ada, we cannot mix values of dierent
types so we cannot assign the value of N to S.
We use the allocator new to allocate memory for a designated object.
Section 4.8 of the ARM provides the details of allocators. The following
assignment statements obtain memory for an integer and a string and assign
the location of this memory to the access variables.
N := new I n t e g e r ; Obt ai n memory f o r an i n t e g e r
S := new St r i n g ( 1 . . 7 ) ; Obt ai n memory f o r a s t r i n g
The rst assignment statement requests enough memory to store one in-
teger and assigns its location to N. The second statement requests enough
memory to store a string of seven characters and assigns that location to S.
Note that in order to allocate memory for the unconstrained type String,
we had to supply an index constraint. Figure 2.3b illustrates the results of
these two assignment statements. The question marks in this gure indicate
that the contents in the designated objects are undened.
We may use the access variables to assign values to these objects. We use
the dereferencing operator .all to access the object from the access vari-
ables. The following two statements assign values to our designated objects.
As s i gn 42 t o t he memory de s i gna t e d by N
N. a l l := 42;
As s i gn Mi l dr ed t o t he memory de s i gna t e d by S
S . a l l := Mi l dr ed ;
The results of these two assignment statements are shown in Figure 2.3c.
We may also include a initial value when we use the new allocator to obtain
memory. The following two assignment statements combine the steps shown
in Figure 2.3b and 2.3c into a single step.
Obt ai n memory f o r an i n t e g e r wi t h i n i t i a l v a l ue
N := new I nt e ge r ( 4 2 ) ;
Obt ai n memory f o r a s t r i n g wi t h i n i t i a l v a l ue
S := new St r i ng ( Mi l dr ed ) ;
Lets look at a more realistic use of access types. The following declarations
dene a stack implemented as the linked list illustrated in Figure 2.4.
type Node Type ; I nc ompl e t e t ype d e f i n i t i o n
type Node Ptr i s access Node Type ;
type Node Type i s Compl ete t ype d e f i n i t i o n
record
I n f o : Char ac t e r ;
Next : Node Ptr ;
end record ;
Top : Node Ptr ; De s i gnat e s t he top node i n t he s t ac k
As the denition of type Node Ptr uses Node Type, the scope rules require
that Node Type be declared rst. But since the record Node Type uses Node
Top i null e c
Figure 2.4 A linked list implementation of a stack of characters
Ptr, the scope rules require that Node Ptr be declared rst. To solve this
circularity problem, we make use of an incomplete type declaration of Node
Type. We then declare Node Ptr. Finally we give the complete denition for
Node Type.
Making use of the allocator and an initial value for the node memory, it
takes only one assignment statement to push a new character onto the stack.
Push d onto t he s t ac k
Top := new Node Type ( I n f o => d ,
Next => Top ) ;
The execution of this assignment statement begins with the evaluation
of the expression on the right memory for a node is allocated, the Info
component of the node is initialized to d, and the Next component of
the node is initialized to designate the current top node of the stack. The
location of this new node is then copied into Top so it now designates our
latest node.
It takes a few more lines to pop a value from our stack.
Pop a c h a r a c t e r f rom t he s t ac k
To Recyl e := Top ; Make To Recycl e an a l i a s of Top
Val ue := Top . a l l . I n f o ; Copy t he i n f o f rom t he top node
Top := Top . a l l . Next ; Unl i nk top node f rom t he l i s t
Fr ee ( To Recyl e ) ; De a l l oc a t e t he node s memory
Ada does not have a predened operator for deallocating memory.
5
The
procedure Free we used is instantiated from a generic procedure in the Ada
library. Here is the required instantiation.
procedure Fr ee i s new Ada . Unc he c ke d De al l oc at i on
( Obj ect => Node Type , The o bj e c t t ype
Name => Node Ptr ) ; The p o i n t e r t ype
Since Ada is strongly typed, we must instantiate a deallocation procedure
for every pointer type we use. Unchecked programming requires care. It is the
responsibility of the programmer to ensure that the memory they deallocate
5
The Ada standard allows implementations to support garbage collection. Currently, no
implementation provides garbage collection.
is not designated by other access variables. To avoid memory leaks, we must
be sure to deallocate all memory that is no longer needed.
General access types and aliased objects
The access types we have described allow us to manipulate objects created
through execution of the allocator new. The memory that an allocator ob-
tains for an object comes from a storage pool,
6
an area of memory used
to hold dynamically allocated objects. Because they designate objects in a
storage pool, the access types we dened and used in the previous section
are called pool-specic access types.
We may also dene access types that can designate objects in places other
than storage pools. These types are called general access types. We in-
clude the word all in the type declaration to specify a general access type.
For example the two declarations
type G St r i ng Pt r i s access a l l St r i n g ;
Fl ower : G St r i ng Pt r ;
dene the general access type G String Ptr and the variable Flower that
designates a string.
Two common uses of general access types are the designation of declared
objects and the designation of remote objects. Well look at remote objects
in Chapter 6. In order to designate a declared variable, that variable must
be marked as aliased as in the following declaration of a string variable:
Weed : al i as ed St r i n g := Dandel i on ;
We use the Access attribute to assign the location of the declared vari-
able Weed to the access variable Flower. Then we can access the string
variable Weed through the access variable Flower.
Fl ower := Weed Access ; As s i gn t he l o c a t i o n of Weed t o Fl ower
Put Li ne ( Fl ower . a l l ) ; Di s pl a y s Dandel i on
Fl ower . a l l := P i s s e n l i t ; Change t he v a l ue of Weed
Put Li ne (Weed ) ; Di s pl a y s P i s s e n l i t
Like pool-specic access types, general access types may designate objects
in a storage pool. Here is an example.
Fl ower := new St r i ng ( Da f f o d i l ) ;
Put Li ne ( Fl ower . a l l ) ;
Fr ee ( Fl ower ) ; Fr ee i n s t a n t i a t e d f rom Unc he c ke d De al l oc at i on
The use of a general access type rather than a pool-specic access type
comes with a potential trap. When using general access types, you must not
6
Many programming languages refer to the storage pool as the heap.
attempt to use a procedure instantiated from Unchecked Deallocation to
deallocate the memory of a declared variable.
The Ada compiler automatically associates a standard storage pool with
each pool-specic access type. It is possible for us to dene our own stor-
age pools and associate dierent access types with dierent storage pools.
Dening our own storage pools provides more control over the allocation
and deallocation of memory of dynamic objects. Dening new storage pools
is beyond the scope of this book. See Barnes (2006) or Cohen (1996) for
details.
2.4 Blocks and exceptions
Pointers are the source of many errors in programs. In fact, pointers are
sometimes prohibited or severely limited in use in certain safety-critical ap-
plications. Pointers are frequently used to create and manage collections
whose size is not known at compile time. For example, suppose we need a
collection of integers whose size is specied by the user at run time. With
pointers, after getting the size from the user, we can allocate the necessary
memory on the heap. Adas block structure allows us to dynamically allocate
objects on the stack, avoiding the need for pointers in many situations. Here
is an example program that uses a block to dynamically allocate memory
on the stack for an array.
procedure Bl ock Exampl e i s
type I n t Ar r a y i s ar r ay ( Po s i t i v e range <>) of I n t e g e r ;
Count : Po s i t i v e ;
begi n
Put Li ne ( How many numbers ar e i n your dat a s e t ? ) ;
Get ( Count ) ;
decl ar e be gi nni ng of t he bl oc k s t at ement
subtype L i s t Ar r a y i s I n t Ar r a y (1 . . Count ) ;
L i s t : L i s t Ar r a y ;
begi n
Put Li ne ( Ent er your & Po s i t i v e I mage ( Count )
& numbers ) ;
f or I ndex i n Li s t Ar r a y Range l oop
Get ( L i s t ( I ndex ) ) ;
end l oop ;
p r o c e s s i n g of t he v a l u e s i n L i s t woul d go her e
end ; of t he bl oc k s t at ement
end Bl ock Exampl e ;
2.4 Blocks and exceptions 63
The rst thing that happens when procedure Block Example begins its
execution is the elaboration of its declarations. Elaboration is the run-
time processing of declarations. This processing includes allocating memory
and providing initial values for objects. In Block Example, the memory for
Count is allocated on the stack. After elaboration of its declarations, exe-
cution continues with the prompting of the user and getting the size from
them. Next the block statement is executed. The block statement includes
an optional declarative part and a sequence of statements. In our example,
the declarative part of our block contains two declarations: the denition of
a constrained array subtype whose index constraint was obtained from the
user, and an array variable. When these declarations are elaborated, mem-
ory for the array is allocated on the stack. We use this dynamically allocated
array in the blocks sequence of executable statements. When we reach the
end of the block. the memory allocated on the stack for the blocks variables
is released. Blocks give us the advantage of dynamic memory allocation
without the dangers of pointers.
We could have used a procedure to accomplish the same dynamic alloca-
tion of memory. With this approach, we pass the procedure the size of the
desired array. The size parameter is used in the procedures declarative part
to dene the same constrained array type and variable we have in our block.
When we return control to the caller, the memory for the procedures local
array is deallocated from the stack. A block is sometimes called an inline
procedure. Blocks, functions, and procedures dynamically allocate memory
during the elaboration of their declarations and deallocate that memory
when their execution is complete.
Several times in this chapter we have said that if something goes wrong
during the execution of an Ada program, then an exception will be raised.
An exception is an abnormal condition that requires special processing. We
briey mentioned two exceptions: Constraint Error and Program Error.
There are four predened exceptions.
Constraint Error is raised during an attempt to assign a value to an
object if the value does not satisfy a dened limitation. Limitations include
range constraints on scalar types and index constraints on array types.
Attempting to dereference a null pointer or dividing by zero also raises
this exception.
Program Error is raised when our program violates a control structure
in some way. Reaching the end of a functions sequence of statements
without executing a return statement is one situation that raises this ex-
ception. Other situations involve tasking and the elaboration of packages.
Storage Error is raised when our program requires more memory than
is available.
Tasking Error is raised in situations involving problems with task acti-
vation or communication.
There are a number of other exceptions dened in the Ada library. For
example the library package Ada.IO Exceptions (section A.13 of the ARM)
denes eight exceptions related to abnormal conditions with input and out-
put. We may also dene and raise our own exceptions.
An exception handler is a segment of code that executes when an ex-
ception occurs. Exception handlers allow us to recover from abnormal con-
ditions. They may be included in any begin/end construct, including pro-
cedures, functions, and block statements. Here is a procedure with three
exception handlers two at the end of a block statement and one at the
end of the procedure.
subtype Count Range i s I n t e g e r range 0 . . 10;
procedure Get Count ( Prompt : i n St r i n g ;
Count : out Count Range ) i s
begi n
l oop Data v a l i d a t i o n l oop
Put Li ne ( Prompt ) ;
begi n
Ada . I nt e g e r Te x t I O . Get ( Count ) ;
exi t ;
excepti on
when Co n s t r a i n t Er r o r =>
Put Li ne ( Val ue must be between 0 and 10 ) ;
when Ada . I O Ex c e pt i ons . Dat a Er r or =>
Put Li ne ( Val ue must be a number ) ;
Ada . Text I O . Sk i p Li ne ;
end ;
end l oop ;
excepti on
when Ada . I O Ex c e pt i ons . End Er r or =>
Count := 0;
end Get Count ;
Get Count is a robust procedure that obtains an integer value from the
keyboard. Lets begin by tracing a successful read of an integer. After the
prompt is displayed, the procedure gets a valid integer from user, control
exits the loop, the procedure is completed and control returned to the caller.
Now lets trace the execution with some exceptions. Suppose after the
prompt is displayed, the user enters the number 42. As this value is outside
of the domain of Count, the Ada run-time system raises Constraint Error.
Control is transferred to the exception handler for Constraint Error at the
end of the block. The handler displays an appropriate message. Execution
continues with the statement following the block statement the enclosing
loop statement. The prompt is displayed a second time. Suppose this time
the user enters the string hello. The get procedure, expecting a number,
raises the exception Data Error. Control is transferred to the exception
handler which displays an appropriate message. When the data is not an
integer, Ada.Integer Text IO.Get does not consume it. So we call Skip
Line to skip over the erroneous input. We return to the top of the loop,
repeat the prompt and make another attempt to obtain valid data from the
user.
Lets see how the remaining exception handler might be invoked. Suppose
after the prompt, the user types the control code that signals the end of
le. When the get procedure encounters the end of le while attempting to
read a number, it raises the exception End Error. There is no handler for
this exception associated with the block statement. Control is transferred to
the statement following the block statement and the End Error is re-raised.
There is an exception handler in the enclosing block (the procedure). This
handler assigns zero to the out parameter and control is returned normally
to the caller.
In a nal example of exception handling, suppose that there is a hardware
failure in the keyboard while the user is typing their value and the Ada run-
time system raises the exception Device Error. There is no handler for this
exception in the block or the procedure. The exception is propagated back
to the caller of the procedure.
Section 11 of ARM is devoted to the facilities for dealing with errors and
other exceptional situations that arise during program execution.
2.5 Programming in the large
To facilitate the construction of large programs, Ada makes use of library
units. An Ada program consists of a main subprogram that uses services
provided by library units. A library unit is a separately compiled program
unit. We have already made use of many predened library units in our
examples. The with clause provides access to a library unit. The use clause
provides direct visibility to the public declarations within a library unit.
A library unit is a subprogram (a procedure or function), a package, or a
generic unit. The main subprogram is itself a library unit. In the following
sections well introduce you to the package and to generic units. Generally,
we use a compiler and linker to create an executable from a collection of
library units. In Chapter 6 well show you how to distribute the library
units making up a program across a network.
2.5.1 Packages
Information hiding and encapsulation are the cornerstones of programming
in the large. Information hiding is what we do in the design process when we
hide the decisions that are most likely to change. We hide information in or-
der to protect the other portions of our design from changes to that decision.
Information hiding does not mean that the information is not available; it is
just kept out of sight when not required. The module, a collection of related
objects and operations, is the key component of hiding information. En-
capsulation is the implementation of information hiding; the programming
language features that allow a compiler to enforce information hiding.
The package is Adas implementation of the module. The package sup-
ports abstract data types, encapsulation, separate compilation, and reuse.
We write packages in two parts: the package declaration and the package
body. The declaration species the resources the package can supply to the
rest of the program. These resources may include types, subtypes, constants,
variables, and subprograms. The package body provides the implementation
of the subprograms dened in the package declaration.
Although there are many dierent ways to dene and use packages, we
can usually place packages into one of three categories: denition packages,
service packages, and data abstraction packages. This classication scheme
is neither strict nor inclusive. In the next sections well look at an example
from each category.
Denition packages
A denition package groups together related constants and types. Such pack-
ages are useful when the same types must be used in several dierent pro-
grams or by dierent programmers working on dierent parts of one large
program. Here is an example of a denition package.
wi th Ada . Numer i cs ;
package Common Units i s
type Degr ees i s di gi t s 18 range 0. 0 . . 360. 0;
type Radi ans i s di gi t s 18 range 0. 0 . . 2. 0 Ada . Numer i cs . Pi ;
type Vol t s i s del t a 1. 0 / 2. 012 range 45 000 . 0 . . 45 000 . 0 ;
type Amps i s del t a 1. 0 / 2. 016 range 1 000 . 0 . . 1 000 . 0 ;
type Ohms i s del t a 0. 125 range 0. 0 . . 1. 0 E8 ;
type Li ght Ye a r s i s di gi t s 12 range 0. 0 . . 20. 0 E9 ;
subtype Per cent i s I n t e g e r range 0 . . 100;
end Common Units ;
This package denes six types and one subtype. It uses the value of from
the Ada library denition package Ada.Numerics. Since denition packages
have no subprograms, there is nothing to implement. In fact, the compiler
will give us an error should we try to compile a body for it. Here is a short
program that uses our denition package.
wi th Common Units ; use type Common Units . Ohms ;
procedure Ohms Law i s
package Ohm IO i s new Fi xe d I O ( Common Units . Ohms ) ;
package Amp IO i s new Fi xe d I O ( Common Units . Amps ) ;
package Vol t I O i s new Fi xe d I O ( Common Units . Vol t s ) ;
A : Common Units . Amps ;
R1 : Common Units . Ohms ;
R2 : Common Units . Ohms ;
V : Common Units . Vol t s ;
begi n
Put Li ne ( Ent er c u r r e n t and two r e s i s t a n c e s ) ;
Amp IO. Get (A) ;
Ohm IO. Get ( R1 ) ;
Ohm IO. Get ( R2 ) ;
V := A ( R1 + R2 ) ;
Put ( The v o l t a g e dr op over t he two r e s i s t o r s i s ) ;
Vol t I O . Put ( I tem => V,
For e => 1 ,
Af t => 2 ,
Exp => 0 ) ;
Put Li ne ( v o l t s ) ;
end Ohms Law;
This program also illustrates the use type clause. When we declare a
type, we dene its domain and a set of operations. As type Ohms is a xed
point type, the operations include all of the standard arithmetic operators.
In order to add two resistance values, we use the plus operator. But since
this operator is dened in package Common Units, we must either prex the
plus operator with the package name or include a use clause to access the
operator directly. A use clause makes all of the resources in the named
package available without prexing. A use type clause is more specic it
allows us to use operators
7
of the given type without prexing.
7
Adas operators are and, or, xor, =, /=, <, <=, >, >=, +, - , &, *, /, rem, mod, **, abs, and not.
Service packages
A service package groups together the constants, types, subtypes, and sub-
programs necessary to provide some particular service. The library package
Ada.Numerics.Elementary Functions is a service package that includes 29
mathematical functions such as square root, trigonometric functions, and
logarithms for Float values. Here is the declaration of a service package that
provides three operations for control over output displayed on a screen.
package Di s p l a y Co n t r o l i s
procedure Bol d On ;
Ev e r y t hi ng s e nt t o t he s c r e e n a f t e r t h i s pr oc e dur e
i s c a l l e d w i l l be d i s p l a y e d i n bol d c h a r a c t e r s
procedure Bl i nk On ;
i s c a l l e d w i l l be b l i n k i n g
procedure Normal ;
i s c a l l e d w i l l be d i s p l a y e d nor mal l y
end Di s p l a y Co n t r o l ;
The implementation of these three operations depends upon the display
hardware. Having encapsulated this dependency in a package body allows
us to use the operations without knowledge of that hardware. Here is a
body for this package with the implementation for a display that supports
ANSI escape sequences. It includes one procedure body for each procedure
declared in the package specication.
wi th Ada . Cha r a c t e r s . La t i n 1 ; Cha r a c t e r s i n t he
ISO 88591 c h a r a c t e r s e t
package body Di s p l a y Co n t r o l i s
Assumes t hat t he d i s p l a y ac c e pt s and p r o c e s s e s Ameri can
Na t i ona l St andar ds I n s t i t u t e ( ANSI ) es cape s equences .
Code t o s t a r t an ANSI c o n t r o l s t r i n g ( t he Escape
c o n t r o l c h a r a c t e r and t he l e f t br ac ke t c h a r a c t e r )
ANSI St ar t : constant St r i n g :=
Ada . Cha r a c t e r s . La t i n 1 . ESC & [ ;
procedure Bol d On i s
begi n ESC[ 1m t ur ns on Bol d
Ada . Text I O . Put ( ANSI St ar t & 1m ) ;
Send any b u f f e r e d c h a r a c t e r s t o t he d i s p l a y
Ada . Text I O . Fl us h ;
end Bol d On ;
procedure Bl i nk On i s
begi n ESC[ 5m t ur ns on Bl i nk
end Bl i nk On ;
procedure Normal i s
begi n ESC[ 0m t ur ns o f f a l l a t t r i b u t e s
end Normal ;
end Di s p l a y Co n t r o l ;
This package body uses resources from two library packages. While not
necessary in this package body, bodies may include additional subprograms.
These helper subprograms are local to the package body; they may not be
called from outside.
Data abstraction packages
We use the data abstraction package to create abstract data types (ADTs).
An abstract data type consists of a set of data values and associated op-
erations that are specied independent of any particular implementation.
The abstract data type is a fundamental concept of Ada (Barnes 2006;
Ben-Ari 2009; Dale and McCormick 2007). Our example is an abstract data
type that we will make use of in later chapters the bounded queue. Here
is the queue package declaration for a bounded queue whose elements are
integers.
package Bounded Queue V1 i s
Ve r s i on 1 , d e t a i l s of t he queue t ype ar e not e nc a ps ul a t e d
subtype El ement Type i s I n t e g e r ;
type Queue Ar r ay i s ar r ay ( Po s i t i v e range <>) of El ement Type ;
type Queue Type ( Max Si ze : Po s i t i v e ) i s
record
Count : Nat ur al := 0; Number of i t ems
Fr ont : Po s i t i v e := 1; I ndex of f i r s t i t em
Rear : Po s i t i v e := Max Si ze ; I ndex of l a s t i t em
I t ems : Queue Ar r ay (1 . . Max Si ze ) ; The el ement a r r a y
end record ;
Over f l ow : excepti on ;
Under f l ow : excepti on ;
procedure Cl e a r ( Queue : i n out Queue Type ) ;
procedure Enqueue ( Queue : i n out Queue Type ;
I tem : i n El ement Type ) ;
Over f l ow i s r a i s e d on at t empt t o Enqueue an el ement
onto a f u l l queue . Queue i s unchanged .
procedure Dequeue ( Queue : i n out Queue Type ;
I tem : out El ement Type ) ;
Under f l ow i s r a i s e d on at t empt t o dequeue an el ement
f rom an empty Queue . Queue r emai ns empty .
f uncti on Fu l l ( Queue : i n Queue Type ) r etur n Bool ean ;
f uncti on Empty ( Queue : i n Queue Type ) r etur n Bool ean ;
end Bounded Queue V1 ;
This package denes a queue type as a record with ve components and
ve queue operations. The initial values assigned to three of the record
components ensure that every queue object is initialized to empty when
it is elaborated. The package declaration also contains the declaration of
two programmer-dened exceptions. The comments with the enqueue and
dequeue operations document which of these exceptions they might raise.
Here is a very short program that illustrates the use of our abstract queue
data type.
wi th Bounded Queue V1 ; use Bounded Queue V1 ;
procedure Bounded Queue Exampl e V1 i s
Uses t he f i r s t v e r s i o n of t he bounded queue package
My Queue : Bounded Queue V1 . Queue Type ( Max Si ze => 100) ;
begi n
Enqueue ( Queue => My Queue , I tem => Count ) ;
end l oop ;
Dequeue ( Queue => My Queue , I tem => Val ue ) ;
Put Li ne ( I nt e ge r I mage ( Val ue ) ) ;
Cl e a r ( My Queue ) ;
excepti on
when Under f l ow | Over f l ow =>
Put Li ne ( An e x c e pt i on was r a i s e d ) ;
end Bounded Queue Exampl e V1 ;
The rst declaration in this example program denes a bounded queue
with a maximum size of 100. After the loop enqueues 36 values, the program
dequeues one value and displays it. After clearing the queue, it attempts to
dequeue another element which raises an underow exception that is handled
by the exception handler.
Here is the package body with the implementation of the ve operations
dened in the package declaration.
package body Bounded Queue i s
I tem : i n El ement Type ) i s
begi n
i f Queue . Count = Queue . Max Si ze then
r ai s e Over f l ow ;
el s e
Queue . Rear := Queue . Rear rem Queue . Max Si ze + 1;
Queue . I t ems ( Queue . Rear ) := I tem ;
Queue . Count := Queue . Count + 1;
end i f ;
end Enqueue ;
I tem : out El ement Type ) i s
begi n
i f Queue . Count = 0 then
r ai s e Under f l ow ;
el s e
I tem := Queue . I t ems ( Queue . Fr ont ) ;
Queue . Fr ont := Queue . Fr ont rem Queue . Max Si ze + 1;
Queue . Count := Queue . Count 1;
end i f ;
end Dequeue ;
f uncti on Fu l l ( Queue : i n Queue Type ) r etur n Bool ean i s
begi n
r etur n Queue . Count = Queue . Max Si ze ;
end Fu l l ;
f uncti on Empty ( Queue : i n Queue Type ) r etur n Bool ean i s
begi n
r etur n Queue . Count = 0;
end Empty ;
procedure Cl e a r ( Queue : i n out Queue Type ) i s
begi n
Queue . Count := 0;
Queue . Fr ont := 1;
Queue . Rear := Queue . Max Si ze ;
end Cl e a r ;
end Bounded Queue ;
The only new feature in the package body is the use of the raise statement
to raise the overow and underow exceptions.
2.5.2 Private types
The declaration of the queue record type in our bounded queue package
declaration is a form of information hiding. But while the details of the
queue type are hidden, they remain accessible to the application using this
package. A programmer could manipulate the record components directly
rather than call the dened queue operations. Such direct access could leave
a queue object in an inconsistent state. And, should we need to modify
the denition of the queue type later, we would need to locate and modify
all instances of direct access. We need to encapsulate the queue type so
that its details are not accessible. We use private types to encapsulate the
details of abstract data types. Here is a second version of our queue package
declaration in which we use a private type to encapsulate our queue record.
package Bounded Queue V2 i s
Ve r s i on 2 , d e t a i l s of t he queue t ype ar e e nc a ps ul a t e d
subtype El ement Type i s I n t e g e r ;
type Queue Type ( Max Si ze : Po s i t i v e ) i s l i mi t ed pr i vat e ;
Over f l ow i s r a i s e d on at t empt t o Enqueue an el ement
onto a f u l l queue . Queue i s unchanged .
Under f l ow i s r a i s e d on at t empt t o dequeue an el ement
f rom an empty Queue . Queue r emai ns empty .
pr i vat e
record
end record ;
end Bounded Queue V2 ;
This package declaration is divided into two portions by the word private
found a little more than three quarters of the way down. Everything de-
ned above this word is public and may be accessed by any unit that withs
this package. Denitions below private are accessible only by the pack-
age body. The public denition of type Queue Type is not a record. It is a
limited private type. The operations available for limited private types are
limited to those dened in the package. An application may use the type
Queue Type and a value for Max Size to declare queue variables. But that
application is limited to the ve queue operations dened in the package.
Program Bounded Queue Example did not directly access the queue record
components. So it will work ne with the second version of our queue.
For each private type dened in the public portion of our package dec-
laration we must have a complete denition in the private portion.
8
In our
queue package, the complete denition is the record we used in our rst
version. As the package body has full access to the details dened in the
private portion, we need not make any changes to our original package body
to receive the benets of encapsulation.
2.5.3 Generic packages
The abstract queue data types we developed in the previous sections were
restricted to queues whose components were integers. By dening Element
Type as a synonym for Integer, we made it relatively easy to create new
queue packages whose components are other types. However, Ada provides
a mechanism that can make this substitution for us the generic package.
Earlier, we used generic packages to do input and output with programmer-
dened types. In each use we instantiated a package from the generic package
and supplied the type. We can write our own generic packages and generic
subprograms. Here is a generic queue package declaration.
8
The full information in the private part allows us to compile program units that use the
package before its body is even written. Of course, we must complete the package body before
we can link our program.
gener i c
type El ement Type i s pr i vat e ;
package Bounded Queue i s
Fi n a l v e r s i on , e nc a ps ul a t e d g e n e r i c queue
type Queue Type ( Max Si ze : Po s i t i v e ) i s l i mi t ed pr i vat e ;
Over f l ow i s r a i s e d on at t empt t o Enqueue an el ement onto
a f u l l queue . Queue i s unchanged .
Under f l ow i s r a i s e d on at t empt t o dequeue an el ement f rom
an empty Queue . Queue r emai ns empty .
pr i vat e
record
end record ;
end Bounded Queue ;
A generic package declaration begins with the reserved word generic,
followed by zero or more generic formal parameters, followed by a normal
package declaration. We have removed the subtype Element Type from the
previous version and added it as a generic formal parameter.
The reserved word private is used for two dierent purposes in this pack-
age. It is used in the denition of the generic formal parameter Element
Type to specify that the actual formal parameter may be any type that
is not limited. Since the application may use nearly any type, the writer
of the package body is restricted to operations that are available for all
non-limited types: assignment and equality testing. Since our original queue
package body used only assignment with its queue components, no changes
are necessary. The second use of private in our generic package declaration is
in the denition of Queue Type. As before, this type restricts the operations
that can be used in an application to those dened in the package. In both
situations, private restricts access to details. In a generic formal parameter
denition, it restricts the writer of the package body. In a type denition, it
restricts the application using the type. When we instantiate a queue pack-
age from this generic package, we supply an actual parameter that is the
type of the desired queue component. Here is our earlier queue application
with the addition of the instantiation.
wi th Bounded Queue ;
procedure Bounded Queue Exampl e i s
package I nt Queue i s new Bounded Queue
( El ement Type => I n t e g e r ) ;
use I nt Queue ;
My Queue : I nt Queue . Queue Type ( Max Si ze => 100) ;
begi n
Enqueue ( Queue => My Queue , I tem => Count ) ;
end l oop ;
Cl e a r ( My Queue ) ;
excepti on
when Under f l ow | Over f l ow =>
Put Li ne ( An e x c e pt i on was r a i s e d ) ;
end Bounded Queue Exampl e ;
Adas generic facilities are a powerful tool for creating safe reusable code.
We have covered a very small part of these facilities. You can nd additional
details in section 12 of the ARM and in the references mentioned at the
beginning of this chapter.
2.5.4 Child packages
We end our discussion of packages with a brief discussion of child packages.
Child packages provide a hierarchical structure to organize modules. With-
out explaining the concept of child packages, we have been making use of
them since the beginning of this chapter. All standard packages are organized
under three parent packages: Ada, Interfaces, and System. The package
named Ada serves as the parent of most other standard library packages.
Resources for combining Ada code with code written in other programming
languages are found in the package Interfaces and its children. Finally,
package System and its children provide the denitions of characteristics of
the particular environment in which the program runs.
We use dot notation to identity a particular package in the hierarchy.
For example, the standard package Elementary Functions is a child of
package Numerics which is a child of package Ada. We use the syntax
Ada.Numerics.Elementary Functions to name this package.
The most common use of child packages in applications is in the creation
of class hierarchies associated with object-oriented programming. A class
may be dened in Ada by a package that contains a tagged type and a set
of operations. Subclasses, which inherit the methods and member data of
their parent class, are usually dened in child packages. Well take a brief
look at this topic next.
2.6 Object-oriented programming
Object-oriented (OO) is a software development paradigm based on objects
and their interactions. A full explanation of object-oriented programming in
Ada is beyond the scope of this book. In this section we will cover those OO
features used in later chapters. Among the fundamental concepts of OO are:
Object an entity that has state, behavior, and identity. An object is an
instance of a class.
Class represents a set of objects that share common characteristics (at-
tributes) and behaviors (methods). In Ada, a class is implemented
as a tagged record type (containing the attributes) and a set of sub-
programs encapsulated within a package.
Attribute a named property of a class that describes a value held by each
object of the class.
Method an operation on an object. In Ada, methods are procedures and
functions associated with classes.
Association a physical or conceptual connection between classes. The state-
ment students enroll in courses denes the association enroll be-
tween the classes student and course.
Generalization a special association between one class, called the super-
class, and one or more subclasses derived from the superclass. The
superclass holds common attributes and methods. Each subclass in-
herits the attributes and methods of its superclass. The subclasses
usually have additional attributes and/or methods that make them
more specialized than the superclass. Generalization is often called
the is a association since each instance of a subclass is also an
instance of the superclass.
There are three majors uses of generalization. First, it provides a
method to structure a description of objects. The taxonomy devel-
oped by biologists is a prime example of this use. Second, generaliza-
tion provides the support for polymorphism (see below) our major
use of generalization in this book. The third, and least important,
use of generalization is to provide a means for reusing code.
Polymorphism is the property that an operation may behave dierently
on dierent classes. You can call an operation dened for the su-
perclass and have that call redirected to the code for the correct
subclass.
Abstract class a class that can have no direct instances. We inherit from
them to produce concrete classes from which we can create instances.
Abstract classes are used to represent abstract concepts that by
themselves are incomplete. The incomplete features of the abstract
class may be shared by a group of subclasses which add dierent
variations of the missing pieces.
Lets look at an example. The three most common commercial oven types
used in restaurants are convection, conveyor, and microwave. A convection
oven is a conventional oven that incorporates a fan to circulate the air around
the food being cooked. The operator can adjust the temperature in a range
from about 200 to 550 degrees Fahrenheit. You may have seen conveyor ovens
in your favorite sandwich or pizza place. The food is placed on a conveyor
belt which moves it through the oven. The operator of a conveyor oven can
adjust both the temperature and the amount of time that the food remains
in the oven. We do not set a microwave ovens temperature. However, we
can set the power of the microwave generator.
Figure 2.5 is a UML class diagram for these three commercial ovens. We
have used an abstract class, Oven, to hold the two attributes (On and Fuel)
and four operations (Create, Turn On, Turn Off, and Fueled By) common
to all three of our oven types. The three concrete subclasses Convection,
Conveyor, and Microwave extend the abstract superclass.
We encapsulate the resources (types and operations) of each of the classes
in Figure 2.5 in a package. Each subclass is encapsulated in a child package
Oven
On : Boolean
Fuel : Fuel_Type
Create (in Fuel : Fuel_Type) : Oven
Turn_On ( )
Turn_Off ( )
Fueled_By ( ) : Fuel_Type
Set_Temperature (in To : Degrees)
Convection Conveyor
Set_Point : Degrees
Set_Point : Degrees
Speed : Minutes
Set_Temperature (in To : Degrees)
Set_Speed (in To : Minutes)
Set_Power (in To : Power_Level)
Microwave
Power : Power_Level
Figure 2.5 Class diagram for commercial ovens
of the package used to encapsulate its superclass. The abstract class Oven
is the root of our hierarchy. Here is the specication of the package that
implements it.
package Ovens i s
type Oven Type i s abst r act tagged pr i vat e ;
type Oven Ptr i s access Oven Type Cl a s s ;
type Fuel Type i s ( El e c t r i c , Nat ur al Gas , Propane ) ;
f uncti on Cr eat e ( Fuel : i n Fuel Type ) r etur n Oven Type
i s abst r act ;
procedure Turn On ( Oven : i n out Oven Type ) i s abst r act ;
procedure Tur n Of f ( Oven : i n out Oven Type ) i s abst r act ;
f uncti on Fuel ed By ( Oven : i n Oven Type ) r etur n Fuel Type ;
pr i vat e
type Oven Type i s abst r act tagged
record
On : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
Fuel : Fuel Type ;
end record ;
end Ovens ;
Type Oven Type denes our abstract class. It should come as no surprise
that the reserved word abstract species that this type may not be used
in the declaration of objects (variables and constants). The reserved word
tagged indicates that this type may be extended. In most object-oriented
languages, classes may be extended unless the programmer includes some-
thing to specically prohibit inheritance. Ada takes a dierent approach.
The default is no inheritance. We must include tagged in a type denition
in order to allow inheritance. The reserved word private in our type deni-
tion is used to encapsulate the data as described in Section 2.5.2.
Following the declaration of our class type is a declaration of a pointer
type. The denition of type Oven Ptr uses the attribute Class. The target
type, Oven TypeClass, in this context allows the pointers to designate any
object in the class hierarchy rooted at Oven Type. A variable of type Oven
Ptr can at dierent times designate a convection oven, a conveyor oven, and
a microwave oven.
The type Fuel Type is dened next. We use this type to dene an attribute
for the oven class that indicates the type of fuel used by a particular oven.
The next group of declarations dene the four methods available for our
oven class. The rst three operations are labeled as abstract. The imple-
mentation of abstract subprograms is done in each of the three subclasses
that inherit from the oven class. The Fueled By method is not abstract. We
must implement this function in Ovens package body. Well show you this
package body shortly.
Finally, the private section of our oven class specication contains the
data (attributes) that we determined was common for all of our concrete
subclasses. A record with the descriptors abstract and tagged holds the pri-
vate data.
Here is the complete body for our abstract class oven. The only code we
need to write for the oven class is our one concrete operation.
package body Ovens i s
f uncti on Fuel ed By ( Oven : i n Oven Type ) r etur n Fuel Type i s
begi n
r etur n Oven . Fuel ;
end Fuel ed By ;
end Ovens ;
Lets look next at the specication of one of our oven subclasses. Here is
the specication of the child package that denes the conveyor oven subclass.
package Ovens . Conveyor i s
type Degr ees i s range 200 . . 500;
type Mi nut es i s range 1 . . 10;
type Conveyor Oven i s new Oven Type wi th pr i vat e ;
over r i di ng f uncti on Cr eat e ( Fuel : i n Fuel Type )
r etur n Conveyor Oven ;
over r i di ng procedure Turn On ( Oven : i n out Conveyor Oven ) ;
over r i di ng procedure Tur n Of f ( Oven : i n out Conveyor Oven ) ;
procedure Set Temper at ur e ( Oven : i n out Conveyor Oven ;
To : i n Degr ees ) ;
procedure Set Speed ( Oven : i n out Conveyor Oven ;
To : i n Mi nut es ) ;
pr i vat e
type Conveyor Oven i s new Oven Type wi th
record
Se t Poi nt : Degr ees ;
Speed : Mi nut es ;
end record ;
end Ovens . Conveyor ;
After dening the types Degrees and Minutes for conveyor oven at-
tributes, we dene the conveyor oven class type Conveyor Oven as an ex-
tension of the superclass Oven Type. Conveyor Oven inherits all of the
attributes and operations of its superclass. The with private clause indi-
cates that this class has additional attributes that are dened in the private
section.
The next three declarations dene conveyor oven class operations that
override (replace) the operations dened in its superclass. We then dene
two additional operations for conveyor ovens: Set Temperature and Set
Speed.
Finally, the private section of this package specication denes the at-
tributes for a conveyor oven. We inherit the two attributes On and Fuel
from the superclass and add the attributes Set Point and Speed.
The body of child package Conveyor contains the subprogram bodies that
implement the three overridden operations and the two new operations. You
can see these bodies on our web site. The other two subclasses, Convection
Oven and Microwave Oven are implemented as child packages similar to that
for Conveyor Oven. These packages are also available on our web site.
Now that we can implement classes with inheritance, lets look at how
we use them. All of the following code fragments may be found in the pro-
gram Ovens Demo on our web site. Lets start with some simple variable
declarations for three dierent ovens.
Mai n Oven : Convect i on Oven := Cr eat e ( E l e c t r i c ) ;
Pi zza Oven : Conveyor Oven := Cr eat e ( Nat ur al Gas ) ;
Qui ck Oven : Mi crowave Oven := Cr eat e ( E l e c t r i c ) ;
In each declaration, we called the function Create to construct the object.
With tagged types we can use either of two dierent syntaxes to invoke an
objects operation. We may use the standard subprogram call syntax. Here,
for example, is a standard call to the function Fueled By which returns the
type of fuel that heats our main oven.
Funct i on c a l l s ynt ax
The Fuel := Fuel ed By ( Mai n Oven ) ;
The second syntax for invoking an objects method is called the distin-
guished receiver syntax. This syntax is commonly referred to as object dot
method syntax. To use this approach, the rst parameter of the functions
and procedures dened for a class must be an instance of the class. Here is
the same function call with object dot method syntax.
Di s t i n g u i s h e d r e c e i v e r ( o bj e c t dot method ) s ynt ax
The Fuel := Mai n Oven . Fuel ed By ;
Using references (pointers) to objects rather than simple object variables
provides the exibility required for many object-oriented programming pat-
terns. Here is a simple example to illustrate the creation and use of a dy-
namically created oven object.
Por t abl e Oven : Oven Ptr ; A p o i n t e r t o any oven t ype
Cr eat e a new oven
Por t abl e Oven := new Mi crowave Oven ( Cr eat e ( E l e c t r i c ) ) ;
Funct i on c a l l s ynt ax
The Fuel := Fuel ed By ( Oven => Por t abl e Oven . a l l ) ;
Obj ect dot method s ynt ax
The Fuel := Por t abl e Oven . a l l . Fuel ed By ;
We used the option of giving an initial value to the newly created oven ob-
ject. You may wish to review the simpler examples of the allocation operator
new in Section 2.3.7.
Finally, lets look at an example that demonstrates how we can use poly-
morphism to solve a simple problem. We have a collection of ovens that
we would like to turn on when our cooks arrive for work. Such a collection
could be stored in an array or linked list. Here are the declarations for an
array-based list of ve ovens.
type Oven Ar r ay i s ar r ay (1 . . 5) of Oven Ptr ;
Ove n Li s t : Oven Ar r ay ;
As our list is heterogeneous, the array elements are pointers to ovens
rather than the ovens themselves. Here is the code to create the ve ovens,
turn them all on, and then turn them all o.
Ove n Li s t ( 1) := new Convect i on Oven ( Cr eat e ( Nat ur al Gas ) ) ;
Ove n Li s t ( 2) := new Convect i on Oven ( Cr eat e ( E l e c t r i c ) ) ;
Ove n Li s t ( 3) := new Mi crowave Oven ( Cr eat e ( E l e c t r i c ) ) ;
Ove n Li s t ( 4) := new Conveyor Oven ( Cr eat e ( E l e c t r i c ) ) ;
Ove n Li s t ( 5) := new Conveyor Oven ( Cr eat e ( Propane ) ) ;
f or I ndex i n Oven Li s t Range l oop
Pr ocedur e c a l l s ynt ax
Ovens . Turn On ( Oven => Ove n Li s t ( I nde x ) . a l l ) ;
end l oop ;
f or I ndex i n r ever s e Oven Li s t Range l oop
Obj ect dot method s ynt ax
Ove n Li s t ( I nde x ) . a l l . Tur n Of f ;
end l oop ;
The loop in which we turn on all of the ovens uses standard procedure
call syntax. Notice that the Turn On procedure called is the one dened in
our abstract class Ovens. When the call is made, we have no idea of what
kind of oven our pointer is designating. The call to the abstract procedure is
dispatched at run time to the appropriate method for the referenced oven.
While the polymorphism is not explicit in the object dot method syntax used
to turn all ve ovens o, the same dynamic dispatching to the appropriate
oven method is done.
While we will not be using any sophisticated object-oriented patterns in
the remainder of this book, we will make use of type extension (inheritance)
and polymorphism in later chapters. See the references at the beginning
of this chapter for more information on Adas rich set of object-oriented
features.
2.7 Low-level programming
A key characteristic of embedded software is the use of specialized input
and output (I/O) devices. Our computers are electrical devices. Yet the en-
vironments with which embedded systems interact are usually not electrical.
There are other important forms of energy and forces that our systems must
sense and control. A transducer is a device that converts one form of energy
into another form. A photovoltaic cell converts light energy into electrical en-
ergy and a piezoelectric buzzer converts electrical energy into sound energy.
Embedded systems obtain their input through sensors transducers that
transform some physical stimulus (light, temperature, pressure, magnetism,
acceleration, etc.) into an electrical signal. The output of an embedded sys-
tem is often generated by an actuator transducers that transform an
electrical signal into some other form (light, sound, motion, heat, etc.).
Electrical signals can be classied as either analog or digital. Most sensors
provide an analog electrical signal. A thermocouple produces a voltage that
is proportional to its temperature. An analog signal, like most everything
in nature, is continuous; there are no jumps or singularities over time. The
temperature of a batch of mango chutney goes through an innite number
of temperatures as we heat it from room temperature to boiling. A digital
signal is quantized; it has a nite number of possible states. The light given
o by a lamp with a three-way bulb has only four possible values. You might
think of an analog value as a real number and a digital value as an integer.
The former can take on any value while the latter is restricted to whole
numbers. As our computers work with digital data, we must convert the
analog input signals to digital values and the digital output signals to analog
values. Digital signal processing is an important engineering discipline that
is beyond the scope of this book. Our task is to describe how to implement
the algorithms developed by control engineers.
The code that interacts directly with an I/O device is called a device
driver. A device driver provides an abstraction between the gate or reg-
ister level logic of the device hardware and the application that uses that
device. The temperature control algorithm for our pressure cooker exam-
ple in Chapter 1 included the step Input the temperature value from the
ADC . . . . The loop example on page 28 implements this algorithm. It calls
a read procedure in package ADC to obtain the temperature. Package ADC
is a device driver; it has code to access the registers of the analog to digi-
tal converter and return a number that our temperature control application
can use. In the next sections well look at some features Ada provides for
accessing device registers and writing device drivers.
2.7.1 Representations
The driving force of the evolution from machine instructions to assembly
languages to high-level languages is a desire to abstract away the details of
the machine on which our program executes. Today we concentrate on mod-
eling the problem domain rather than manipulating computer hardware.
When we dene a data type, the compiler decides how values of that type
will be represented as sequences of bits that we can manipulate. While such
abstraction is extremely useful for the majority of projects, writing device
drivers requires some knowledge of how data is represented. You have prob-
ably studied the representations of some of the more common types. Today,
most signed integer values are represented with twos complement. Ones
complement and sign and magnitude are less commonly used representa-
tions for signed integers. The IEEE 754 standard for oating point numbers
denes ve basic representations. You are probably familiar with the two
commonly called single and double precision.
Adas enumeration values are stored by their position in the list of enu-
meration literals that denes the type. Given the type denition
type Pi x e l Co l o r i s ( Red , Green , Bl ue , Cyan ,
Magenta , Yel l ow , Bl ack , Whi te ) ;
Red is represented as 000
2
, Green as 001
2
, Blue as 010
2
, Cyan as 011
2
,
Magenta as 100
2
, Yellow as 101
2
, Black as 110
2
and White as 111
2
.
9
We can override this default representation scheme and specify our own bit
pattern for each value. Lets look at an example where dening a dierent
representation scheme makes sense. Suppose we are writing the software
embedded within a digital alarm clock. The user may set up to ve dierent
alarms. Each alarm may be assigned to a particular day of the week, all ve
weekdays, both weekend days, or all seven days of the week. When setting
an alarm, the clock displays the days of the week for which that alarm is
active. The day display is controlled by an 8-bit register. Setting a bit to one
turns on the appropriate day light and setting it to zero turns it o. Setting
multiple bits turns on multiple lights.
Figure 2.6 shows the association between register bits and lights. The most
signicant bit of the display register is not connected to anything. To turn on
the weekend lights, we need to set bits 0 and 6. To turn on all ve weekday
lights, we need to set bits 1 through 5. Your rst thought might be to model
this register as an integer with a range from 1 to 127. However, this rep-
resentation allows for illegal displays. For example, storing 5 in the display
register illuminates both Sunday and Tuesday, an illegal combination.
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
Display Register
Sun
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Sat
Figure 2.6 Association between register bits and enunciation lights
There are ten legal combinations of lights. By enumerating these possibili-
ties, we limit the possible values that can be assigned to the display register.
9
The subscript 2 indicates base-2 (binary) numbers.
Here is the specication of a package to handle the clock display. We have
included only the portions necessary for our day enunciation.
package Cl oc k Di s pl a y i s
type Day Type i s ( Sun , Mon, Tue , Wed, Thu , Fr i ,
Weekdays , Sat , Weekend , Ever yday ) ;
procedure Di s pl ay Days ( Days : i n Day Type ) ;
A r e a l c l oc k d i s p l a y package woul d i n c l u d e
a d d i t i o n a l d i s p l a y pr oc e dur e s
pr i vat e
f or Day Type use ( Sun => 2#00000001#,
Mon => 2#00000010#,
Tue => 2#00000100#,
Wed => 2#00001000#,
Thu => 2#00010000#,
Fr i => 2#00100000#,
Weekdays => 2#00111110#,
Sat => 2#01000000#,
Weekend => 2#01000001#,
Ever yday => 2#01111111#);
f or Day Type Si z e use 8;
end Cl oc k Di s pl a y ;
The enumeration type Day Type denes our ten possible display values.
The order of the literals in this enumeration type denition may not seem
logical. Well explain that shortly. Procedure Display Days takes one of
these ten values and illuminates the appropriate light(s).
The private portion of this package contains an enumeration represen-
tation clause. Enumeration representation clauses allow us to specify the
binary representation of each value in the domain of an enumeration type.
In our example, we assign the numeric value that represents each of the ten
enumeration values. We have written these numbers as base-2 literals rather
than normal decimal literals. Using base 2 provides a clearer association be-
tween the value and the register bits. We may use any base from 2 to 16 for
a numeric literal. The following three lines are equivalent.
Weekdays => 2#00111110#, bas e 2
Weekdays => 62 , bas e 10
Weekdays => 16#3E#, bas e 16
The order of the literals dening the enumeration type are constrained;
their numeric values must be in ascending order. This constraint explains
why we did not list Sat immediately after Fri in the denition of our
enumeration type. Saturdays value, 1000000
2
, is greater than the value
0111110
2
required for all weekdays. So Sat must follow Weekdays in the
denition of Day Type.
The values we assign to the dierent enumeration literals have no eect
on the normal operations available with enumeration types. The relational
operators are still based on the order of the literals in the type denition.
The attributes First, Last, Image, Succ, and Pred also function as
dened earlier in this chapter.
While we did not discuss them earlier, the attributes Pos and Val also
operate the same whether or not we use enumeration representation clauses.
These attributes provide a mapping between enumeration values and posi-
tion numbers. Both require arguments.
Pos Returns the position number of the given value
Val Returns the value at the given position number
In our example, Day TypePos(Tue) returns 2 and Day
TypePos(Everyday) returns 9. Day TypeVal(3) returns Wed and Day
TypeVal(0) returns Sun.
In addition to specifying the values that represent each of our enumeration
literals, we can specify the amount of storage the compiler will allocate
for objects of a type. The nal line in the private portion of the package
is an attribute denition clause. Attribute denition clauses allow us
to control certain implementation-dependent characteristics (attributes) of
objects and types. The Size clause species that objects of type Day Type
should occupy no less than 8 bits, the size of our register. If the size specied
is inadequate for the values, the compiler will reject the program. We need
at least 7 bits to support our largest value, 1111111
2
.
Memory mapped I/O
Now lets look at the body of package Clock Display. Here we need to de-
clare the actual register object. Normally we allow the compiler to determine
where in memory an object is stored. I/O device registers are located at spe-
cic locations. Our program must specify those locations to the compiler.
Accomplishing this task requires a knowledge of our embedded systems or-
ganization. There are two general ways to organize input and output devices.
With memory mapped I/O, the device registers are treated exactly the
same as other memory locations the same address bus is used for both de-
vice registers and memory. The PowerPC and ARM processors are examples
of processors that use memory mapped I/O.
CPU
I/O Device I/O Device I/O Device Memory
Address Bus
Data Bus
Figure 2.7 Memory mapped input/output
Figure 2.7 illustrates a memory mapped organization. We can access the
device registers just as we would for any variable. We just need to tell the
compiler the actual addresses of the registers. Here is the body for package
Clock Display as it could be written for a memory mapped I/O system.
wi th System . St or age El e me nt s ; use System . St or age El e me nt s ;
package body Cl oc k Di s pl a y i s
I mpl ement at i on f o r a memory mapped I /O syst em
Day Re gi s t e r : Day Type ;
f or Day Regi s t er Addr es s use To Addr ess (16#600080FA#);
f or Day Regi s t er Si z e use 8;
pragma Vo l a t i l e ( Day Re gi s t e r ) ;
procedure Di s pl ay Days ( Days : i n Day Type ) i s
begi n
Day Re gi s t e r := Days ;
end Di s pl ay Days ;
end Cl oc k Di s pl a y ;
This package body encapsulates the variable Day Register. On this par-
ticular system, the day register is located at address 600080FA
16
. Type
Address is a private type dened in package System. We use the To Address
function found in the child package Storage Elements to convert an integer
into an address. We use the attribute denition clause, Address, to specify
the actual address of the variable used for the day register. You can nd
the details on addresses and the conversion we used in sections 13.7 and
13.7.1 of the ARM. We have also used the attribute denition clause Size
to specify the exact amount of storage used for our register. Used with a
type, this attribute species the minimum storage. Used with an object, it
species the exact amount of storage. In either use, the compiler will give
an error if the size constraint cannot be met. See section 13.3 of the ARM
for the details on the Size attribute.
There is one more detail necessary to ensure that writing a value to
variable Day Register actually changes the bits of our clock register. The
pragma Volatile prevents the compiler from using temporary copies of the
variable for which it is applied. Why would there be a temporary copy of
a variable? In order to optimize the speed of the program, optimizing com-
pilers often keep temporary copies of variables in registers. It is generally
much faster to access the register than a memory location. It is even possible
that since we never read the value of variable Day Register, the compiler
sees it as an unused variable and optimizes it away completely. Pragma
Volatile ensures that the compiler does not optimize this variable all
values written to it go directly to memory.
Now that we have set the characteristics of global package variable Day
Register, the body of procedure Display is very simple. We just assign the
desired value to Day Register to illuminate the desired lights on the clock
face.
Port mapped I/O
The second approach for organizing input and output uses two dierent ad-
dress buses. One is used for accessing memory and the other for accessing
input/output devices. This method is called port I/O or port mapped
I/O. The x86 architecture introduced by Intel uses port mapped I/O. Fig-
ure 2.8 illustrates the organization of a port mapped I/O system. We must
use special machine instructions to access the registers of a port mapped
I/O device. For example, the x86 instruction set includes the instruction IN
for transferring data from a device register to a processor register and OUT
for transferring data the opposite direction. We cant use the approach of
declaring a variable and using an assignment statement to set it as we did
with memory mapped I/O. To use the IN and OUT instructions, we need
to write some assembly language code. We will show how to do that in
Section 2.7.4.
2.7.2 A device driver for an analog to digital converter
Our day display register can be represented as a simple discrete value. Most
input/output devices have more complex registers. Frequently, a register is
divided into a number of dierent elds, each of which uses a few bits of the
register. Lets look at an example. The analog to digital converter (ADC)
that we introduced in the pressure cooker example in Chapter 1 is a common
input device for embedded systems. The ADC converts an analog voltage
into a digital number. Here is a package specication for a ctitious ADC.
CPU
I/O Device I/O Device I/O Device Memory
Address Bus
Data Bus Data Bus
Device Address Bus
Figure 2.8 Port mapped input/output
wi th Common Units ;
package ADC i s
S p e c i f i c a t i o n of a make b e l i e v e anal og t o d i g i t a l c o n v e r t e r
type Channel Number i s range 0 . . 31;
subtype I n p u t Vo l t s i s Common Units . Vol t s range 0. 0 . . 5 . 0 ;
type Gai n Choi ce i s ( One , Two, Four ) ;
Over Range : excepti on ;
procedure Read ( Channel : i n Channel Number ;
Gai n : i n Gai n Choi ce ;
Val ue : out I n p u t Vo l t s ) ;
Ret ur ns t he v o l t a g e on t he gi v e n channel
Po t e n t i a l l y bl o c k i ng ( e x e c ut e s a de l a y s t at ement )
Ra i s e s Over Range i f t he a mp l i f i e d v o l t a g e e xc e e ds 5 v o l t s
pr i vat e
f or Channel Number Si z e use 5;
f or Gai n Choi ce use ( One => 2#001#, Two => 2#010#,
Four => 2#100#);
f or Gai n Choi ce Si z e use 3;
end ADC;
The Read procedure returns the value of the voltage on one of 32 possible
analog inputs (channels). Our ADC also has the ability to amplify the input
voltage. The amplier gain may be set to one (no amplication), two, or
four. Our ADC can handle a voltage range, after amplication, of 0.0 to 5.0
volts. The procedure raises the exception Over Range when the amplied
voltage exceeds 5.0 volts. Well discuss the representation clauses in the
private portion of our package specication once we have gone through the
hardware details.
Our ctitious ADC has two 16-bit registers: a control and status register
and a data register. The control and status register allows us to set up
a voltage conversion and monitor the status of that conversion. The data
register holds the result of the conversion.
Figure 2.9 illustrates the three components that make up our ADC. The
analog multiplexer (MUX) allows us to choose one of our 32 dierent chan-
nels. Five bits in the control and status register determine which channel
is used. The amplier (Amp) may be used to boost the input voltage by
one of three gain factors. Three bits in the control and status register deter-
mine the amount of amplication. The output of the amplier goes into the
converter which does the actual conversion. An analog voltage between 0.0
and 5.0 volts is converted into an integer that ranges from 0 to 4095. This
conversion takes some time. As is common in many ADCs, our ctitious
converter requires more time to convert higher voltages. In the worst case
(5 volts) our converter takes 10 milliseconds. There are four bits that control
the converter component.
Control and Status Register
MUX
Channel Select Bits
3
2

I
n
p
u
t

V
o
l
t
a
g
e
s

.

.

.

Amp
Converter
.

.

.

1
2

D
a
t
a

B
i
t
s

Gain Select Bits A to D Control Bits
D
a
t
a

R
e
g
i
s
t
e
r

0
0
0
0

Figure 2.9 Example digital to analog converter
The double-ended arrows connected to the control and status register in
Figure 2.9 indicate read/write bits. We can write a value to a read/write bit
and then, later, read it back to see what we originally wrote. Single-ended
arrows into a register indicate read-only bits. Writing to a read-only bit is
not illegal, but has no eect on the bit. Single-ended arrows out of a register
indicate write-only bits. The result of reading such a bit is undened. If you
need to know what values you wrote to write-only bits, you should keep a
copy of the register in a regular variable. This copy is commonly called a
shadow register.
Bit Name Meaning
0 Start Set to 1 to start a conversion
(Write only)
1 Done 0 = conversion not nished (device is busy)
1 = conversion nished
(Read only)
2 Interrupt Set to 0 to disable interrupt when conversion is complete
Enable Set to 1 to enable interrupt when conversion is complete
(Read/Write)
3 Overow 0 = voltage is in range
1 = voltage range exceeded
(Read only)
810 Gain 001 = gain of 1
010 = gain of 2
100 = gain of 4
(Read/Write)
1115 Channel Channels are numbered 0 to 31
(Read/Write)
Table 2.2 The layout of the control status register
Table 2.2, taken from the hardware manual for the ADC, species how the
16-bit control and status register is structured. Bit 0 is the least signicant
bit in this register. Bits 4 through 7 are not used.
Now you can see the origins of the size clauses in the private portion of
the ADC package specication. The sizes come directly from the number
of bits allocated to the corresponding eld in the register. We elected to
use an enumeration type for the gain rather than an integer type to better
match the three distinct gains available in our hardware. An integer type
with a range from 1 to 4 would include the illegal value 3. The enumeration
representations come from the gain control bits dened by the hardware of
our ADC.
Record representation clauses
How do we read or write individual bits in our control and status register?
You may recall using the logical and, or, and xor operators with bit masks
in your assembly language, C, C++, or Java programs to clear, set, and tog-
gle individual bits. As we mentioned earlier in this chapter, these operators
are also available for Adas unsigned (modular) integer types. Programming
with bit masks is tedious and error-prone. Ada provides a higher-level ab-
straction for bit manipulation the record with a representational clause.
A record is a collection of heterogeneous components. We access the indi-
vidual components by name. A record representational clause allows us
to associate component names with bit positions. Here are the declarations
for a record type that matches the hardware denitions of our control and
status register.
type CSR Rec i s Type f o r t he c o n t r o l and s t a t u s r e g i s t e r
record
St a r t : Bool ean ;
Done : Bool ean ;
I nt Ena bl e : Bool ean ;
Over f l ow : Bool ean ;
Gai n : Gai n Choi ce ;
Channel : Channel Number ;
end record ;
f or CSR Rec use F i r s t of two e q u i v a l e n t v e r s i o n s
record
St a r t at 0 range 0 . . 0;
Done at 0 range 1 . . 1;
I nt Ena bl e at 0 range 2 . . 2;
Over f l ow at 0 range 3 . . 3;
Gai n at 0 range 8 . . 10;
Channel at 0 range 11 . . 15;
end record ;
f or CSR Rec Si z e use 16;
f or CSR Rec Bi t Or de r use System . Low Or de r Fi r s t ;
We used type Boolean for the single-bit elds in the register. Boolean
is an enumeration type dened in package Standard with values False and
True (section A.1 of the ARM). The default representations of these two
enumeration values are their positions, 0 and 1.
Following the denition of our record is a record representation clause.
This clause allows us to map the records component names to individual
bits. The ranges in this clause come directly from the register description
given for the hardware.
The at 0 portion of the record representation clause needs further expla-
nation. But rst, we need to dene some terms. Most machine instructions
work on small values called machine scalars. Bytes, words, and long words
are all examples of machine scalars. The storage unit of a particular system
is the smallest addressable unit of memory. The constant System.Storage
Unit (section 13.7 of the ARM) is the number of bits in the storage unit
on our system. On typical architectures, the storage unit is the 8-bit byte.
Larger machine scalars are composed of several storage units. For example,
the word on a PowerPC is made up of 4 bytes.
The at part of the record representation allows us to specify the location
of a record components bits in two dierent ways. We can simply use at
0 and give the osets from the beginning of the record of the rst and last
bit of the component. That is the approach we took in the representation
clause for CSR Rec. We specied that the Gain eld occupy bits 8 through
10 of the record. Alternatively, we can specify the location of a bit using
a combination of storage unit oset and bit oset. With this approach, we
specify that the Gain eld occupy bits 0 through 2 of the second storage unit
of our 16-bit register. We use the at part to specify the storage unit oset.
The rst storage unit is oset 0 and the second is oset 1. The following
record representation clause uses this second approach to describe the bit
layout of our control and status register.
Thi s r e c or d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i s
e q u i v a l e n t t o our f i r s t v e r s i o n
f or CSR Rec use
record
Gai n at 1 range 0 . . 2; Bi t s 8 t o 15 i n
Channel at 1 range 3 . . 7; t he 16 b i t r e g i s t e r
end record ;
This record representation is equivalent to our rst version. We recom-
mend that you use the approach that more closely matches the description
in your devices hardware specication.
Following the rst version of our record representation clause is an at-
tribute denition clause specifying that the record objects should use no
less than 16 bits. Should this value conict with our record representation
clause, the program will not compile. A second attribute denition clause
species the order of bit numbers in the record. In our example, we specied
that the low order bit come rst, a bit numbering scheme sometimes called
little-endian. This endian choice matches the hardware specication that bit
0 is the least signicant bit in the register.
Now that we have a record type that matches our hardware denitions, we
can use record component selection to access the desired bits in our register.
For example, suppose we have the following declaration of a register variable.
Co n t r o l S t a t u s Re g i s t e r : CSR Rec ;
The following statements change the bit elds for gain and channel number
and examine the overow bit.
Co n t r o l S t a t u s Re g i s t e r . Gai n := Two;
Co n t r o l S t a t u s Re g i s t e r . Channel := 28;
i f Co n t r o l S t a t u s Re g i s t e r . Over f l ow then
r ai s e Over Range ;
end i f ;
The declarations required for the read-only 16-bit data register are far
simpler. The bits in positions 0 to 11 contain the output of our converter.
Bits 12 to 15 are always zero. All we need is a 16-bit integer with a range
from 0 to 4095 as dened by the following declarations.
type Data Type i s range 0 . . 4095; Type f o r t he dat a r e g i s t e r
f or Data Type Si z e use 16;
We are nally ready to write the code for our Read procedure. The rst
step is to set the channel number and gain to the values given by the param-
eters. We can simultaneously start the conversion by setting the start bit
to True. Then we wait until the done bit is True. We use a loop to repeat-
edly check this bit, a technique known as polling. After exiting the polling
loop, we raise Over Range if the overow error bit is set. If the conversion
is successful, we obtain the integer value from the data register and convert
it into a xed point voltage. Here is the complete body of our ADC package
for a system using memory mapped I/O.
package body ADC i s
use Common Units ; For o pe r a t o r s on Vol t s
Addr e s s e s of t he ADC s two r e g i s t e r s ( memory mapped I /O)
CSR Address : constant System . Addr es s :=
To Addr ess (16#60008010#);
Dat a Addr es s : constant System . Addr es s :=
To Addr ess (16#60008012#);
Ten mi l l i s e c o n d s
Max Conver si on Ti me : constant Dur at i on := 10 1. 0E3;
type CSR Rec i s Type f o r t he c o n t r o l s t a t u s r e g i s t e r
record
Done : Bool ean ;
end record ;
f or CSR Rec use
record
end record ;
type Data Type i s range 0 . . 4095; f o r t he dat a r e g i s t e r
The two de v i c e r e g i s t e r s
f or Co n t r o l St a t u s Re g i s t e r Addr es s use CSR Address ;
f or Co n t r o l St a t u s Re g i s t e r Si z e use 16;
pragma Vo l a t i l e ( Co n t r o l S t a t u s Re g i s t e r ) ;
Da t a Re gi s t e r : Data Type ;
f or Dat a Re gi s t e r Addr es s use Dat a Addr es s ;
f or Dat a Re gi s t e r Si z e use 16;
pragma Vo l a t i l e ( Da t a Re gi s t e r ) ;

Val ue : out I n p u t Vo l t s ) i s
Shadow : CSR Rec ;
begi n
Set up f o r t he c onv e r s i on ( use a r e c or d aggr e gat e )
Shadow := ( St a r t => True , Done => Fal s e ,
I nt Ena bl e => Fal s e , Over f l ow => Fal s e ,
Gai n => Gai n , Channel => Channel ) ;
St a r t t he c onv e r s i on ( by s e t t i n g t he s t a r t b i t )
Co n t r o l S t a t u s Re g i s t e r := Shadow ;
Wai t u n t i l t he c onv e r s i on i s compl et e
l oop
del ay Max Conver si on Ti me / 10;
exi t when Co n t r o l S t a t u s Re g i s t e r . Done ;
end l oop ;
end i f ;
Conver t whol e number dat a t o a f i x e d poi nt v o l t a g e
Val ue := 5 Vol t s ( Da t a Re gi s t e r ) / 4095;
end Read ;
end ADC;
Our read procedure loop contains a delay statement. While this delay is
not necessary in a program with a single process, leaving it out in a concur-
rent program might result in the loop starving other processes. Picking the
amount of time to delay between each status check has tradeos. Making it
very small uses additional CPU time while making it larger may decrease
the response time of the read operation. We selected a delay value that is
one tenth the maximum conversion time. In Chapter 4 well examine another
approach to handling the unknown time between the start of a conversion
and its completion interrupts. As you might expect, the interrupt enable
bit plays an important role in this alternative to polling.
2.7.3 Unchecked conversions
Conversion is the changing of a value of one type to a value of a dierent
type. The example program given at the very beginning of this chapter
illustrated the use of explicit type conversion. The assignment statement
M := Fl oa t (A + B) / 2 . 0 ;
in that program uses an explicit type conversion to convert an integer sum
into a oating point number. This conversion requires some data manipula-
tion to transform a twos complement integer representation into an IEEE
754 oating point representation. Not all explicit type conversions require
changing bits. The explicit type conversions we made to combine apples and
oranges during our discussion of signed integer types
Fr u i t := Bi g Range ( Appl es ) + Bi g Range ( Oranges ) ;
involve converting one signed integer type to another signed integer type.
As both values are stored as twos complement integers, these conversions
require no modication of bits; the bits are simply interpreted as a dierent
type.
Explicit type conversions are available only between related types. While
we can convert any numeric type to any other numeric type, explicit type
conversion is not allowed between a numeric type and a character type. The
following conversion attempt will not compile.
Num := I n t e g e r ( a ) ; I l l e g a l e x p l i c i t c onv e r s i on
When writing software for embedded systems, there are times when we
want to interpret a bit pattern in dierent ways. We may, for example, want
to interpret a byte as a number in one part of our program and as a record in
another part. Unchecked conversions allow us to change our interpretation
of a group of bits at will. The Ada library includes a generic function called
Ada.Unchecked Conversion which may be used to copy bits from objects
of one type to objects of another type. Here is an example that illustrates
its use.
wi th Ada . Unchecked Conver s i on ;
procedure Unchecked Exampl e i s
type Bi t Ar r a y i s ar r ay (0 . . I nt e ge r Si z e 1) of Bool ean ;
f or Bi t Ar r ay Component Si ze use 1;
f or Bi t Ar r ay Si z e use I nt e ge r Si z e ;
f uncti on To Bi t s i s new Ada . Unchecked Conver s i on
( Sour ce => I nt e ge r ,
Tar get => Bi t Ar r a y ) ;
Num : I n t e g e r ;
Bi t s : Bi t Ar r a y ;
f or Bi t s Si z e use I nt e ge r Si z e ;
begi n
l oop
Put Li ne ( Ent er an i n t e g e r ) ;
Get (Num) ;
Per f or m an unchecked c onv e r s i on ( copy t he b i t s )
Bi t s := To Bi t s (Num) ;
Put Li ne ( The b i t s ar e ) ;
f or I ndex i n r ever s e Bi t s Range l oop
i f Bi t s ( I ndex ) then
Put ( 1 ) ;
el s e
Put ( 0 ) ;
end i f ;
end l oop ;
New Li ne ;
end l oop ;
end Unchecked Exampl e ;
Type Bit Array is an array of Booleans whose index range is determined
by the number of bits (Size) used by type Integer. While it takes only one
bit to represent a Boolean object, the compiler will typically use an entire
storage unit for that object. The expense of the extra storage is justied by
the faster time to access the object. So an array of 32 Boolean values will
typically use 32 bytes of memory rather than 32 bits of memory. We used
the Component Size clause to specify that only one bit be used for each
Boolean component. With this attribute denition clause, the compiler will
pack 32 Booleans into 4 bytes. We also included the Size clause to specify
that the array be stored in no less memory than an Integer. The exact
amount of storage for Bits is set with another Size clause.
The function To Bits is instantiated from the generic library function
Ada.Unchecked Conversion. The instantiation requires two generic param-
eters: the type for the source of the bits and the type of the target of the bit
copying. In the body of the program, we prompt for and get an integer from
the user. This integer is converted into an array of Booleans by the function
To Bits. Unchecked conversions do no manipulation of bits. They simply
copy the bits from the source, Num, to the target, Bits. The loop displays
the Boolean values in the array as 1s and 0s allowing us to view the bit
pattern used to represent the number.
As you are giving up the safety of Adas type system, use unchecked
conversions with caution. Be sure that the size of the source and target
types are the same.
10
We will see another example of unchecked conversion
in the next section.
2.7.4 Machine code insertion
While writing code at the machine or assembly level is error-prone, there are
situations for which it is necessary. Earlier we mentioned that port mapped
I/O required special instructions to access the device registers. These spe-
cial machine instructions have no counterparts in high-level languages such
as Ada. One way to use such instructions is to include them in assembly
language subroutines and call those subroutines from our Ada program. An
alternative approach is to insert machine instructions directly into our Ada
program. Other than stating that machine code insertion can be achieved
by a call to a subprogram of code statements, section 13.8 of the ARM
provides no details on how to accomplish the task. The Ada standard leaves
it up to the individual compiler vendors to determine the syntax of these
code statements. In this section well give an example of the use of machine
code insertion for two dierent compilers. First, we give the specication of
a package for doing input and output with Intel x86 ports.
wi th I n t e r f a c e s ;
package Por t I O i s
Thi s package p r o v i d e s a c c e s s t o I /O por t s . I t p r ov i d e s t he
Ada programmer wi t h t he I n t e l x86 IN and OUT i n s t r u c t i o n s .
Por t a ddr e s s e s
type Addr es s Range i s new I n t e r f a c e s . Uns i gned 16 ;
10
Most Ada compilers issue a warning when the sizes dier.
Data f o r IN and OUT i n s t r u c t i o n s
type Byte i s new I n t e r f a c e s . Uns i gned 8 ;
type Word i s new I n t e r f a c e s . Uns i gned 16 ;
The f o l l o wi n g pr oc e dur e s wr i t e a byt e or word t o a por t
procedure Out Byte ( Addr es s : i n Addr es s Range ;
Data : i n Byte ) ;
procedure Out Word ( Addr es s : i n Addr es s Range ;
Data : i n Word ) ;
The f o l l o wi n g f u n c t i o n s r ead a byt e or word f rom a por t
f uncti on I n By t e ( Addr es s : i n Addr es s Range ) r etur n Byte ;
f uncti on I n Word ( Addr es s : i n Addr es s Range ) r etur n Word ;
end Por t I O ;
Package Interfaces is the parent of several library packages that declare
types and other entities useful for interfacing to other programming lan-
guages. It also contains some implementation-dened types that are useful
for interfacing to assembly language. We derive our port address type and
data types from the types for 8 and 16-bit unsigned integers dened in that
package. We derived new types rather than use the unsigned integer types
directly to ensure that we do not inappropriately mix address values and
data values.
The following package body is written for the GNAT Ada compiler. We
wont explain the features in this package body. This code is presented only
as an example to demonstrate that we can include assembly language state-
ments in an Ada program. Consult section 12.1 of the GNAT Reference
Manual (2010) for the necessary details.
wi th System . Machi ne Code ; use System . Machi ne Code ;
package body Por t I O i s
The x86 IN and OUT i n s t r u c t i o n s ar e ac c e s s e d t hr ough
t he ASM f u n c t i o n f ound i n package System . Machi ne Code .
For a l l r out i ne s , we use r e g i s t e r DX t o hol d t he por t
a ddr e s s . Thi s a v oi ds t he h a s s l e s of de t e r mi ni ng i f t he
v a l ue i s i n 0 . . 2 5 5 , where we can use i mmedi at e mode .
Data : i n Byte ) i s
begi n
System . Machi ne Code . Asm
( Templ ate => outb %%al , %%dx ,
Outputs => No Output Operands ,
I nput s => ( Byte Asm I nput ( a , Data ) ,
Addr ess Range Asm I nput ( d , Addr es s ) ) ,
Cl obber => ,
Vo l a t i l e => True ) ;
end Out Byte ;
procedure Out Word ( Addr es s : i n Addr es s Range ;
Data : i n Word) i s
begi n
( Templ ate => outw %%ax , %%dx ,
Outputs => No Output Operands ,
I nput s => ( Word Asm I nput ( a , Data ) ,
Addr ess Range Asm I nput ( d , Addr es s ) ) ,
Cl obber => ,
end Out Word ;
f uncti on I n By t e ( Addr es s : i n Addr es s Range ) r etur n Byte i s
Re s ul t : Byte ;
begi n
( Templ ate => i nb %%dx , %%a l ,
Outputs => Byte Asm Output ( =a , Re s ul t ) ,
I nput s => Addr ess Range Asm I nput ( d , Addr es s ) ,
Cl obber => ,
r etur n Re s ul t ;
end I n By t e ;
f uncti on I n Word ( Addr es s : i n Addr es s Range ) r etur n Word i s
Re s ul t : Word ;
begi n
( Templ ate => i nw %%dx , %%ax ,
Outputs => Word Asm Output ( =a , Re s ul t ) ,
I nput s => Addr ess Range Asm I nput ( d , Addr es s ) ,
Cl obber => ,
r etur n Re s ul t ;
end I n Word ;
end Por t I O ;
As an example to show how machine code insertion is compiler-dependent,
here is the code for the Out Byte procedure written for the Rational Apex
Ada compiler.
Data : i n Byte ) i s
begi n
Code 2 ( Mov , Dx , Addr ess Ref ) ;
Code 2 ( Mov , Al , Data Ref ) ;
Code 2 ( Out Op , Dx , Al ) ;
end Out Byte ;
As you can see, a good knowledge of the assembly language is needed to
insert machine code into an Ada program.
Earlier we presented the package body for our ctitious ADC on a memory
mapped computer. We can use the Port IO package and modify our ADC
code for a port mapped I/O computer. First well need some unchecked
conversion functions to copy bits between our control and status record and
Port IOs word type.
f uncti on To CSR i s new Ada . Unchecked Conver s i on
( Sour ce => Por t I O . Word ,
Tar get => CSR Rec ) ;
f uncti on To Word i s new Ada . Unchecked Conver s i on
( Sour ce => CSR Rec ,
Tar get => Por t I O . Word ) ;
Instead of reading and writing memory mapped variables, we use the IN
and OUT instructions available through Port IO to read and write the device
registers. We keep copies of the two registers in local variables. Here is the
code for the ADC read procedure revised for the port mapped machine. The
entire package body is available on our web site.
Por t mapped I /O i mpl ement at i on
Shadow : CSR Rec ; Copy of c o n t r o l s t a t u s r e g i s t e r
f or Shadow Si z e use 16;
Data Reg : Por t I O . Word ; Copy of dat a r e g i s t e r
f or Data Reg Si z e use 16;
begi n
Set up f o r t he c onv e r s i on ( us i ng a r e c or d aggr e gat e )
I nt Ena bl e => Fal s e , Over f l ow => Fal s e ,
Note c onv e r s i on of r e c or d t o word
Por t I O . Out Word ( Addr es s => CSR Address ,
Data => To Word ( Shadow ) ) ;
Wai t u n t i l t he c onv e r s i on i s compl et e
l oop
del ay Max Conver si on Ti me / 10;
Get t he CSR word f rom t he por t
and c onv e r t i t t o a r e c or d
Shadow := To CSR ( Por t I O . I n Word ( CSR Address ) ) ;
exi t when Shadow . Done ;
end l oop ;
i f Shadow . Over f l ow then
end i f ;
Get and c onv e r t whol e number dat a t o a
f i x e d poi nt v o l t a g e
Data Reg := Por t I O . I n Word ( Dat a Addr es s ) ;
Val ue := 5 Vol t s ( Data Reg ) / 4095;
end Read ;
Summary
Ada provides all of the control structures expected in a high-level pro-
gramming language.
Ada provides two kinds of subprograms: procedures and functions.
Parameter passing modes are based on direction of data ow, not on the
underlying passing mechanism.
The nested structure of an Ada program provides a powerful mechanism
for controlling the scope of identiers.
Adas type model is perhaps the most important feature giving Ada a
signicant advantage over other programming languages.
Programmer-dened scalar types allow us to more accurately model the
problem we are solving.
Ada provides both oating point and xed point representations for real
numbers.
Ada provides both signed and unsigned (modular) representations for in-
teger numbers.
Enumeration types allow us to create types by listing all possible values
in the domain.
Attributes provide information about a type or object.
Subtypes allow us to create a set of values that is a subset of the domain
of some existing type.
We may index our arrays with any discrete data type; we are not limited
to integer indices.
Indexing allows us to access an element of an array.
Slicing allows us to access a portion of an array; a slice is an array.
Unconstrained array types allow us to dene formal array parameters that
match any size actual array parameter.
Exercises 103
Records are heterogeneous composite data types.
Access types are strongly typed pointers.
Exceptions allow us to separate normal processing from error processing.
Packages provide the framework for information hiding and encapsulation
in Ada.
A class may be dened by a package containing a type with the attributes
and functions and procedures for the operations.
We may use child packages to build a class hierarchy.
A key characteristic of embedded software is the use of specialized input
and output devices.
Enumeration representation clauses allow us to specify the representation
of the values dening an enumeration type.
Attribute denition clauses allow us to specify some property of a type or
object such as size, location in memory, and bit order.
Record representation clauses allow us to specify the bit layout of an
object.
Memory mapped I/O and port mapped I/O are two common approaches
for organizing input and output devices.
Unchecked conversion allows us to copy bits from one object to another
without any type constraints.
We can insert machine code instructions directly into our Ada program.
The exact method is compiler-dependent.
Exercises
2.1 Write an if statement that checks three integer variables, A, B, and C,
and displays one of the three messages: Two of the values are the
same, All three values are the same, or All of the values are dier-
ent.
2.2 Write a loop that displays all of the integers between 0 and 100 that
are evenly divisible by 3.
2.3 Write a procedure that swaps the contents of its two integer parameters.
2.4 Write a function that returns the larger of its two real parameters.
2.5 Write a for loop that uses the Image attribute to display all of the
values in type Day Type (declared on page 43).
2.6 Why did we not have to declare the variable Day used in the for loop
of our enumeration example program on page 44?
2.7 What property makes a discrete type more specialized than a scalar
type?
2.8 Write a loop that uses an exit statement rather than a for iteration
scheme to display all of the values in type Day Type (declared on page
43). You will need to use the attributes Image, First, Last, and
Succ.
2.9 Declare an array type whose components are positive whole numbers
indexed by Pixel Color (dened on page 43).
2.10 Given the following unconstrained array type
type I n t Ar r a y i s ar r ay ( Char ac t e r range <>) of I n t e g e r ;
complete the following function that returns the value of the largest
value in the array.
f uncti on Max ( I t ems : i n I n t Ar r a y ) r etur n I n t e g e r i s
2.11 Rewrite program Palindrome on page 54 using the unbounded, varying
length string type Ada.Strings.Unbounded.Unbounded String dened
in section A.4.5 of the ARM in place of the subtype Line Type. Input
and output operations for unbounded varying length strings are dened
in package Ada.Text IO.Unbounded IO described in section A.10.12 of
the ARM.
2.12 Why is an access type not a scalar type?
2.13 Dene the terms elaboration, exception, and exception handler.
2.14 Download the denition package Common Units and the program Ohms
Law from our web site. Compile and run the program. Then delete the
use clause for Common Units from the program. Recompile and explain
the error message.
2.15 Using the generic queue package on page 74 as an example,
1. Write the package declaration for an array-based stack.
2. Write the package body for your stack.
2.16 Write the specication for the class Convection Oven which is a sub-
class of Oven Type dened on page 89. After you are done, download
our specication from the web site and compare it to your work.
2.17 Download all of the les for the oven class hierarchy from our web
site. Compile and run program Ovens Demo. Add a new subclass of
microwave oven that includes a heating element to brown food. Include
operations to switch this heating element on and o. Write a body
similar to that of the other oven packages. Add the necessary code to
program Ovens Demo to test your code.
2.18 Dene the terms transducer, sensor, and actuator.
2.19 What is a device driver?
Exercises 105
2.20 What is an enumeration representation clause? What is an attribute
denition clause?
2.21 Add another enumeration value, None, to the enumeration type Day
Type used in the alarm clock example on page 85. When this value is
sent to procedure Display Days, all of the seven lights are extinguished.
2.22 Add another enumeration value, Midweek, to the enumeration type
Day Type used in the alarm clock example on page 85. When this value
is sent to procedure Display Days, the lights for Tue, Wed, and Thu are
illuminated.
2.23 Dierentiate between memory mapped I/O and port mapped I/O.
2.24 What is a record representation clause?
2.25 The attribution denition clause Size may be applied to both types
and variables. What is the dierence between applying this clause to a
type and applying it to a variable?
2.26 Write a program fragment that calls procedure ADC.Read on page 89
and displays the channel number and voltage of all 32 channels. Use
a gain of one. Youll need to instantiate a package to output voltage
values.
2.27 Modify the program fragment you wrote for the previous question.
Instead of using a gain of one, use the highest gain possible for each
channel. You will need to handle possible over-range exceptions and
lower the gain when necessary.
2.28 Given the following package declaration for a digital to analog
converter
wi th Common Units ;
package DAC i s
S p e c i f i c a t i o n of a make b e l i e v e d i g i t a l t o anal og c o n v e r t e r
type Channel Number i s range 0 . . 7 ;
subtype Out put Vol t s i s Common Units . Vol t s range 0. 0 . . 5 . 0 ;
procedure Wr i t e ( Channel : i n Channel Number ; Which channel
Val ue : i n Out put Vol t s ) ; Output v a l ue
Set s t he v o l t a g e on t he gi v e n channel
end DAC;
write a program that sets each of the 8 channels to a voltage equal to
half the channel number. For example, channel 5 is set to 2.5 volts.
Compile your work to check your syntax.
2.29 Complete the package body for the package declared in the previous
question. The digital to analog converter has eight 16-bit data registers.
There is no control or status register. Like the analog to digital example
in this chapter, only the low-order 12 bits of the data registers are used.
To output a voltage, you simply write a value between 0 (for 0.0 volts)
and 4095 (for 5.0 volts) to the appropriate register. The data register
for channel zero is memory mapped to address FFFAA0
16
. Each of the
other data registers follow at two-byte intervals. Compile your work to
check your syntax.
3
Task basics
In Chapter 1 we demonstrated the eectiveness of concurrent algorithms.
Together, Horace and Mildred can prepare a meal faster than one of them
alone. The concurrent algorithm for controlling the process of chutney cook-
ing provides a simpler and more reusable solution than the original sequential
algorithm. Now that you have a basic understanding of sequential program-
ming with Ada we are ready to create concurrent Ada programs.
Ada is a concurrent programming language it provides the constructs
needed to support the creation of programs with multiple threads of control.
Adas task is an implementation of Dijkstras (1968) process. An Ada pro-
gram is composed of one or more tasks that execute concurrently to solve a
problem. In this chapter we examine the Ada task as an independent entity.
In the next two chapters, well examine the facilities that allow tasks to
communicate, synchronize, and share resources.
3.1 Dening tasks
As with packages, the denition of a task has two parts: a declaration and
a body. We can dene a task type from which we can create multiple tasks
that execute the same sequence of statements. Alternatively, we can dene
a singleton task that ensures that only one task executes the sequence of
statements in the body. Lets look at a program that illustrates both alter-
natives.
procedure LED Task Exampl es i s
type Col or Type i s ( Red , Green , Yel l ow , Bl ue ) ;
procedure Turn On LED ( Col or : i n Col or Type ) i s
108 Task basics
begi n
Put Li ne ( Col or Type I mage ( Col or ) & on ) ;
end Turn On LED ;
procedure Turn Of f LED ( Col or : i n Col or Type ) i s
begi n
Put Li ne ( Col or Type I mage ( Col or ) & o f f ) ;
end Turn Of f LED ;
task Fl ash Red LED ; De c l ar e a s i n g l e t o n t as k

task body Fl ash Red LED i s Body of t he t as k
begi n
l oop
Turn On LED ( Red ) ;
del ay 0 . 5 ;
Turn Of f LED ( Red ) ;
del ay 0 . 5 ;
end l oop ;
end Fl ash Red LED ;
task type Fl ash LED ( Col or : Col or Type ; A t as k t ype

Pe r i od : Nat ur al ) ;
task body Fl ash LED i s Body of t he t as k
begi n
l oop
Turn On LED ( Col or ) ;
del ay Dur at i on ( Per i od ) / 2;
Turn Of f LED ( Col or ) ;
end l oop ;
end Fl ash LED ;
Two t as k o b j e c t s ( v a r i a b l e s )
Yel l ow LED : Fl ash LED ( Col or => Yel l ow ,
Per i od => 4 ) ;
Green LED : Fl ash LED ( Col or => Green ,
Per i od => 3 ) ;
A p o i n t e r t o a t as k o bj e c t
type Fl a s h Pt r i s access Fl ash LED ;
Bl ue LED : Fl a s h Pt r ;
begi n
Put Li ne ( Fl a s hi ng LEDs ) ;
Bl ue LED := new Fl ash LED ( Col or => Bl ue ,
Per i od => 8 ) ;
Put Li ne ( Main t as k i s done ) ;
end LED Task Exampl es ;
When this program executes, ve tasks run concurrently to display the
state (on or o) of four dierent-colored light-emitting diodes (LEDs). You
can download this program from our web site, build it, and run it to see the
output displayed by the ve tasks.
It takes only a single line to declare the singleton task Flash Red LED. This
declaration provides only the tasks name. The body contains the sequence
of instructions executed by the task. In this case, our task body contains
an innite loop that alternatively calls a procedure to turn on the red LED
and a procedure to turn it o.
The declaration of task type Flash LED includes two discriminants. As
with record discriminants, we supply an actual value when we use the type
to declare an object. The declarations of variables Yellow LED and Green
LED illustrate the use of these discriminants. The values we gave to the
discriminants Color and Period are used by the task body. Looking at
the body for task type Flash LED, you may wonder why we declared the
discriminant Period to be an integer subtype rather than Duration. That
would save us the trouble of converting the whole number to a Duration
value. Task discriminants, like record discriminants, are limited to discrete
types and access types. Being a real type, Duration discriminants are illegal.
We have shown two ways to create a task: dening a singleton task or
dening a task type and declaring task variables. Tasks may also be created
dynamically using access types. Our program declares the access type Flash
Ptr that designates a Flash LED task and an access variable that holds the
location of a Flash LED task. Like all access objects, the initial value of
Blue LED is null. In the main subprogram we use the allocator new to create
a new Flash LED task and assign its location to Blue LED. We supplied
appropriate values for the two discriminants when we allocated the task.
Unlike a package, a task cannot be written and compiled by itself. The
task declaration and body must exist within some other program unit such
as a package or subprogram. All of the example tasks are written within the
declarative part of the program LED Task Examples.
3.2 The task life cycle
A task passes through several dierent states during its lifetime. The state
diagram in Figure 3.1 shows the basic states and transitions that dene the
behavior of a task. In the next sections well look at each of the dierent
states in this diagram.
110 Task basics
Finished
Creation
Activation
Executable
elaboration of entire
declarative part successful
[static creation]
allocation
successful
[dynamic creation]
activation
successful
exception raised
exception raised
reached end of body
exception raised
a
l
l

d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
s

t
e
r
m
i
n
a
t
e
d

Terminated
Completed
Figure 3.1 The basic states of a task
3.2.1 Task creation
Our LED examples demonstrated the two approaches for creating task ob-
jects. Static creation is done when we dene a singleton task or we declare
a variable of a task type. Dynamic creation uses the allocator operation to
assign a location to an access variable that designates a task. Static creation
is done through elaboration, the run-time processing of declarations. The
elaboration of ordinary variables includes allocation of memory for them on
the stack and the assignment of any initial values. The elaboration of a task
object (singleton task or task variable) also allocates memory. This memory
includes a task control block and a run-time stack where the tasks local
variables and subprogram call frames are stored. Since each task has its own
run-time stack, tasks of the same type have their own separate copies of any
local objects dened in the task body. Tasks created dynamically obtain
their memory when the allocator operator is invoked.
In program LED Task Examples, tasks Yellow LED and Green LED are cre-
ated when those variables are elaborated. The task designated by the pointer
Blue LED is not created until it is assigned a value from the allocator when
the assignment statement in the main subprogram is executed.
The amount of memory allocated to each task for its task control block and
run-time stack is determined by a default value in the compiler. This amount
may be insucient for tasks that require large amounts of storage for local
variables and/or are highly recursive. On the other hand, the default stack
size may be overly large for a program with many tasks each requiring little
stack space. We can use the pragma Storage Size to specify the amount of
memory allocated for each singleton task and for each stack object created
from a task type. This pragma is given in the declaration of the singleton
task or the declaration of the task type. The following task declarations
include pragmas to set the memory available for our four ashing tasks to
1000 storage units.
task Fl ash Red LED i s
pragma St o r a g e Si z e (1 000 ) ;
end Fl ash Red LED ;
task type Fl ash LED ( Col or : Col or Type ;
Pe r i od : Nat ur al ) i s
pragma St o r a g e Si z e (1 000 ) ;
end Fl ash LED ;
Comparing this code to our original declarations of these tasks in program
LED Task Examples, youll notice that we needed to include end clauses in
the declarations. Later well include other task items in task declarations.
It is possible that an exception is raised during the elaboration of the
declarative region containing task denitions. For example, the constant
declaration
c a l l i n g f u n c t i o n LED Count t o i n i t i a l i z e Count
Count : constant Po s i t i v e := LED Count ;
would raise a Constraint Error exception when it is elaborated if the func-
tion LED Count returns zero. Any tasks that were created prior to this failed
constant elaboration become terminated. A wise programmer will avoid dec-
larations that could raise exceptions during elaboration.
3.2.2 Task activation
During this phase of a tasks life cycle, the declarative part of the task body
is elaborated. Space is allocated for any local variables on the tasks run-
time stack. The task bodys declarative part could include the denition of
another task which is created as part of the tasks elaboration.
A dynamically created task is activated immediately after a successful
allocation. The activation of static tasks is deferred until the elaboration
of the declarative region in which they are dened is complete. In our ex-
ample program, the tasks Flash Red LED, Yellow LED, and Green LED are
activated after the elaboration of program LED Task Examples is complete.
They are activated before the execution of the rst executable statement in
the program.
112 Task basics
Should the elaboration of the task bodys declarative part raise an excep-
tion, the task becomes completed. Again, the wise programmer will avoid
complex declarations that might raise exceptions during their elaboration.
3.2.3 Task execution
A task enters the executable state immediately after a successful activation.
In this state the statements in the tasks body are executed. The executable
state does not mean that the task is actually executing statements. If there
are more tasks than processors, some of the tasks must wait until a processor
is available. A task may also need to suspend executing its statements until
some resource is available. For example, a task calling Get to read informa-
tion will be blocked until the input is available. Well discuss resources in the
next two chapters. Executing a delay statement is another way a task may
block itself. Figure 3.2 shows the substates of a task within the executable
state.
Ready Blocked
Running
Executable
dispatch
wakeup
preempt
block
done
Figure 3.2 The substates of executable
When a task rst becomes executable, it starts o in the ready state. Tasks
in the ready state have all of the resources they need to run except for a
processor. When a processor becomes available the task scheduler dispatches
the task to the running state. In this state the task executes its sequence
of statements. Should the running task execute a delay statement or need
some resource that is not currently available, it relinquishes the processor
and moves to the blocked state. When the delay expires or the required
resource becomes available, the task is awoken by moving it to the ready
state. A running task is done when it has nished execution of the statements
in its body or raised an exception.
The replacement of the running task with a ready task is called a context
switch. When there is more than one task in the ready state, the scheduler
must select one of them. Well discuss the scheduler in detail in Chapters 7
and 8. For now well mention that the set of ready tasks is usually stored
in either a FIFO queue or priority queue. The scheduler simply picks the
task at the front of the queue. Figure 3.2 also includes a transition from
running to ready labeled preempt. In many scheduling schemes, a task may
be preempted by the scheduler because a higher priority task is now ready
or the task has used up its allotment of processor time.
3.2.4 Task nish
A nished task is either in the completed state or the terminated state. For
most purposes, it makes little dierence which of these two states a nished
task is in. There are two ways an executable task moves to the completed
state. Completion of all of the statements in the task body is the normal
way. An exception handled by the task body provides another expected way
to complete the task. An unhandled exception in the task body also sends a
task to the completed state. As we mentioned in our discussion of activation,
should an exception be raised during the elaboration of the task body, it will
go directly to the completed state.
A task moves from completed to terminated when all its dependent tasks
are terminated. To understand this state transition requires an understand-
ing of the master-dependent relationship. Well discuss that in the next
section.
3.3 Task hierarchies
While the sequential programs we discussed in Chapter 2 dened no task
objects, a task was still part of their execution. Sequential programs have
a single thread of control carried out by a predened task called the envi-
ronment task. The environment task provides the thread of control that
executes the main subprogram. Before it calls the main subprogram, the
environment task carries out the elaboration of the bodies of packages that
are part of the program. Elaboration of a package body consists of the
114 Task basics
elaboration of any declarations followed by the execution of the optional
package body initialization sequence.
Each task is part of two hierarchical relationships. The parent-child
hierarchy is most relevant to task creation. The master-dependent hi-
erarchy is most relevant to the nishing of tasks.
3.3.1 Parent-child
A task that is directly responsible for creating another task is called the
parent of the task, and the task it creates is called the child. A parent task
may create a child statically through the elaboration process or dynamically
through use of the allocator. In program LED Task Examples (page 107), the
environment task is the parent of the four child tasks created by the main
subprogram.
When a parent task creates a child, it is suspended until that child com-
pletes its activation. When that activation is complete, both parent and child
execute concurrently. Adas block structure allows us to declare task objects
in any block, including within a task body. Such task nesting can give rise
to a hierarchy of suspensions. For example, while a parent task is suspended
for the activation of a child task, that child task may have its activation
suspended while a task it created activates. The environment task is at the
top of the parent-child hierarchy.
Program LED Task Examples is suspended three times during its elabora-
tion to create the three child tasks Flash Red LED, Yellow LED, and Green
LED. The program is suspended a fourth time during its execution when it
uses the allocator to create task Blue LED.all. Figure 3.3 adds the sus-
pended state to the basic task state diagram we illustrated in Figure 3.1.
3.3.2 Master-dependent
Every task depends on a master. The concept of master is more complicated
than that of parent. The direct master of a task is a block structure. Block
structures can be task bodies, block statements, subprogram bodies, or li-
brary packages. Determining the direct master of a task depends on how
the task was created. The direct master of a statically created task is the
block in which the task object is declared. The direct master of a dynami-
cally allocated task is the block in which the access type is declared (not the
block in which the task pointer variable is declared). If the direct master is
a block statement or a subprogram, then this master is dependent on the
Activation
Executable
activation
successful
Suspend
for Child
Activation
create child
child activation
complete
[static creation]
create child
child activation
complete
[dynamic creation]
Figure 3.3 Parent tasks are suspended during the activation of a child
task
task executing the block. Therefore, a task may have multiple masters, the
block or subprogram acting as its direct master, and the task that executes
the block as an indirect master.
An important property of the master-dependent relationship is that a
master may not terminate until all of its dependents have terminated. Fig-
ure 3.1 illustrates this property for the case in which a master is a task. A
task moves from completed to terminated when all of its dependents have
terminated. When the direct master of a task is a block statement or subpro-
gram, the task executing that block may not exit the block until all of that
blocks dependent tasks have terminated. Procedure LED Task Examples is
the master of all four tasks in that program. Control does not leave this
procedure after executing its three statements. The environment task must
wait until the dependents of the main subprogram terminate. As these tasks
contain innite loops, the main subprogram never terminates. Lets look at
another example. The following procedure is passed an array of real numbers
and returns the sum and the product of all the numbers in that array.
procedure Math ( Val ues : i n Fl oa t Ar r a y ;
Sum : out Fl oat ;
Pr oduct : out Fl oat ) i s
task Mul t i pl y ;
task body Mul t i pl y i s
begi n
Pr oduct := 1 . 0 ;
Pr oduct := Pr oduct Val ues ( I ndex ) ;
116 Task basics
end l oop ;
end Mul t i pl y ;
begi n Math
Sum := 0 . 0 ;
Sum := Sum + Val ues ( I ndex ) ;
end l oop ;
end Math ;
The singleton task Multiply is declared locally within procedure Math.
The task whose thread of control called procedure Math is the parent of task
Multiply. The scope rules described in Chapter 2 apply to all identiers,
including tasks. As task Multiply is nested within procedure Math, it has
global access to procedure Maths parameters. Task Multiply is activated
during the elaboration of procedure Math. After task Multiply completes
its activation, the code in its body executes concurrently with the code in
the body of procedure Math. Procedure Math is the direct master of task
Multiply. The task whose thread of control called procedure Math is an
indirect master of task Multiply. Should procedure Math complete the cal-
culation of Sum before task Multiply completes the calculation of Product,
Maths thread of control will be suspended until the dependent task is ter-
minated. Should task Multiply complete the calculation of Product before
procedure Math completes its calculation of Sum, task Multiply will become
completed. As task Multiply has no dependent tasks, it will then immedi-
ately move to the terminated state. The main point in this example is that
control does not leave a block while that block is the master of a task that
is not terminated.
Lets look at another example. The following procedure sorts an array of
real numbers. It uses two tasks to accomplish its objective. One task sorts
the rst half of the array and the other sorts the second half. Each task
calls a sequential sort procedure to do the actual sorting. We call a merge
function to combine the two sorted slices into a single sorted array.
procedure Conc ur r e nt Sor t ( Val ues : i n out Ar r ay Type ) i s
S p l i t : constant I n t e g e r := Val ues F i r s t + Val ues Length / 2;
begi n
decl ar e a bl oc k s t at ement
task type Worker Task ( F i r s t : Po s i t i v e ;
Las t : Po s i t i v e ) ;
task body Worker Task i s
begi n
Ca l l a s e q u e n t i a l s o r t t o s o r t t he a s s i gne d s l i c e
Sor t ( Val ues ( F i r s t . . Las t ) ) ;
end Worker Task ;
3.4 Exceptions 117
De c l ar e two wor ker t a s k s
Low Part : Worker Task ( F i r s t => Val ues Fi r s t ,
Las t => S p l i t 1 ) ;
Hi gh Par t : Worker Task ( F i r s t => Sp l i t ,
Las t => Val ues Las t ) ;
begi n e x e c ut a bl e par t of bl oc k s t at ement
do not hi ng ( wai t f o r t he wor ker t a s k s t o t e r mi na t e )
nul l ;
end ; of bl oc k s t at ement
Ca l l a f u n c t i o n t o merge t he two s or t e d h a l v e s ;
Val ues := Merge ( Val ues ( Val ues F i r s t . . S p l i t 1) ,
Val ues ( S p l i t . . Val ues Las t ) ) ;
end Conc ur r e nt Sor t ;
We cannot merge the two array halves until the worker tasks have com-
pleted their work. To ensure that we dont call the merge function before the
two array halves are sorted, we declared the worker tasks in a block state-
ment. We used two task discriminants to assign a dierent slice of the array
to each of our worker tasks. The block statement is the direct master of the
two worker tasks. Control will not exit this block until both worker tasks
have terminated. Thus we are guaranteed that the merge function will not
be called until both halves of the array are sorted. The executable portion of
the block contains only a null statement. As an alternative, we could have
divided the array into three pieces giving one third to each of the worker
tasks and one third to the calling task. For the most ecient sort, we would
have as many concurrent tasks sorting as there are processors in our system.
You can nd a complete program, Concurrent Sort Demo, on our web site
that demonstrates procedure Concurrent Sort.
You can nd more details on the termination of tasks in section 9.3 of the
ARM. Section 7.6.1 of the ARM discusses completion of masters including
masters that include controlled types. A controlled type allows us to write
destructor code for objects. Dale and McCormick (2007) provide simple
examples that use controlled types to reclaim memory used by dynamic
data structures.
3.4 Exceptions
When a sequential program running under a typical operating system raises
an exception for which it has no exception handler, the exception is prop-
agated to the operating system, which displays a message. When a task
raises an exception for which it has no exception handler, the exception is
118 Task basics
not propagated; the task dies silently.
1
We recommend including an others
handler with every task body that will inform us of an unhandled exception.
The following task body includes such a handler.
task body Bad Logi c i s
subtype Dozen Range i s I n t e g e r range 1 . . 12;
Dozen : Dozen Range ;
begi n
Dozen := 1;
l oop
Dozen := Dozen + 1;
exi t when Dozen > 12;
end l oop ;
excepti on
when Except : others =>
Put Li ne
( F i l e => St andar d Er r or ,
I tem => Task Bad Logi c di e d wi t h t he e x c e pt i on &
Ada . Ex c e pt i ons . Excepti on Name ( Except ) ) ;
end Bad Logi c ;
This code includes an exception feature we did not discuss in Chapter
2. The package Ada.Exceptions (section 11.4.1 of the ARM) provides the
type Exception Occurrence and a number of operations for exceptions.
The handler for others includes the Exception Occurrence choice param-
eter Except. This parameter is assigned the occurrence information on the
exception that this handler caught. We use this parameter in the call to
Exception Name to obtain the name of the exception. Our call to Put Line
writes this information to the standard error le. Here is the output from
this handler.
Task Bad Logic died with the exception CONSTRAINT ERROR
Such an exception handler will not handle exceptions raised in the task
bodys declarative part. These exceptions must be handled in an enclosing
scope. It is usually better to simplify declarations (e.g. use an executable
statement to give an initial value to an object rather than in its declaration)
than to handle exceptions.
Handling exceptions that are raised during the creation or activation of a
task is a complex matter. We recommend keeping declarations simple (for
example, avoid using function calls to initialize declared constants and vari-
ables). Burns and Wellings (2007) provide additional details on exceptions
and tasking.
1
Package Ada.Task Termination provides mechanisms we may use to identify a protected
procedure that is called by the implementation when a task terminates. We discuss protected
procedures in Chapter 4.
3.5 The implementation of Ada tasking 119
3.5 The implementation of Ada tasking
Many programmers have their rst introduction to the concept of the process
in a class on operating systems. All modern operating systems provide the
facilities for creating processes. The term process has specic and sometimes
dierent meanings in the context of particular operating systems. Many op-
erating systems support dierent levels of sequential processes. For example,
Linux uses the word process for an instance of an executing program. We
might run a word processing program and a spreadsheet program simul-
taneously on a Linux machine, each executing as a process. Each process
has its own private address space. One process may not access another pro-
cesss address space. In order for processes to communicate, they must use
inter-process communication mechanisms provided by the operating system.
Linux uses the word thread to refer to a sequential subprogram executing
concurrently within the context of a process. The threads within a process
share that processs address space. Within our word processing program,
a spell checking thread may execute concurrently with a thread that takes
our input from the keyboard. Since they share the same memory space,
these threads may access the same variables. The terms heavyweight and
lightweight are often used with process and thread. A process is said to be
heavyweight because it takes signicantly more eort to create a process
with its new address space than a thread in an existing address space.
An Ada task executes within a memory space shared by all tasks in the
program. The usual scope rules determine which objects a task can access.
So the task is more like a Linux thread than a process. If our Ada program is
running under Linux, it is very likely that the Ada run-time support system
maps the Ada tasks to operating system threads. Alternatively, it is possible
that the Ada program might have its own tasking support system making it
invisible to the operating system. We may also use such a tasking support
system for running concurrent Ada programs on bare (no operating system)
hardware. In practice, you rarely need to know the underlying implementa-
tion of the task. Well give more details on the implementation of Ada tasks
in our discussions of run-time systems in Chapter 9.
3.6 Other task features
In this section well introduce some less commonly used Ada tasking features
of tasks. You can nd more details in the ARM and in Burns and Wellings
(2007).
120 Task basics
3.6.1 Aborting tasks
The abort statement allows us to halt one or more tasks. The following
statement aborts the task named Yellow LED and the task that the pointer
Blue LED designates.
abort Yel l ow LED , Bl ue LED . a l l ;
These tasks were dened in the program LED Task Examples on page 107.
The execution of an abort statement results in the named tasks becoming
abnormal. Tasks that are dependent on a task named in an abort statement
also become abnormal.
The use of an abort statement may have catastrophic eects upon the
entire program. It is a means of last resort. We, like many others (Burns
and Wellings, 2007; Taft et al., 2006; Wikibooks, 2010b), strongly discourage
using the abort statement.
You can abort a task any time after its creation. Aborting an abnormal
task or a completed task has no eect. The execution of the abort statement
is nished once the named task and all of its dependents become abnormal.
Abnormal tasks that were not running when they were aborted move im-
mediately from the abnormal state to the completed state. Abnormal tasks
that were running when they were aborted may not move to the completed
state immediately. Such tasks may continue to execute until they reach an
abort completion point. Section 9.8 of the ARM lists these points. Many
of the points involve concepts we cover in Chapters 4 and 5. It is possi-
ble that a task may never reach an abort completion point and continue
its execution, further corrupting the program. A program making use of
the Real-Time Systems Annex (discussed in Chapter 8) will have an upper
bound on the time it takes for an abnormal task to complete. To make the
task abortion issue even more complicated, there are a number of abort-
deferred operations which must be allowed to complete before an abnormal
task completes. These operations are also listed in section 9.8 of the ARM.
3.6.2 Task identication
In most circumstances a task name or pointer that designates a task is all we
need to reference that task. You may nd in some circumstances that it is
useful to have a unique identier rather than a name. The package Ada.Task
Identification (section C.7.1 of the ARM) denes unique identiers for
tasks. This package includes the private type Task ID, an equality operator
for comparing IDs, a function for converting an ID into a string, and a
function that returns the ID of the calling task. Here is a revised version of
3.6 Other task features 121
the task body in program LED Task Examples that calls function Current
Task to obtain the ID of the task that calls it and function Image to convert
the ID to a string.
task body Fl ash LED i s
use Ada . Ta s k I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ;
My ID : Tas k I d ;
begi n
My ID := Cur r ent Tas k ;
Put Li ne ( Col or Type I mage ( Col or ) &
S ID i s & I mage ( My ID ) ) ;
l oop
Turn On LED ( Col or ) ;
Turn Of f LED ( Col or ) ;
end l oop ;
end Fl ash LED ;
The output produced by the Put Line statement in the three tasks exe-
cuting this body is
YELLOWS ID is yellow led 003E7110
GREENS ID is green led 003EA160
BLUES ID is blue led 003ED2E8
Package Ada.Task Identification also provides the attribute Identity
which returns the identity of the task. For example, the assignment state-
ment
My ID := Fl ash Red LED I d e n t i t y ;
assigns the value of the singleton task Flash Red LEDs ID to the variable
My ID.
3.6.3 Task attributes
The generic package Ada.Task Attributes (section C.7.2 of the ARM) al-
lows you to create, set, and query your own attributes for tasks. Once you
create an instance of this package, the attribute is added to each task. You
use the task IDs dened in package Ada.Task Identification to specify
the task for which you want to query or set your attribute.
Summary
A task is a program unit that executes concurrently with other tasks.
The denition of a task includes two parts: a declaration and a body.
122 Task basics
We use a task type declaration to create multiple tasks that execute the
same sequence of statements.
Each instance of a task type has its own run-time stack and therefore its
own copies of variables dened in the task body.
We use a singleton task declaration when we want to ensure that there is
only one task executing a sequence of statements.
Tasks may be created statically (through elaboration of declarations) or
dynamically (through use of an allocator).
Each task passes through several dierent states during its lifetime.
During task creation, memory is allocated for the task control block and
run-time stack.
During task activation, the task body is elaborated.
When a task is executable, it may be in one of three substates: Ready,
Running, and Blocked.
The task scheduler is responsible for deciding which tasks run at a given
time.
The environment task provides the thread of control for the main subpro-
gram.
The parent-child hierarchy is most relevant to task creation. A parent task
is suspended while its child activates.
The master-dependent hierarchy is most relevant to task nalization.
A master may be a block statement, subprogram, or package.
Control will not exit a block statement or subprogram as long as it has a
dependent that has not terminated. This feature allows us to synchronize
some concurrent activities.
A task is complete when the execution of the sequence of statements in
its body is complete or it raises an exception.
A completed task is terminated when all its dependents are terminated.
A task usually dies silently when it raises an unhandled exception.
The abort statement provides a means for halting tasks. We strongly
discourage its use.
The package Ada.Task Identification denes unique identiers for tasks.
The generic package Ada.Task Attributes allows you to create, set, and
query your own attributes for tasks.
Exercises
3.1 Obtain a copy of the program LED Task Examples (page 107) from our
web site. Build and run it. Do you get the same output each run? Why?
Exercises 123
3.2 Obtain a copy of the program LED Task Examples (page 107) from our
web site. Rewrite the specication of task type Flash LED so that the
discriminant Period is a pointer to a duration value rather than an
integer.
3.3 Obtain a copy of the program LED Task Examples (page 107) from
our web site. Delete the singleton task denition. Delete the variables
Yellow LED, Green LED, and Blue LED. Declare an array type indexed
by Color Type with Flash Ptr components. Write a for loop in the
main subprogram that dynamically creates a ashing task for each of
the four colors with periods of 1, 2, 3, and 4 seconds. Youll nd the
attribute Pos useful in calculating the periods in the loop.
3.4 Write a program with a task type called Put Name that has a discrim-
inant that is a pointer to String. The task body should display the
designated name ve times, waiting one second between each display.
Declare the task variable Name Writer as an instance of type Put Name.
Within this declaration, use the new operator to obtain the memory
containing a string with your rst name and assign its location to the
task discriminant. The main task should simply display the word Hello.
Build and execute your program.
3.5 Obtain a copy of the program Master Demo from our web site. This
program calls procedure Math (page 115). Add a Put Line statement
after the for loop in task Multiply that displays Product Computed.
Add a Put Line statement after the for loop in procedure Math that
displays Sum Computed. Increase the size of the array to 10. Build
and run the program. Which calculation was completed rst? Does that
calculation always complete rst?
3.6 Obtain a copy of the program Concurrent Sort Demo from our web
site. Rewrite procedure Concurrent Sort (page 116) so that the array
is divided into four chunks. Three of these chunks are sorted by three
worker tasks while the fourth is sorted by procedure Concurrent Sort.
Youll need to carry out three merges.
3.7 Given the following program which is available on the web site:
wi th Ada . Numer i cs . Fl oat Random ; use Ada . Numer i cs . Fl oat Random ;
procedure Ex e r c i s e i s
Gener at or : Ada . Numer i cs . Fl oat Random . Gener at or ;
task type Do Nothi ng ( Le t t e r : Char ac t e r ) ;
task body Do Nothi ng i s
Per i od : Dur at i on ;
124 Task basics
begi n
Per i od := Dur at i on ( Random ( Gener at or ) ) / 10;
i f Le t t e r = W or Le t t e r = X then
Per i od := 2 Per i od ;
end i f ;
Put ( Le t t e r ) ;
del ay Per i od ;
end l oop ;
end Do Nothi ng ;
type A Ptr i s access Do Nothi ng ;
procedure Do Nothi ng More i s
type B Ptr i s access Do Nothi ng ;
X : A Ptr ;
Y : B Ptr ;
begi n
X := new Do Nothi ng ( Le t t e r => X ) ;
decl ar e
Z : Do Nothi ng ( Le t t e r => Z ) ;
begi n
Put ( ) ;
del ay 0. 008;
end l oop ;
end ;
Y := new Do Nothi ng ( Le t t e r => Y ) ;
end Do Nothi ng More ;
W : Do Nothi ng ( Le t t e r => W ) ;
begi n
New Li ne ;
Put Li ne ( Ca l l i n g Do Nothi ng More ) ;
Do Nothi ng More ;
New Li ne ;
Put Li ne ( Ret ur ned f rom Do Nothi ng More ) ;
end Ex e r c i s e ;
1. How many tasks are in this program?
2. What is the parent of each of these tasks?
3. What is the direct master of each of these tasks?
4. Are we guaranteed that nothing is displayed on the screen by this
program before the phrase Calling Do Nothing More? Why or why
not?
5. Are we guaranteed that the last thing displayed on the screen by
Exercises 125
this program is the phrase Returned from Do Nothing More? Why
or why not?
6. Are we guaranteed that no Y will be displayed before a Z? Why
or why not?
7. Are we guaranteed that no Y will be displayed before an X?
Why or why not?
3.8 Obtain a copy of the program Handler Demo from our web site. This
program includes the task Bad Logic whose body is on page 118. Build
and run it. Now add a denition for the exception My Exception to
this program. Add a raise statement that raises My Exception after
the fourth iteration of the loop in the body of task Bad Logic. Build
and run the revised program.
3.9 Extend the state diagram in Figure 3.1 with the state Suspend for
Child Activation from Figure 3.3 and a state Waiting Dependent
Termination to indicate that a master is waiting for its dependents to
terminate.
3.10 Extend the state diagram in Figure 3.1 with the state Abnormal.
4
Communication and synchronization based on
shared objects
In Chapter 3 we introduced the task. The tasks in all of the examples in
that chapter were independent. They did not share any resources nor did
they communicate with each other. As suggested by the cooking examples
of Chapter 1, the solution to most parallel problems requires cooperation
among tasks. Such cooperation involves communication, mutual exclusion,
and synchronization. Communication is the exchange of data or control
signals between processes. Mutual exclusion is a mechanism that prevents
two processes from simultaneously using the same resource. Synchroniza-
tion ensures that multiple processes working on a job complete the steps
of that job in the correct order. There are two approaches for communica-
tion among processes. In this chapter we look at indirect communication via
shared objects. In Chapter 5, well look at direct communication via Adas
rendezvous mechanism.
4.1 Mutual exclusion
Lets start with a simple example that illustrates the need for mutually
exclusive access to a resource used by multiple tasks. A small but popular
museum has a limited capacity. When that capacity is reached, the sale of
tickets must be suspended until space is made available by the departure of
some visitors. Recently, the museum has installed turnstiles at each of its
four entrances and hired a programmer to write the software to monitor the
turnstiles and keep count of the number of visitors currently in the museum.
Here is the specication of the package that provides the input from the
turnstile sensors at the museums four entrances.
package Tu r n s t i l e i s
Thi s package p r o v i d e s an i n t e r f a c e t o t he
Museum s t u r n s t i l e s e n s o r s
The Museum has f our door s
type Ent r ance Type i s ( North , South , East , West ) ;
A per s on can e nt e r or l e a v e t hr ough a t u r n s t i l e
type Di r e c t i on Ty pe i s ( Enter , Leave ) ;
procedure Get ( Ent r ance : i n Ent r ance Type ;
Di r e c t i o n : out Di r e c t i on Ty pe ) ;
The c a l l e r of t h i s pr oc e dur e i s bl oc ke d u n t i l a
per s on pa s s e s t hr ough t he t u r n s t i l e at t he gi v e n
e nt r anc e . I t s r e t ur n v a l ue i n d i c a t e s whet her t he
per s on has e nt e r e d or l e f t t he Museum.
end Tu r n s t i l e ;
This package encapsulates the code that monitors the turnstiles at the four
museum entrances. Procedure Turnstile.Get waits until someone passes
through the designated turnstile. It then returns the direction in which the
person passed. Here is the rst version of a program that uses the information
from the turnstiles to track the current number of visitors in the museum.
wi th Tu r n s t i l e ; use Tu r n s t i l e ;
wi th Ada . Ex c e pt i ons ;
procedure Museum V1 i s
Thi s program us e s a g l o b a l v a r i a b l e s har ed by f i v e t a s k s
t o moni t or t he number of v i s i t o r s i n s i d e a museum
Thi s v e r s i o n wor ks most of t he t i me
Someti mes at c l o s i n g ti me , i t i n d i c a t e s t hat

t he museum i s not empty when i nde e d i t i s empty
Someti mes an e nt r anc e moni t or t as k t e r mi na t e s wi t h

t he e x c e pt i on Co n s t r a i n t Er r o r
Maximum : constant := 100; Museum c a pa c i t y
Popul at i on : Nat ur al := 0; Cur r ent number of v i s i t o r s
A t as k t ype f o r moni t or i ng t u r n s t i l e s
task type Ent r ance Moni t or
( My Entr ance : Tu r n s t i l e . Ent r ance Type ) ;
task body Ent r ance Moni t or i s
Di r e c t i o n : Tu r n s t i l e . Di r e c t i on Ty pe ;
begi n
l oop
Wai t u n t i l someone pa s s e s t hr ough my t u r n s t i l e
Tu r n s t i l e . Get ( My Entrance , Di r e c t i o n ) ;
Update t he number of pe opl e i n t he Museum
128 Communication and synchronization based on shared objects
case Di r e c t i o n i s
when Tu r n s t i l e . Ent er =>
Popul at i on := Popul at i on + 1;
when Tu r n s t i l e . Leave =>
Popul at i on := Popul at i on 1;
end case ;
end l oop ;
excepti on
Put Li ne
I tem => Ent r ance Type I mage ( My Entr ance ) &
t u r n s t i l e t as k t e r mi nat e d wi t h e x c e pt i on
& Ada . Ex c e pt i ons . Excepti on Name ( Except ) ) ;
end Ent r ance Moni t or ;
One t as k t o moni t or each of t he f our museum door s
Nor th Door : Ent r ance Moni t or ( Tu r n s t i l e . North ) ;
South Door : Ent r ance Moni t or ( Tu r n s t i l e . South ) ;
Eas t Door : Ent r ance Moni t or ( Tu r n s t i l e . Eas t ) ;
West Door : Ent r ance Moni t or ( Tu r n s t i l e . West ) ;
Museum Ful l : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
begi n
l oop
Put ( Cur r ent number of v i s i t o r s i s ) ;
Put ( I tem => Popul at i on , Width => 1 ) ;
New Li ne ;
Check f o r change i n t i c k e t s e l l i n g s t a t u s
i f not Museum Ful l and Popul at i on >= Maximum then
Put Li ne ( The Museum i s f u l l . &
Suspend t i c k e t s a l e s . ) ;
Museum Ful l := True ;
e l s i f Museum Ful l and Popul at i on < Maximum then
Put Li ne ( The Museum i s no l o ng e r f u l l . &
Resume t i c k e t s a l e s . ) ;
Museum Ful l := Fa l s e ;
end i f ;
del ay 1 . 0 ; Update s t a t u s e v e r y second
end l oop ;
end Museum V1 ;
The program uses the global variable Population to track the current
number of visitors. Four tasks monitor the turnstiles at the museums four
entrances. The body of these tasks contains a loop that gets information
from its turnstile and either increments or decrements the global variable
Population. A fth task executes the main subprogram which contains
a loop that queries the global variable Population, displays the current
number of visitors, and displays an appropriate message when ticket sales
should be suspended or resumed. The four monitor tasks communicate with
the display task indirectly through the global variable Population.
As the comments in this program indicate, it operates correctly most of
the time. Perhaps once a month the visitor count displayed is greater than
zero at closing time even through the museum docents have conrmed that
all visitors have left. Also occasionally, one of the four turnstile monitor
tasks displays an error message indicating that it has terminated because
of a Constraint Error. We suspect that the task attempted to make the
Natural variable Population negative.
In Chapter 1 we introduced the scenario as a tool for discovering the
potential for deadlock when multiple tasks share a resource. The same tech-
nique may be used to debug the problem in this application. This time, it is a
computer executing instructions rather than humans. While we may see and
think of instructions written in Ada, we must remember that the computer
is executing machine language instructions. An assignment statement is usu-
ally translated by the Ada compiler into several machine instructions. For
example, the Ada statement to increment Population might be translated
into three machine language instructions as follows:
Population := Population + 1;
Copy the value of Population from memory to a CPU register
Increment the CPU register
Replace the value of Population in memory with the value of the CPU register
With this insight, it isnt dicult to nd a scenario that fails when two
people enter through the East and North turnstiles around the same time.
1. The East task copies the value of Population (say it is 52) into its CPU
register
2. The North task copies the value of Population (52) into its CPU register
3. The North task increments its register (it becomes 53)
4. The North task replaces the value of Population in memory with the
value of its register (53)
5. The East task increments its register (it becomes 53)
6. The East task replaces the value of Population in memory with the value
of its register (53)
Each of the two tasks incremented the original value (52) of the shared
variable. We need to nd a way to delay one of the tasks from carrying out
the update of the variable until the other has completed its update. Each
task requires exclusive access to the shared variable Population while it
completes all the necessary machine instructions to increment or decrement
that variable.
4.2 The protected object
Adas protected object provides a safe and ecient mechanism for multiple
tasks to share data. The protected object encapsulates the data allowing
access only through protected operations. Ada ensures that these operations
are executed with mutually exclusive access to the encapsulated data. We
can declare singleton protected objects or dene a protected object type
from which we can declare multiple protected objects. As with packages
and tasks, a protected unit has a specication and body. Lets look at a
complete example. Here is a correct version of our museum visitor counting
program that encapsulates a shared variable, Count, within the protected
object Population.
wi th Tu r n s t i l e ; use Tu r n s t i l e ;
procedure Museum i s
Thi s program us e s a pr ot e c t e d obj e c t s har ed by f i v e
t a s k s t o moni t or t he number of v i s i t o r s i n s i d e a museum
Maximum : constant := 100; The Museum c a pa c i t y
protected Popul at i on i s The c u r r e n t number of v i s i t o r s
procedure I ncr ement ;
procedure Decrement ;
f uncti on Cur r ent r etur n Nat ur al ;
pr i vat e
Count : Nat ur al := 0;
end Popul at i on ;
protected body Popul at i on i s
procedure I ncr ement i s
begi n
Count := Count + 1;
end I ncr ement ;
procedure Decrement i s
begi n
Count := Count 1;
end Decrement ;
f uncti on Cur r ent r etur n Nat ur al i s
begi n
r etur n Count ;
end Cur r ent ;
end Popul at i on ;
A t as k t ype f o r moni t or i ng t u r n s t i l e s
task type Ent r ance Moni t or
( My Entr ance : Tu r n s t i l e . Ent r ance Type ) ;
task body Ent r ance Moni t or i s
Di r e c t i o n : Tu r n s t i l e . Di r e c t i on Ty pe ;
begi n
l oop
Wai t u n t i l someone pa s s e s t hr ough my t u r n s t i l e
Tu r n s t i l e . Get ( My Entrance , Di r e c t i o n ) ;
Update t he number of pe opl e i n t he Museum
case Di r e c t i o n i s
when Tu r n s t i l e . Ent er =>
Popul at i on . I ncr ement ;
when Tu r n s t i l e . Leave =>
Popul at i on . Decrement ;
end case ;
end l oop ;
excepti on
Put Li ne
I tem => Ent r ance Type I mage ( My Entr ance ) &
t u r n s t i l e t as k t e r mi nat e d wi t h e x c e pt i on
& Ada . Ex c e pt i ons . Excepti on Name ( Except ) ) ;
end Ent r ance Moni t or ;
One t as k t o moni t or each of t he f our museum door s
Nor th Door : Ent r ance Moni t or ( Tu r n s t i l e . North ) ;
South Door : Ent r ance Moni t or ( Tu r n s t i l e . South ) ;
Eas t Door : Ent r ance Moni t or ( Tu r n s t i l e . Eas t ) ;
West Door : Ent r ance Moni t or ( Tu r n s t i l e . West ) ;
Museum Ful l : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
Cur r ent Count : Nat ur al ;
begi n
l oop
Cur r ent Count := Popul at i on . Cur r ent ;
Put ( Cur r ent number of v i s i t o r s i s ) ;
Put ( I tem => Cur r ent Count , Width => 1 ) ;
New Li ne ;
Check f o r change i n t i c k e t s e l l i n g s t a t u s
i f not Museum Ful l and Cur r ent Count >= Maximum then
Put Li ne ( The Museum i s f u l l . &
Suspend t i c k e t s a l e s . ) ;
Museum Ful l := True ;
e l s i f Museum Ful l and Cur r ent Count < Maximum then
Put Li ne ( The Museum i s no l o ng e r f u l l . &
Resume t i c k e t s a l e s . ) ;
Museum Ful l := Fa l s e ;
end i f ;
del ay 1 . 0 ; Update s t a t u s e v e r y second
end l oop ;
end Museum;
The specication of a protected object such as Population has a pub-
lic part and a private part. The public part of Population includes the
procedures Increment and Decrement and the function Current. These
are the protected operations of the protected object. The private part of
Population contains the data that the object is protecting from simultane-
ous access. The body of a protected object contains the implementation for
each of the operations dened in the specication. These operation bodies
can access the data dened in the private part of the specication. In our
example, procedures Increment and Decrement and the function Current
all access the encapsulated variable Count.
In Chapter 1 we demonstrated the need for a protocol to prevent erroneous
simultaneous use of a shared resource. The beauty of a protected object is
that it provides, through ordinary-looking functions and procedures, sophis-
ticated pre-protocols and post-protocols for safe and ecient use of shared
data. We simply place the critical sections of code in the bodies of these sub-
programs. A protected procedure may examine and modify the encapsulated
data. A protected procedure provides mutually exclusive read/write access
to the data. When one task is executing the body of a protected procedure,
all other tasks are locked out of the object. A protected function may exam-
ine the encapsulated data but not modify it. This restriction allows multiple
tasks to safely examine the shared data simultaneously.
Lets look at a model that illustrates how protected objects operate. A
locking mechanism provides the protection of shared data. Each protected
object has two associated locks: a read lock and a read/write lock. Only one
of these locks may be active at any time. Initially both locks are inactive.
Both locks must be inactive before a task is allowed to start a protected pro-
cedure. The read/write lock becomes active when a task starts a protected
procedure. The read/write lock returns to inactive when the task completes
execution of the body of the protected procedure. A task may not start a
protected function when the read/write lock is active that lock indicates
that a procedure is modifying the shared data. Figure 4.1 illustrates this
situation. The protected object is represented by the rectangle containing
the protected variables. The large circle around the protected object with
the lock symbol represents a lock; the read/write lock in this example. Tasks
are represented by small circles. The open circles represent tasks executing
or wanting to execute a protected function. Currently all of these tasks are
delayed by the read/write lock protecting the data. The small circles with
diagonal lines represent tasks executing or wanting to execute a protected
procedure. One such task is shown within the protected object indicating
that task is currently executing the body of a protected procedure. The
double-ended arrow between this task and the encapsulated variables indi-
cates that the task may read and write the protected data. The other seven
tasks in this gure are delayed by the read/write lock.
Protected
Variables
read/write lock
legend
A task executing or wanting to
execute a protected procedure
execute a protected function
Figure 4.1 The read/write lock
When the task currently executing within the protected object completes
the body of the protected procedure, it will leave the object and the
read/write lock will become inactive. At that point one of the other tasks
will start its desired operation and activate a lock. Which of those many
delayed tasks is selected is not dened by the core language.
A task may start a protected function when both locks are inactive or
when the read lock is active. The read lock becomes active when a task
starts the protected function. Since protected functions cannot change the
protected data, any number of tasks may be executing protected functions
when the read lock is active. Figure 4.2 illustrates the read lock. In this
example, three tasks are executing protected functions within the protected
object. The arrows between the encapsulated variables and the tasks cur-
rently executing the protected functions indicate that each task may only
read the protected data. A fourth task wanting to start a protected func-
tion is shown passing through the read lock. The tasks wanting to execute
protected procedures are delayed behind the lock. The read lock is removed
when the last task executing a protected function leaves the object.
Protected
Variables
read lock
legend
execute a protected procedure
execute a protected function
Figure 4.2 The read lock
The two locks provide mutually exclusive read/write access and mutually
exclusive read access to the data within the protected object. As tasks may
be delayed by these locks, it is important to keep the code in the bodies
of protected procedures and functions (the critical sections) as short as
possible.
Locks do not provide any synchronization. It is possible, therefore, that a
group of reader tasks executing protected functions can starve writer tasks
wanting to execute protected procedures. One can imagine from Figure 4.2
the possibility of newly arriving reader tasks replacing departing reader
tasks, delaying those tasks that need the read/write access provided by the
protected procedures.
4.3 Synchronization
In Chapter 1 we introduced synchronization with the example of two cooks
preparing a recipe of scalloped potatoes. Horace has to peel a potato
before Mildred can slice it. A shared bowl allows them to work at dier-
ent paces. If Mildred is delayed, Horace could continue working, placing the
peeled potatoes into the bowl at least until the bowl could hold no more.
If Horace has to take a break, Mildred could continue slicing at least
until she exhausts the supply of peeled potatoes in the bowl. We could ex-
tend the example with additional people peeling and slicing potatoes, all
sharing a common bowl. This need to coordinate the asynchronous produc-
tion and consumption of information or objects is common in concurrent
programs it is known as the producer-consumer pattern. Let us see
how to implement it in Ada.
Well use a FIFO queue to buer the objects between the producers and
consumers. Producer tasks will add items to the queue and consumer tasks
will remove them. Since the queue is shared by dierent tasks, we must en-
sure that any update of the queue is made with mutually exclusive access.
Encapsulating the queue within a protected object provides the necessary
exclusive access. While protected functions and procedures provide the re-
quired mutual exclusion, they do not provide any form of ordering needed
to ensure that the tasks actions are synchronized. Synchronization for our
buer requires that a consumer task must wait if the buer is empty and a
producer task must wait if there is no room in the queue for another item.
We use the protected entry to achieve the necessary synchronization.
4.4 The protected entry
The protected entry is the third operation available for accessing the data
encapsulated within a protected object. A protected entry call is like a pro-
tected procedure call. The protected entry uses the read/write lock in the
same way a protected procedure does and the body of a protected entry has
mutually exclusive read/write access to the data encapsulated within the
object. The object-locking behavior demonstrated for protected procedures
in Figures 4.1 and 4.2 applies equally to protected entries.
Synchronization requires the enforcement of an order in which the tasks
execute protected operations. To achieve this order, each protected entry
includes a Boolean expression called a barrier. A barrier that evaluates to
True is said to be open and a barrier that evaluates to False is said to be
closed. A task calling a protected entry with a closed barrier will be blocked
until that barrier becomes open. The Boolean expression of a barrier should
test the state of the protected object. Barriers should not test variables
outside of the protected object. The barriers are evaluated when an entry
is rst called. They are reevaluated when something happens that could
possibly change the barrier. Only protected procedures and entries may
change the state of the protected object; a protected function may only
query the state. Thus barriers are evaluated when an entry is rst called
and reevaluated upon the completion of an entry or procedure body by
some task.
Before looking at the details of the barrier mechanism, lets look at a
full example. The program below illustrates the use of protected entries to
implement a producer-consumer pattern. It has ve producer tasks and one
consumer task that communicate through a buer encapsulated within a
shared protected object.
wi th Ada . Numer i cs . Fl oat Random ; use Ada . Numer i cs ;
wi th Bounded Queue ;
procedure Producer Consumer Demo i s
Number Of Pr oducer s : constant := 5;
Pr o d u c e r I t e r a t i o n s : constant := 8;
package I nt e ge r Que ue i s new

Bounded Queue ( El ement Type => Po s i t i v e ) ;
protected type Bounded Buf f er ( Max Si ze : Po s i t i v e ) i s

procedure Cl e a r ;
d e l e t e a l l of t he i t ems i n t he b u f f e r
entry Put ( I tem : i n Po s i t i v e ) ;
add a v a l ue t o t he b u f f e r
entry Take ( I tem : out Po s i t i v e ) ;
remove a v a l ue f rom t he b u f f e r
pr i vat e
Buf f e r : I nt e ge r Que ue . Queue Type ( Max Si ze ) ;
end Bounded Buf f er ;
protected body Bounded Buf f er i s
procedure Cl e a r i s
begi n
I nt e ge r Que ue . Cl e a r ( Buf f e r ) ;
end Cl e a r ;
entry Put ( I tem : i n Po s i t i v e )
when not I nt e ge r Que ue . Fu l l ( Buf f e r ) i s
begi n
I nt e ge r Que ue . Enqueue ( Queue => Buf f er ,
I tem => I tem ) ;
end Put ;
entry Take ( I tem : out Po s i t i v e )
when not I nt e ge r Que ue . Empty ( Buf f e r ) i s
begi n
I nt e ge r Que ue . Dequeue ( Queue => Buf f er ,
I tem => I tem ) ;
end Take ;
The b u f f e r o bj e c t . Hol ds a maximum of 3 e n t r i e s .
The Buf f er : Bounded Buf f er ( Max Si ze => 3 ) ;
protected I D Ge ne r at or i s
procedure Get ( ID : out Po s i t i v e ) ;
Ret ur ns a uni que p o s i t i v e ID number
pr i vat e
Next I D : Po s i t i v e := 1;
end I D Ge ne r at or ;
protected body I D Ge ne r at or i s
procedure Get ( ID : out Po s i t i v e ) i s
begi n
ID := Next I D ;
Next I D := Next I D + 1;
end Get ;
end I D Ge ne r at or ;
protected Random Durati on i s

procedure Get ( I tem : out Dur at i on ) ;
Ret ur ns a random dur a t i on v a l ue
between 0. 0 and 1. 0 s econds
pr i vat e
F i r s t C a l l : Bool ean := True ;
My Gener at or : Ada . Numer i cs . Fl oat Random . Gener at or ;
end Random Durati on ;
protected body Random Durati on i s
procedure Get ( I tem : out Dur at i on ) i s
begi n
i f F i r s t C a l l then
On t he f i r s t c a l l , r e s e t t he ge ne r a t or
Ada . Numer i cs . Fl oat Random . Res et ( My Gener at or ) ;
F i r s t C a l l := Fa l s e ;
end i f ;
Get a random v a l ue and c onv e r t i t t o a dur a t i on
I tem := Dur at i on ( Fl oat Random . Random ( My Gener at or ) ) ;
end Get ;

task type Pr oducer ;
task body Pr oducer i s
My ID : Po s i t i v e ;
My Del ay : Dur at i on ;
begi n
Get a uni que ID f o r t h i s t as k
I D Ge ne r at or . Get ( ID => My ID ) ;
Put my ID i n t o t he bounded b u f f e r 8 t i mes
f or Count i n 1 . . Pr o d u c e r I t e r a t i o n s l oop
Put my ID i n t o t he b u f f e r
The Buf f er . Put ( My ID ) ;
Si mul at e t he t i me t o do t he work
t o a c t u a l l y pr oduce s omet hi ng
Random Durati on . Get ( My Del ay ) ;
del ay My Del ay ;
end l oop ;
end Pr oducer ;
A number of pr oducer t a s k s
type Pr oduc e r Ar r ay i s ar r ay (1 . . Number Of Pr oducer s )
of Pr oducer ;
Pr oducer s : Pr oduc e r Ar r ay ;
Val ue : Po s i t i v e ;
Consumer Del ay : Dur at i on ;
begi n
Consume e v e r y t h i n g i n t he bounded b u f f e r
f or Count i n 1 . . Number Of Pr oducer s Pr o d u c e r I t e r a t i o n s
l oop
The Buf f er . Take ( Val ue ) ;
Put ( I tem => Val ue , Width => 2 ) ;
New Li ne ;
Si mul at e t he t i me t o do t he work
t o a c t u a l l y consume s omet hi ng
Random Durati on . Get ( Consumer Del ay ) ;
del ay Consumer Del ay / Number Of Pr oducer s ;
end l oop ;
end Producer Consumer Demo ;
Lets begin with the protected type Bounded Buffer. We use this type to
declare the protected object The Buffer. As with task types, we can include
a discriminant with the declaration of a protected type. In this program, the
discriminant species the capacity of the buer. Protected type Bounded
Buffer has three operations. The protected procedure Clear may be called
to empty the buer. The protected entry Put appends a positive integer
to the buer and the protected entry Take removes and returns the rst
number from the buer. The data encapsulated within this protected type
is a FIFO queue of positive integers instantiated from the generic bounded
queue package from Chapter 2. We use the value of the protected types
discriminant to specify the capacity of the FIFO queue.
The body of the protected type Bounded Buffer includes the denition
of a barrier for each of our two entries. Recall that the barrier must be open
(True) for the call to the entry to take place. The barrier for entry Put states
that the encapsulated FIFO queue Buffer must not be full. The barrier for
entry Take states that the encapsulated FIFO queue Buffer must not be
empty. These two barriers ensure that a calling task does not take a value
from an empty buer or attempt to add a value to a full buer. The bodies
of the protected procedure and the two protected entries call the appropriate
FIFO queue operations to accomplish their jobs.
Now lets move down to the producer tasks. We dene the task type
Producer and use it to declare the array of ve tasks, Producers. The
body of task type Producer begins with a call to the protected object
ID Generators procedure Get to obtain a unique identication number.
ID Generator encapsulates a counter used to provide these numbers. The
producer task then puts eight copies of its identication number into The
Buffer. After placing each number into the buer, the task blocks itself for
a random time. The amount of time is obtained from the random number
generator encapsulated in the shared protected object Random Duration.
The one consumer task in this example executes the main subprogram.
It takes numbers out of The Buffer and displays them. Like the producer
tasks, the consumer task obtains a random delay time from the shared pro-
tected object Random Duration which it uses in a delay statement before
taking the next number out of The Buffer.
In Chapter 1 we introduced the scenario as a means for understanding
concurrent algorithms. Lets look at a scenario that illustrates the behavior
of the protected entries in program Producer Consumer Demo.
1. Producers(1) obtains its ID number
3. The consumer task calls entry Take, the barrier is closed (because Buffer
is empty) so the consumer task is blocked
4. Producers(1) calls entry Put, the barrier is open so its number is en-
queued into Buffer
5. Takes barrier is now open, the consumer task is unblocked and removes
the number from Buffer
queued into Buffer
9. Producers(1) gets a random delay value
10. Producers(1) executes the delay statement and is blocked
queued into Buffer
queued into Buffer
14. Producers(5) calls entry Put, the barrier is closed (because Buffer is
full) so the task is blocked
15. The consumer tasks delay time has expired
16. The consumer task calls entry Take, the barrier is open so a number is
removed from the Buffer
17. Puts barrier is now open, Producers(5) is unblocked and enqueues its
number into Buffer
18. And so on . . .
Steps 3 and 5 illustrate how entry Takes barrier blocks consumers until
there is something in Buffer. Steps 14 and 17 show how entry Puts barrier
blocks producers when Buffer is full. Mutual exclusion of shared data and
task synchronization are completely handled by the protected objects. We
need not include any special code within the tasks to obtain these necessary
protections.
4.5 Restrictions
A critical section is a group of instructions that must not be executed con-
currently by multiple tasks. The bodies of protected operations are critical
sections. Other tasks are forced to wait while one task is executing a pro-
tected operation. It is therefore important to keep the code in protected
operations as short as possible.
It is also important that a task is not blocked while executing a protected
operation.
1
It is a bounded error
2
to execute a potentially blocking operation
from within a protected operation. Potentially blocking operations include
Delay statements
Calls to protected object entries
Creation or activation of a task
Calls to subprograms whose body contains a potentially blocking opera-
tion
1
Reasons for this restriction include a very ecient implementation of mutual exclusion and
decreasing the potential of deadlock scenarios.
2
A bounded error need not be detected either prior to or during run time.
4.6 Entry queues 141
Others to be described in Chapter 5
Most input/output operations are potentially blocking. You should never
call a Get or Put procedure within a protected operation. While calling
a protected entry is potentially blocking, calling a protected function or a
protected procedure is not potentially blocking.
While we are discussing restrictions, well remind you again that the
Boolean expressions used in barriers should limit their testing to variables
within the protected object. This limitation facilitates the reevaluation of
the barrier. Barriers should not test variables outside of the protected object.
The barriers are only reevaluated when some task completes the execution
of the body of a protected procedure or entry. A task changing some variable
global to the protected object does not trigger a reevaluation of the barriers.
4.6 Entry queues
Each protected entry has a queue associated with it. When a task calls an
entry whose barrier is closed, it is added to that entrys queue. Figure 4.3
illustrates the two entry queues in our protected object The Buffer from
the program Producer Consumer Demo. Currently, the consumer task is ex-
ecuting the protected entry Take. The read/write lock is active, delaying
tasks Producer(1) and Producer(3). The entry queue for Take is empty
and its barrier, indicated by the hinged gate on the right side of the queue,
is open. Three producer tasks are blocked and waiting in the entry queue
for Put. As the Buffer is currently full, the barrier for Put is closed.
When the consumer task completes the removal of a number from the
buer and exits the protected object, all barriers are reevaluated. Entry Puts
barrier is opened and depending on whether or not the consumer removed
the last item in the queue, entry Takes barrier either remains open or is
closed. As there are producer tasks waiting in the queue, the task at the
head of the queue is selected, removed from the queue, and allowed to put
its value into the buer.
Our simple example demonstrates the order that Ada imposes on the
selection of the task that executes next within the protected object. Queued
entry calls have precedence over other operations on the protected object.
Figure 4.3 shows producer tasks (1) and (3) outside of the protective shell
of the read/write lock. Producer tasks (2), (4) and (5) are within the shell.
When each of these latter three tasks began the execution of entry Put,
the read/write lock was not active. Each activated the lock and checked the
barrier condition. As the barrier was closed, the task was blocked and placed
on Puts entry queue. Upon joining the entry queue, the newly blocked task
released the read/write lock. These three tasks will not be delayed again by
The Buffer
legend
A producer task that is
executing or wanting to
execute entry Put
A consumer task
execute entry Take
3
C
3
5 2 4
Put
1
read/write lock
Buffer
5 1 3
dequeue
Take
C
Figure 4.3 Entry queues for the protected bounded buer
a read lock or a read/write lock before they execute the body of entry Put.
These tasks, as Ben-Ari (2009) states, have already passed the outer shell
and are considered part of the club and have preference over calls that have
not yet commenced.
When a task completes the execution of a protected procedure or pro-
tected entry and leaves the protected object, all barriers are reevaluated. If
one or more barriers are open, one of the entry queues is serviced the
task at the head of that queue is removed and begins execution of the en-
try body. The read/write lock remains active during the switch from the
task that exited the protected object to the task now executing within it.
Figure 4.4 shows The Buffer just after the consumer task completed its re-
moval of the number from Buffer in Figure 4.3. After Producer task (4)
completes the body of entry Put and leaves the protected object, the two
barriers are reevaluated. Since Buffer is again full, the barrier for entry Put
will close.
After evaluating all the barriers, it is possible to have more than one entry
queue with waiting tasks and open barriers. Ada does not specify which of
these queues is serviced. You should assume that the selection is arbitrary.
However, the Real-Time Systems Annex (Appendix D of the ARM) provides
the pragma Queuing Policy which we may use to specify a deterministic
selection. Well discuss this pragma in Chapter 8.
The Buffer
read/write lock
Buffer
1
5 1
enqueue
4
5 2
Take
3
legend
A producer task that is
execute entry Put
3
Put
Figure 4.4 Tasks in the entry queues have precedence over those delayed
behind the lock
The bodies of protected operations may use the Count attribute to query
the current length of an entry queue. The Count attribute may also be
used in barriers. Well look at some examples using this attribute in the
next section. While the Count attribute would seem a useful operation,
one must use it with care in programs that use abort statements or timed
entry calls (Chapter 5). A queue with ve entries becomes a queue of four
entries after one task in the queue is aborted.
4.7 Some useful concurrent patterns
The concurrent programming literature is lled with many patterns for com-
munication between and synchronization of processes. The protected object
provides a simple ecient mechanism for implementing many of these pat-
terns. We have already showed you how the bounded buer pattern can
easily be implemented by a protected object. In this section we look at a
number of additional patterns and their implementations. The implemen-
tations given here are based on those of Burns and Wellings (1998). These
same authors provide an updated set of concurrency utilities based on Adas
object-oriented features (Burns and Wellings, 2007).
4.7.1 Semaphores
A semaphore is a classic concurrency control construct. It combines a counter
and a lock to provide both mutually exclusive access to critical sections of
code and synchronization between tasks. The semaphores counter is initial-
ized during its creation. If initialized to one, it is called a binary semaphore
and if it is initialized to a value greater than one, it is called a counting
semaphore. There are two semaphore operations.
Wait Wait until the counter is greater than zero, then decrement the counter.
The test and decrement of the counter is done as an atomic action.
Signal Increment the counter. The increment is done as an atomic action.
Each semaphore has an associated queue of tasks. When a task performs a
wait operation on a semaphore whose counter is zero, the task is added to the
semaphores queue. When another task increments the semaphore through
a signal operation and there are tasks on the queue, a task is removed from
the queue and it resumes execution. The rst thing that the task does on
resumption is to decrement the counter.
We associate a dierent semaphore with each shared resource. This asso-
ciation is done informally; there is no formal syntax to connect the resource
and the semaphore. To ensure mutually exclusive access to a shared resource,
every task that accesses the resource must call wait before accessing the re-
source and call signal after completing its use of the resource. The following
code fragment illustrates the use of a binary semaphore to provide mutually
exclusive access to the global variable Population in the rst version of our
museum visitor counting program.
The s har ed v a r i a b l e
Popul at i on : Nat ur al := 0;
A bi na r y semaphore whi ch we have a s s o c i a t e d wi t h Popul at i on
Sem : Semaphore ( I n i t i a l Va l u e => 1 ) ;
Use of t he semaphore t o pr o t e c t t he s har ed v a r i a b l e Popul at i on

Sem. Wai t ; Wai t u n t i l t he r e s o ur c e ( Popul at i on ) i s a v a i l a b l e
Popul at i on := Popul at i on + 1; C r i t i c a l Se c t i on
Sem. Si g na l ; Si g na l t hat t he r e s o ur c e i s now a v a i l a b l e
The Wait operation provides the pre-protocol and the Signal operation
provides the post-protocol for ensuring mutually exclusive access to the
shared resource. Each task that accesses the shared resource must include
the calls to Wait and Signal before and after the access. Contrast this
approach to that of the protected object in which each shared resource is
encapsulated in an object. The pre- and post-protocols are associated with
the data rather than repeated within every task that accesses the data.
Semaphores may also be used to provide synchronization. Two semaphores
are required to achieve the necessary synchronization for the bounded buer
in our producer-consumer pattern. A third semaphore is needed to ensure
mutually exclusive access to the buer.
The need for multiple semaphores to implement most simple synchroniza-
tion patterns, having to include semaphore operations within each task ac-
cessing a shared resource, and the the need to manually match up signal/wait
operations make the semaphore an error-prone construct. It is indeed a low-
level mechanism which some people liken to the assembly language of
concurrent programming.
In Ada, the semaphore may be used to overcome the restriction that
a protected operation may not execute a potentially blocking operation.
Lets look at an example of creating and using a semaphore in Ada. It is
common for multiple tasks to write to the console. We require mutually
exclusive access to the console to prevent the interleaving of characters in
messages produced by various tasks. Normally we would achieve mutually
exclusive access by encapsulating the resource (calls to Text IO.Put) within
a protected object. However, because input/output operations in package
Text IO are potentially blocking, it is not possible to do so. The semaphore
provides a workable alternative. So that we need not enclose every call to
Text IO.Put between Wait and Signal, we will encapsulate the semaphore
and code to call Text IO.Put within a package. Here is a specication and
body for a very simple such package.
package Pr ot ect ed Out put i s
Thi s package p r o v i d e s t as k s a f e out put pr oc e dur e s .
The e x e c ut i on of a pr oc e dur e i n t h i s package has
mut ual l y e x c l u s i v e a c c e s s t o t he c ons ol e
procedure Put ( I tem : i n St r i n g ) ;
procedure Put Li ne ( I tem : i n St r i n g ) ;
end Pr ot ect ed Out put ;
package body Pr ot ect ed Out put i s
protected type Semaphore ( I n i t i a l Va l u e : Nat ur al ) i s
procedure Si g na l ;
entry Wai t ;
pr i vat e
Count : Nat ur al := I n i t i a l Va l u e ;
end Semaphore ;
protected body Semaphore i s
procedure Si g na l i s
begi n
Count := Count + 1;
end Si g na l ;
entry Wai t when Count > 0 i s
begi n
Count := Count 1;
end Wai t ;
end Semaphore ;
My Semaphore : Semaphore ( I n i t i a l Va l u e => 1 ) ;
procedure Put ( I tem : i n St r i n g ) i s

begi n
My Semaphore . Wai t ;
Ada . Text I O . Put ( I t em ) ;
My Semaphore . Si g na l ;
end Put ;
procedure Put Li ne ( I tem : i n St r i n g ) i s
begi n
My Semaphore . Wai t ;
Ada . Text I O . Put Li ne ( I tem ) ;
My Semaphore . Si g na l ;
end Put Li ne ;
end Pr ot ect ed Out put ;
Lets rst look at the denition of the semaphore in the package body.
The semaphore type is a protected object encapsulating a counter which
is initialized to the value of the discriminant, Initial Value. We initialize
My Semaphore to one, indicating that the resource (the console) is currently
available. The protected procedure Signal implements the semaphore signal
operation and the protected entry Wait with its barrier implements the
semaphore wait operation. The entry queue serves as the semaphores queue
of waiting tasks.
The body of each output operation dened in the specication encloses a
call to the appropriate output operation in package Ada.Text IO between
a semaphore wait and a semaphore signal operation. Should the console be
in use when a task calls the semaphore wait operation, it will wait its turn
in the entry queue until the task ahead of it has signaled its completion of
console use.
4.7.2 Barriers
A barrier provides a type of synchronization. Do not confuse this synchro-
nization pattern with the term barrier associated with Adas protected en-
tries. The barrier pattern is used to block several tasks until a set number
of tasks have arrived. It is like a horse race that begins only when all of
the horses have arrived at the starting gate. At that point, all of the tasks
are released. Here is a specication and body for a package that implements
barriers.
package Ba r r i e r s i s
protected type Ba r r i e r ( Gr oup Si ze : Po s i t i v e ) i s
wai t u n t i l Gr oup Si ze t a s k s ar e wa i t i ng at t h i s e nt r y
entry Wai t ;
pr i vat e
Gate Open : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
end Ba r r i e r ;
end Ba r r i e r s ;
package body Ba r r i e r s i s
protected body Ba r r i e r i s
entry Wai t
when Wait Count = Gr oup Si ze or Gate Open i s
begi n
i f Wait Count > 0 then
The f i r s t t as k r e l e a s e d opens t he gat e
f o r t he r e s t . Tasks r e l e a s e d be f or e t he
l a s t t as k keep t he gat e open .
Gate Open := True ;
el s e
The l a s t t as k r e l e a s e d c l o s e s t he gat e
Gate Open := Fa l s e ;
end i f ;
end Wai t ;
end Ba r r i e r ;
end Ba r r i e r s ;
Waits entry barrier opens when the value of the WaitCount (the number
of tasks in the entry queue) is equal to the number of tasks set by Group
Size. When the barrier opens, the rst task on the entry queue is selected
and executes the body of Wait. At this point, the number of tasks in Waits
entry queue is below the Group Size. To allow these remaining tasks in the
group to execute entry Wait, the rst task sets the protected Boolean vari-
able Gate Open to True. Thus even though WaitCount is less than Group
Size, the entry barrier remains open. The last task selected from the queue
resets the protected Boolean variable Gate Open to False. The last person
leaving turns o the lights is an analogy frequently given to this program-
ming paradigm.
Because tasks in entry queues have precedence over those delayed behind
the protected objects lock, we are guaranteed that the tasks queued on
Waits entry barrier execute the body of Wait before any other tasks even
test the barrier condition. Any tasks delayed behind the lock will be queued
for the next release. A program that demonstrates the barrier synchroniza-
tion pattern is available on our web site.
4.7.3 Broadcasts
We use the broadcast pattern to send a message to a group of tasks waiting
for it. Like a radio broadcast, only the tasks that are tuned in and waiting
for the message receive it. Tasks that tune in later miss the message and
must wait for the next message to be sent. Well use a generic package to
implement our broadcast pattern. We can instantiate it for any message type
we desire. Here is the specication.
gener i c
type Message Type i s pr i vat e ;
package Br oadcas t s i s
protected type Br oadcas t i s
procedure Send ( Message : i n Message Type ) ;
Send a message t o a l l wa i t i ng t a s k s
entry Tune I n ( Message : out Message Type ) ;
Wai t f o r a message
pr i vat e
The Message : Message Type ;
Have Message : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
end Br oadcas t ;
end Br oadcas t s ;
Tasks call the entry Tune In to wait for a message. A task calls the procedure
Send to broadcast a message to the waiting group. Here is an instantiation
of a package for broadcasting temperatures.
type Degr ees i s del t a 0. 1 range 100. 0 . . 100. 0;
package Br oadcas t Temper at ur e i s new
Br oadcas t s ( Message Type => Degr ees ) ;
And here is the body of the generic broadcast package.
package body Br oadcas t s i s
protected body Br oadcas t i s
procedure Send ( Message : i n Message Type ) i s
begi n
Do s omet hi ng onl y i f t a s k s ar e wa i t i ng
i f Tune I n Count > 0 then
The Message := Message ;
Have Message := True ;
end i f ;
end Send ;
entry Tune I n ( Message : out Message Type )
when Have Message i s
begi n
Message := The Message ;
i f Tune I n Count = 0 then
Have Message := Fa l s e ;
end i f ;
end Tune I n ;
end Br oadcas t ;
end Br oadcas t s ;
The protected procedure Send rst checks to see if any listeners are waiting
in the queue for entry Tune In. If no tasks are waiting, Send does nothing
with its message. Otherwise, it stores its message in the protected variable
The Message and opens the entry barrier by setting the Boolean variable
Have Message to True. Once the barrier is open, all of the waiting tasks
take a copy of the message. The last task in the queue closes the barrier to
prevent any non-queued tasks from accessing the message. A program that
demonstrates the broadcast synchronization pattern is available on our web
site.
4.8 Requeue and private operations
Assigning limited resources is a basic problem in concurrent programming
as well as in life. For example, suppose a school has a supply of 100 special
pencils for their ancient mark sense exam scoring machine. When a teacher
gives an exam to their class, they request a number of pencils from the
principal. When the exam is nished, the teacher returns the pencils. Should
the principal not have enough pencils to satisfy all requests, some teachers
may have to wait until another teacher returns pencils. Because pencils
wear out and are stolen, the teachers may not return as many pencils as
they requested. New pencils are occasionally added to the inventory.
We can use a protected object to model the principal. As teachers may
have to wait until the principal has sucient pencils for their needs, we use
an entry for pencil requests. There should be no waiting to return pencils, so
we use a procedure for that operation. Here is our rst attempt at dening
the protected object.
package Re s o ur c e Al l o c a t i o n 1 s t At t e mpt i s
protected type Manager ( I n i t i a l I n v e n t o r y : Po s i t i v e ) i s
entry Take ( Number Requi r ed : i n Po s i t i v e ) ;
Make a r e que s t f o r r e s o u r c e s . The c a l l e r i s bl ocked
u n t i l t he amount r e que s t e d i s a v a i l a b l e
procedure Repl ace ( Number Returned : i n Po s i t i v e ) ;
Ret ur n r e s o u r c e s so some ot he r t as k may use them .
pr i vat e
I nv e nt o r y : Nat ur al := I n i t i a l I n v e n t o r y ;
end Manager ;
end Re s o ur c e Al l o c a t i o n 1 s t At t e mpt ;
The body of the package would seem to be trivial just decrement
the inventory when resources are taken and increment the inventory when
resources are returned. And, of course, we will need to add a barrier to
our entry to block any task requesting more resources than are currently in
memory. Here is that package body.
package body Re s o ur c e Al l o c a t i o n 1 s t At t e mpt i s
protected body Manager i s
entry Take ( Number Requi r ed : i n Po s i t i v e )
when Number Requi r ed >= I nv e nt o r y i s
begi n
I nv e nt o r y := I nv e nt o r y Number Requi r ed ;
end Take ;
procedure Repl ace ( Number Returned : i n Po s i t i v e ) i s
begi n
I nv e nt o r y := I nv e nt o r y + Number Returned ;
end Repl ace ;
end Manager ;
end Re s o ur c e Al l o c a t i o n 1 s t At t e mpt ;
Unfortunately, this package body does not compile. The Ada compiler balks
at the condition we used in our barrier. Here is the errant line and the error
message.
when Number Requi r ed <= I nv e nt o r y i s
***ERROR*** "Number Required" is undefined
We may not use parameters in our barrier expressions. This restriction
makes sense when you recall that this barrier must be evaluated after re-
sources are returned as well as when requests are made. We may only deter-
mine the value of an entry parameter within the entry body.
3
Returning to
our school analogy, we cannot block a teacher at the principals door with
a barrier that tests the number of pencils the teacher needs. We must let
the teacher into the oce to nd out how large their request is. Everything
is ne if the principal has enough pencils to satisfy that request. However,
there is a problem if the principal does not have a sucient inventory of
pencils. Our solution is to move the teacher into a private waiting room
adjacent to the principals oce where they will wait until another teacher
returns some pencils. At that point the principal can let the teacher waiting
in the private room back into the oce to see if their request may now be
lled. If it can, we are done. If it cant, well return the teacher to the private
waiting room. Here is the specication of a resource controller based on this
new model.
package Re s o u r c e Al l o c a t i o n i s
protected type Manager ( I n i t i a l I n v e n t o r y : Po s i t i v e ) i s
entry Take ( Number Requi r ed : i n Po s i t i v e ) ;
Make a r e que s t f o r r e s o u r c e s . The c a l l e r i s bl ocked
u n t i l t he amount r e que s t e d i s a v a i l a b l e
procedure Repl ace ( Number Returned : i n Po s i t i v e ) ;
Ret ur n r e s o u r c e s so some ot he r t as k may use them .
pr i vat e
I nv e nt o r y : Nat ur al := I n i t i a l I n v e n t o r y ;
Tas ks Wai t i ng : Nat ur al ;
Re s our c e Re l e as e d : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
entry Wai t ( Number Requi r ed : i n Po s i t i v e ) ;
end Manager ;
end Re s o u r c e Al l o c a t i o n ;
3
There are two additional reasons for prohibiting the use of a parameter in a barrier
expression. First, it is costly to implement. Second, it would allow a programmer to dene
their own entry queueing policy which would make the analyses discussed in Chapter 7 far
more complex.
The specication of the protected type includes three more items in the
private part. Entry Wait corresponds to the private waiting room in our
school analogy. Well use the variables Tasks Waiting and Resource Released
to process all of the tasks in the private waiting room whenever resources
are returned.
The only remaining problem is how we move the unsatised requester
to the private waiting room. Making an entry call from an entry body is
not allowed as it is a potentially blocking operation. The solution is Adas
requeue statement. The requeue statement redirects an entry call to a
new entry queue. It may also redirect the call to the same entry queue.
There is one restriction with the requeue statement the entry to which
we requeue a task must either have no parameters or have the same signature
(parameter prole) as the entry from which it is being moved. Here is the
body of our resource controller that makes use of the requeue statement.
package body Re s o u r c e Al l o c a t i o n i s
protected body Manager i s
when I nv e nt o r y > 0 i s
begi n
i f Number Requi r ed <= I nv e nt o r y then
el s e
requeue Wai t ;
end i f ;
end Take ;
procedure Repl ace ( Number Returned : i n Po s i t i v e ) i s
begi n
I nv e nt o r y := I nv e nt o r y + Number Returned ;
Tas ks Wai t i ng := Wait Count ;
i f Tas ks Wai t i ng > 0 then
Re s our c e Re l e as e d := True ;
end i f ;
end Repl ace ;
entry Wai t ( Number Requi r ed : i n Po s i t i v e )
when Re s our c e Re l e as e d i s
begi n
Decrement number of t a s k s wa i t i ng
Tas ks Wai t i ng := Tas ks Wai t i ng 1;
Am I t he l a s t t as k t o be checked ?
i f Tas ks Wai t i ng = 0 then
Cl os e t he b a r r i e r
Re s our c e Re l e as e d := Fa l s e ;
end i f ;
Are t he r e enough r e s o u r c e s f o r my r e que s t
4.9 Pragmas Atomic and Volatile 153
i f Number Requi r ed <= I nv e nt o r y then
el s e Get back i n l i n e and wai t f o r more r e s o u r c e s
requeue Wai t ;
end i f ;
end Wai t ;
end Manager ;
end Re s o u r c e Al l o c a t i o n ;
The body of entry Take is straightforward. If there are enough resources
in the inventory, we allocate them. Otherwise, we requeue the caller on the
private entry Wait. Procedure Replace is a little more complicated than
our rst attempt. After incrementing the inventory, we check to see how
many tasks are waiting at the private entry Wait. If there are one or more
tasks in that entrys queue, we set the Boolean variable Resource Released
to True. This change will open the barrier of the private entry Wait. The
logic of entry Wait is similar to what we used in our implementations of
barriers and broadcasts. But the last one out turn o the lights pattern is
dierent. Because we might requeue a task back onto entry Wait, we cannot
use the WaitCount to test whether or not to close the barrier. Instead, we
use the variable Tasks Waiting in this role. This variable is initialized to
WaitCount by a task returning a resource. It is decremented by each task
as they check to see whether the recently released resources are sucient
to satisfy their needs. A program that demonstrates the resource allocation
pattern is available on our web site.
One nal note on this implementation of a resource controller. It assumes
that the entry queues are FIFO queues. In Chapters 7 and 8 well introduce
the notion of priority and how we can request that entry queues be priority
queues rather than FIFO queues. Burns and Wellings (1998; 2007) discuss
solutions for resource allocation with priority entry queues.
4.9 Pragmas Atomic and Volatile
In this chapter we have shown how tasks can cooperate through shared
resources. Shared resources allow tasks to communicate and synchronize. We
emphasized the need to protect variables that are shared by multiple tasks.
The museum example clearly demonstrated the consequences of failing to
provide mutually exclusive access to a shared variable. We introduced the
protected object and described how its locks ensure mutually exclusive access
to its data and its entry barriers provide the means for synchronization.
In this section, we look at the special circumstances in which we can do
without the protected object and allow multiple tasks to access a simple
shared variable directly.
If the following three conditions are met, it is safe for multiple tasks to
access an unprotected shared variable.
1. Each task either reads the variable or writes the variable, but not both.
2. Each read and write is done as an indivisible action.
3. There are no temporary copies of the variable.
The rst condition eliminates the problem that we saw in the original
museum software. To update the shared variable Population, the turnstile
tasks had to both read and write the shared variable. The problems arose
when a second tasks reading and writing were interleaved with the rst
tasks. The second condition ensures that a read or write operation has no
interference from simultaneous write operations. To meet this condition, the
processor must be able to read or write the variable in a single indivisible
machine cycle. The third condition is broken when the compiler, in an at-
tempt to optimize our code, creates temporary copies of the variable in a
register. All of the tasks must access the same memory location, not some
temporary copy.
The burden of satisfying the rst condition is the responsibility of the
program designer. Ada provides two pragmas to direct the compiler to meet
the other two. Pragma Atomic will either ensure that the compiler satises
the last two conditions or produce a syntax error to inform us that it cannot
ensure those conditions. Here is an incomplete program which demonstrates
the use of pragma Atomic. The shared global variable Value is written to by
three tasks (one being the main task) while eight tasks read variable Value.
procedure Atomic Demo i s
Val ue : Nat ur al := 0;
pragma Atomi c ( Val ue ) ;
task type Wr i t e r ;
task body Wr i t e r i s
My Val ue : Nat ur al := 0;
begi n
l oop
Cr eat e My Val ue
My Val ue := . . .
Wr i t e My Val ue t o t he s har ed g l o b a l
Val ue := My Val ue ;
del ay 0 . 1 ;
end l oop ;
end Wr i t e r ;
4.10 Interrupts 155
task type Reader ;
task body Reader i s
My Val ue : Nat ur al ;
begi n
l oop
Read t he s har ed g l o b a l
My Val ue := Val ue ;
Do s omet hi ng wi t h My Val ue
. . .
del ay 0 . 2 ;
end l oop ;
end Reader ;
type Wr i t e r Ar r a y i s ar r ay (1 . . 2) of Wr i t e r ;
type Reader Ar r ay i s ar r ay (1 . . 8) of Reader ;
The Wr i t er s : Wr i t e r Ar r a y ;
The Reader s : Reader Ar r ay ;
begi n
Val ue := 25;
end Atomic Demo ;
It is unlikely that an array can be read or written in a single machine
cycle. However, the pragma Atomic Components may be used to ensure that
the reading and writing of a single array component satises the last two
conditions for shared access.
In our discussion of assigning package variables to memory-mapped device
registers in Chapter 2, we introduced the pragma Volatile. This pragma
ensures that reads and writes to the named variable go directly to memory
rather than to a possible copy that the compiler optimizes into registers.
The related pragma Volatile Components ensures that the compiler does
not create copies of individual components of the named array variable.
4.10 Interrupts
The device driver we wrote for the analog to digital converter (page 94)
used a loop with a delay statement to repeatedly check the done bit. This
polling loop uses valuable processor time waiting for the device to complete
the conversion of an analog voltage. The interrupt provides an alternative
to the polling loop. An interrupt is an asynchronous event indicating a
need for attention. Humans constantly process interrupts. Suppose we are
reading a book and the telephone rings. We insert a bookmark, set down
our book, and take the call. When we are nished with the call, we return
to reading our book. Imagine a phone system that used polling instead of
interrupts. Such a system would require us to periodically pick up the phone
and say hello to see if anyone was connected to us. If we dont check the
phone frequently enough, we might miss a call. On the other hand, checking
it too frequently wastes our valuable time.
Interrupts are commonly generated by hardware devices such as our ana-
log to digital converter. When a device generates an interrupt, the processor
saves its current state and begins execution of a sequence of instructions
called an interrupt handler. Interrupts may also be generated by software
through the execution of an interrupt instruction. Like hardware interrupts,
the generation of a software interrupt causes the processor to save its current
state and begin execution of an interrupt hander. After the execution of the
interrupt handler is complete, the processor returns to the state that was
saved at the point that the interrupt was generated.
Sometimes we must handle multiple interrupts. Suppose we are reading
a book and the telephone rings at the same time there is a knock on our
door. Can we process both interruptions? Which interrupt do we deal with
rst? Can we be interrupted while processing an interrupt? To manage such
cases, interrupts are generally assigned priorities. These priorities are often
set by the hardware.
Section C.3 of the Ada Reference Manual (Taft et al., 2006) describes a
model for interrupts in Ada programs. Here are the key denitions of this
model.
An interrupt represents a class of events that are detected by the hardware
or the system software.
Interrupts are said to occur.
An occurrence of an interrupt is separable into generation and delivery.
The generation of an interrupt is the event in the underlying hardware or
system that makes the interrupt available to the program.
Delivery is the action that invokes part of the program in response to the
interrupt occurrence.
Between generation and delivery, the interrupt occurrence is pending.
Some or all interrupts may be blocked. When an interrupt is blocked, all
occurrences of that interrupt are prevented from being delivered.
Certain interrupts are reserved. The set of interrupts that are reserved
is implementation-dened. A reserved interrupt is either an interrupt for
which user-dened handlers are not supported, or one which already has
an attached handler by some other implementation-dened means.
4.10 Interrupts 157
Program units can be connected to non-reserved interrupts. While con-
nected, the program unit is said to be attached to that interrupt. The
execution of that program unit, the interrupt handler, is invoked upon
delivery of the interrupt occurrence.
Beginning with Ada 95, the preferred program unit for an interrupt han-
dler is a parameterless protected procedure.
While a handler is attached to an interrupt, it is called once for each
delivered occurrence of that interrupt. While the handler executes, the
corresponding interrupt is blocked.
While an interrupt is blocked, all occurrences of that interrupt are pre-
vented from being delivered. Whether such occurrences remain pending
or are lost is implementation-dened.
Each interrupt has a default handler which determines the systems re-
sponse to an occurrence of that interrupt when no user-dened handler is
attached.
Adas support for interrupts includes two pragmas and the packages
Ada.Interrupts and Ada.Interrupts.Names. We use the analog to dig-
ital converter described in Chapter 2 to illustrate interrupt handling. Here
is the specication for the device.
wi th Common Units ; See Chapt er 2
package ADC I nt r pt i s
S p e c i f i c a t i o n of a make b e l i e v e anal og t o d i g i t a l c o n v e r t e r
type Channel Number i s range 0 . . 31;
subtype I n p u t Vo l t s i s Common Units . Vol t s
range 0. 0 . . 5 . 0 ;
type Gai n Choi ce i s ( One , Two, Four ) ;
Over Range : excepti on ;
Ret ur ns t he v o l t a g e on t he gi v e n channel
Po t e n t i a l l y bl o c k i ng ( wa i t s on an e nt r y )
Ra i s e s Over Range i f t he a mp l i f i e d v o l t a g e
e xc e e ds 5 v o l t s
pr i vat e
f or Channel Number Si z e use 5;
f or Gai n Choi ce use ( One => 2#001#, Two => 2#010#,
Four => 2#100#);
f or Gai n Choi ce Si z e use 3;
end ADC I nt r pt ;
The only change from the specication in Chapter 2 is the comment that
the caller may be blocked by an entry barrier instead of by a delay statement.
Here is the body of our interrupt-based analog to digital converter.
wi th Ada . I n t e r r u p t s . Names ;
package body ADC I nt r pt i s
use Common Units ; For o pe r a t o r s on Vol t s
Addr e s s e s of t he ADC s two r e g i s t e r s ( memory mapped I /O)
CSR Address : constant System . Addr es s :=
To Addr ess (16#60008010#);
Dat a Addr es s : constant System . Addr es s :=
To Addr ess (16#60008012#);
type CSR Rec i s For t he c o n t r o l and s t a t u s r e g i s t e r
record
Done : Bool ean ;
end record ;
f or CSR Rec use
record
end record ;
type Data Type i s range 0 . . 4095; f o r t he dat a r e g i s t e r
The two de v i c e r e g i s t e r s
f or Co n t r o l St a t u s Re g i s t e r Addr es s use CSR Address ;
f or Co n t r o l St a t u s Re g i s t e r Si z e use 16;
pragma Vo l a t i l e ( Co n t r o l S t a t u s Re g i s t e r ) ;
Da t a Re gi s t e r : Data Type ;
f or Dat a Re gi s t e r Addr es s use Dat a Addr es s ;
f or Dat a Re gi s t e r Si z e use 16;
4.10 Interrupts 159
pragma Vo l a t i l e ( Da t a Re gi s t e r ) ;
The i n t e r r u p t ha ndl e r i s i n t h i s pr ot e c t e d o bj e c t
protected ADC I nt er r upt i s

entry Read ( Channel : i n Channel Number ;
pr i vat e
Busy : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
Conver s i on Compl et e : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
procedure Handl er ; The a c t ua l i n t e r r u p t ha ndl e r
pragma At t ach Handl er ( Handl er ,
Ada . I n t e r r u p t s . Names . SIGINT ) ;
pragma I n t e r r u p t P r i o r i t y ;
entry Wai t For Compl et i on ( Channel : i n Channel Number ;
end ADC I nt er r upt ;
protected body ADC I nt er r upt i s
entry Read ( Channel : i n Channel Number ;
Val ue : out I n p u t Vo l t s ) when not Busy i s
Shadow : CSR Rec ;
begi n
Set up f o r t he c onv e r s i on
I nt Ena bl e => True , Over f l ow => Fal s e ,
Co n t r o l S t a t u s Re g i s t e r := Shadow ;
Don t l e t anyone e l s e e xe c ut e t h i s e nt r y
Busy := True ;
requeue Wai t For Compl et i on ; Wai t f o r i n t e r r u p t
end Read ;
procedure Handl er i s
begi n
Conver s i on Compl et e := True ;
end Handl er ;
entry Wai t For Compl et i on ( Channel : i n Channel Number ;

Val ue : out I n p u t Vo l t s )
when Conver s i on Compl et e i s
begi n
Set up f o r t he next c onv e r s i on
Busy := Fa l s e ;
Conver s i on Compl et e := Fa l s e ;
Check f o r p o s s i b l e ov e r f l ow
end i f ;
Conver t whol e number dat a t o a f i x e d poi nt v o l t a g e
Val ue := 5 Vol t s ( Da t a Re gi s t e r ) / 4095;
end Wai t For Compl et i on ;
end ADC I nt er r upt ;

begi n
ADC I nt er r upt . Read ( Channel , Gai n , Val ue ) ;
end Read ;
end ADC I nt r pt ;
The implementation of our interrupt-based analog to digital converter is
based on the protected object ADC Interrupt. The public portion of the
specication of this protected object has a single entry, Read. This entry
is called by procedure Read dened in the package specication. The pri-
vate portion of the protected object includes two Boolean variables used for
synchronization, the parameterless procedure Handler, and the entry Wait
For Completion with the same parameter prole as the public entry Read.
The pragma Attach Handler designates procedure Handler as an inter-
rupt handler. This pragma also associates the interrupt handler with a par-
ticular interrupt. Package Ada.Interrupts.Names provides the names of
the available interrupts. The pragma Interrupt Priority sets the priority
of the protected object to that required for interrupts. An understanding of
priorities is not important to our discussion of interrupt handlers. Well look
at priorities in detail in Chapters 7 and 8.
Lets trace a call to procedure Read. This procedure calls the entry Read
in the protected object. The value of Busy is initially False so the entrys
barrier is open and we execute the body. We set up and start the analog
to digital conversion just as we did in the polling version we write the
setup values to the control and status register. The only dierence is that we
set the Int Enable bit to True. Now when the conversion is complete, the
device will generate an interrupt. After starting the device, the calling task
sets the Boolean variable Busy to True, which closes entry Reads barrier.
At this point we must wait until the hardware completes the conversion
and generates the interrupt. In the polling version we temporarily blocked
4.10 Interrupts 161
execution of the calling task with a delay statement. In the interrupt version
we block execution of the calling task by moving it to an entry queue whose
barrier is closed. We use the requeue statement to accomplish this transfer.
In our example, requeue moves the task from the Read entry to the Wait
For Completion entry. As the value of Conversion Complete is False, the
barrier is closed and our calling task is blocked. Once we are blocked, the
read/write lock is removed. Should another task attempt to start a new
voltage conversion while the original task is waiting, it will be blocked in
Reads closed entry queue.
When the analog to digital hardware completes the conversion and gen-
erates the interrupt, the processor saves its current state and invokes the
interrupt handler the protected procedure Handler. This procedure sets
the Boolean variable Conversion Complete to True. Once the interrupt
handler completes its execution, the processor returns to its previous state.
But now the entry barrier on which our task is blocked has opened so it can
execute the entry body. First we set both synchronization variables to False
for the next conversion. Then we check the status bit to see if the voltage
exceeded the range of the converter. Finally, we obtain the data and convert
it to the required voltage range. Once our task leaves the protected object,
another task can begin the voltage reading process anew. Youll notice that
we do not use the parameters Channel or Gain in the body of entry Wait
For Completion. We had to include these parameters to create the same
parameter prole as entry Read. The requeue statement requires that the
entry to which we requeue either has no parameters or has a parameter
prole identical to that of the entry from which we are transferring.
Our sample code illustrates the static association of an interrupt han-
dler. Package Ada.Interrupts provides procedures for attaching, exchang-
ing, and detaching interrupt handlers while our program is executing. It
also includes functions to query whether a particular interrupt is reserved,
whether it is currently attached to some handler, and to what handler it is
attached. To use these operations for the dynamic association of interrupt
handlers, you must include the pragma Interrupt Handler rather than the
pragma Attach Handler for each protected procedure you might use as an
interrupt handler.
Summary
Communication is the exchange of data or control signals between pro-
cesses.
Shared variables provide a means for processes to communicate with each
other.
Mutual exclusion is a mechanism that prevents two processes from simul-
taneously using the same resource.
Synchronization ensures that cooperating processes complete the steps of
a job in the correct order.
Adas protected objects provide a safe and ecient mechanism for multiple
tasks to share data.
Protected objects encapsulate shared data and provide protected func-
tions, protected procedures, and protected entries to access that data.
Protected functions provide mutually exclusive read access to the shared
data. Many tasks can simultaneously read the data.
Protected procedures provide mutually exclusive read/write access to the
shared data. Only a single task at a time can update the shared data.
Like protected procedures, protected entries provide mutually exclusive
read/write access to the shared data. In addition, each entry has a barrier
which we use to synchronize the tasks access to the shared data.
Each protected entry has a queue for tasks waiting on a closed barrier.
It is an error to execute a potentially blocking operation from within a
protected operation.
We use protected objects to implement most concurrent patterns such
as the bounded buer, the semaphore, the barrier, the broadcast and
resource allocators.
The requeue statement redirects an entry call to a new entry queue.
An interrupt is an asynchronous event indicating a need for attention.
When an interrupt occurs, the processor saves its current state and exe-
cutes a sequence of instructions called an interrupt handler.
Interrupt handlers are written as parameterless protected procedures.
Exercises
4.1 Dene the terms communication, mutual exclusion, and synchroniza-
tion.
4.2 The scenario given to demonstrate the problem in the rst version of our
museum visitor counting program showed an example where the count
was less than the actual number of visitors within the museum. Describe
how this can give rise to the Constraint Error seen occasionally with
this program.
Exercises 163
4.3 Write a scenario for the rst version of our museum visitor counting
program that demonstrates how the count becomes greater than the
actual number of visitors in the museum.
4.4 The protected object The Buffer in program Producer Consumer Demo
has two entries, Put and Take.
1. Is it possible to have the barriers for these two entries closed simul-
taneously? If so, give a scenario that results in this state.
2. If we had multiple consumers as well as multiple producers,
is it possible to have tasks waiting in both entry queues
simultaneously?
4.5 Given the following code fragment:
subtype Wor d St r i ng i s St r i n g (1 . . 16) ;
protected type Word Hol der i s
procedure Set ( Word : i n Wor d St r i ng ) ;
entry Get ( Word : out Wor d St r i ng ) ;
entry F i r s t ( Le t t e r : out Char ac t e r ) ;
pr i vat e
The Word : Wor d St r i ng ;
Va l i d : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
end Word Hol der ;
protected body Word Hol der i s
procedure Set ( Word : i n Wor d St r i ng ) i s
begi n
The Word := Word ;
Va l i d := True ;
end Set ;
procedure Cl e a r i s
begi n
Va l i d := Fa l s e ;
end Cl e a r
;
entry Get ( Word : out Wor d St r i ng ) when v a l i d i s
begi n
Word := The Word ;
end Get ;
entry F i r s t ( Le t t e r : out Char ac t e r ) when v a l i d i s
begi n
Le t t e r := The Word ( 1 ) ;
end F i r s t ;
end Word Hol der ;
Suppose that the value of Valid is false so that the barriers on entries
Get and First are closed. Further suppose that three tasks are waiting
in the entry queue for Get and two tasks are waiting in the entry queue
for First. Now a task calls procedure Set which opens both barriers.
From which entry queue is the next task allowed to access the protected
data selected?
4.6 Design a protected object that stores a shared integer. Use a discrimi-
nant to assign the initial value to the integer. Include a protected op-
eration that obtains the value of the integer and a protected operation
that updates the integer.
4.7 Modify the protected object you designed in the previous question to
handle the following two additions.
1. A reader task should always read a fresh value. That is, after one
task has read the value, the next task must wait until a new value
has been written to the integer variable before reading it. Assume
that the initial value is fresh.
2. Each value must be used before a new value can be assigned to the
integer variable. A task wanting to change the value must wait until
some task has read the current value. This condition applies to the
initial value.
4.8 Write a package that implements the concurrent blackboard pattern.
The two primary operations on a blackboard are writing a message
and reading a message. We can also erase the blackboard. A task want-
ing to read a message on the blackboard must wait until there is a
message.
4.9 The package body for the analog to digital converter on page 94 is
not safe for use with multiple tasks. While one task is delayed waiting
to complete a conversion of the voltage on one channel, a second task
may attempt to begin a conversion on a second channel. Add a pro-
tected object to this body that ensures that only one task at a time
can perform a conversion. Remember that the body of a protected op-
eration (function, procedure, or entry) may not include any code that
is potentially blocking.
4.10 Our solution for resource allocation could possibly starve a task wait-
ing for a large number of resources. Explain how this starvation could
occur.
4.11 Rewrite our protected object for resource allocation so that a task will
not be starved waiting for a large number of resources. Here is one
possible solution (explained in terms of our teacher/pencil analogy).
The principal only allows one teacher to wait in the private waiting
Exercises 165
room. When a teacher returns some pencils, the teacher waiting in the
private room is allowed back into the principals oce to see if there are
enough pencils for their need. While there is a teacher in the private
waiting room, all other teachers who want pencils must wait outside
the main (public) door to the principals oce.
4.12 We stated that our resource allocation package does not work when
the entry queues are priority queues rather than FIFO queues. Explain
why it fails with priority-based entry queues.
4.13 The following package specication denes an event pattern.
package Event s i s
type St at e Type i s (On, Of f ) ;
protected type Event ( I n i t i a l Va l u e : St at e Type ) i s
procedure Turn On ;
procedure Tur n Of f ;
entry Wai t ( De s i r e d St a t e : i n St at e Type ) ;
pr i vat e
St at e : St at e Type := I n i t i a l Va l u e ;
entry Wai t For On ;
entry Wai t For Of f ;
end Event ;
end Event s ;
The two protected procedures change the state of the event. The public
entry Wait allows a task to wait until the state of the event is On or until
the state of the event is Off. The parameter Desired State determines
which Wait For entry is entered. Complete the body of this package.
4.14 The requeue statement may include the option with abort. Read sec-
tion 9.5.4 of the Ada Reference Manual and determine the eects of this
option. You may also nd section 9.8 useful in answering this question.
4.15 Dene the terms interrupt, interrupt generation, interrupt delivery,
pending interrupt, and interrupt handler.
5
Communication and synchronization based on
direct interaction
In Chapter 4 we showed how protected objects can provide an indirect means
for tasks to communicate and synchronize. Protected functions and proce-
dures provide safe access to shared data while protected entries provide the
means for tasks to synchronize their activities. In this chapter we look at
direct communication between tasks through Adas rendezvous.
5.1 The rendezvous
Rendezvous is a sixteenth century French word which literally translates
to present yourself. To rendezvous is to come together at a prearranged
meeting place. In Ada, the rendezvous is a mechanism for controlled direct
interaction between two tasks. The rendezvous provides a second way to
synchronize tasks and transfer data between them.
Adas rendezvous is based on a client-server model. One task, called the
server, declares one or more services that it can oer to other tasks, the
clients. These services are dened as entries in the server tasks specication.
Task entries are similar to protected entries. In fact, we may requeue a
protected entry call onto a task entry and vice versa. A client task requests
a rendezvous with a server by making entry calls just as if the server was a
protected object. Server tasks indicate a willingness to accept a rendezvous
on an entry by executing an accept statement. The accept statement may
include code to be executed during the rendezvous.
For the rendezvous to take place, both the client and the server must have
issued their requests. Should the client make an entry call before the server
executes an accept statement, the client is blocked. If the server executes an
accept statement before the client makes an entry call, the server is blocked.
When both requests have been made, the tasks begin their rendezvous. When
the rendezvous occurs, the two tasks are synchronized we know that the
server is available to provide its service and that the client is at the point
in its execution that it requires that service. During the rendezvous:
1. The values of any in and in out entry parameters are passed from the
client task to the server task.
2. The client task is blocked.
3. The server task executes any code within the accept statement.
4. The values of any out and in out entry parameters are transferred from
the server task to the client task.
5. Both the server task and the client task continue their independent and
concurrent execution.
The parameters passed during the rendezvous provide direct communi-
cation between the client and the server. The client is blocked while the
server executes the optional rendezvous code the sequence of statements
included within the accept statement. To minimize blocking, the rendezvous
code should be kept as short as possible.
Client Task Server Task
parameters
2. entry call
1. accept
execute
rendezvous
code
3. end accept
results
4. entry call
parameters
5. accept
execute
rendezvous
code
6. end accept
results
Blocked
Task
Executing
Task
Figure 5.1 Statement sequencing in rendezvous
Figure 5.1 illustrates the behavior of the rendezvous. Time ows down in
this gure. At the start, both tasks are executing. At time 1, the server task
168 Communication and synchronization based on direct interaction
executes an accept statement. Since no client task has made an entry call,
the server task is blocked. At time 2, the client task makes an entry call. As
the server is waiting for this call, the rendezvous begins immediately with
the passing of parameters from the client. The client is blocked while the
server executes the code within its accept statement. When control reaches
the end of the accept statement at time 3, the rendezvous ends and any
results are returned to the client. Both the client and the server continue
to execute concurrently. At time 4, the client makes a second entry call
to the server. But as the server is not executing an accept statement, the
client is blocked. At time 5, the server executes an accept statement. There
is a client waiting so the rendezvous begins immediately with the passing
of parameters from the client. The client is again blocked while the server
executes the code within its accept statement. When control reaches the end
of the accept statement at time 6, the rendezvous ends and any results are
returned to the client. Both the client and the server continue to execute
concurrently.
Lets look at some sample Ada code.
wi th Ada . Numer i cs . Fl oat Random ; use Ada . Numer i cs ;
procedure Rendezvous Demo i s
Number Of Cl i ent s : constant := 5;
Numbe r Of I t e r a t i ons : constant := 4;
protected Random Durati on i s

procedure Get ( I tem : out Dur at i on ) ;
Ret ur ns a random dur a t i on v a l ue between
0. 0 and 1. 0 s econds
pr i vat e
F i r s t C a l l : Bool ean := True ;
My Gener at or : Ada . Numer i cs . Fl oat Random . Gener at or ;
protected body Random Durati on i s
procedure Get ( I tem : out Dur at i on ) i s
begi n
i f F i r s t C a l l then
On t he f i r s t c a l l , r e s e t t he ge ne r a t or
Ada . Numer i cs . Fl oat Random . Res et ( My Gener at or ) ;
F i r s t C a l l := Fa l s e ;
end i f ;
Get a random f l o a t v a l ue and
c onv e r t i t t o a dur a t i on
I tem := Dur at i on ( Fl oat Random . Random ( My Gener at or ) ) ;
end Get ;
task Count er i s
entry I ncr ement ( Cl i e n t : i n Po s i t i v e ;
Val ue : out Nat ur al ) ;
end Count er ;
task body Count er i s
Count : Nat ur al := 0;
begi n
l oop Each i t e r a t i o n , r endez vous wi t h two c l i e n t s
del ay My Del ay ;
accept I ncr ement ( Cl i e n t : i n Po s i t i v e ;
Val ue : out Nat ur al ) do
Put Li ne ( Count er i s i n #1 r endez vous wi t h t as k
& Po s i t i v e I mage ( Cl i e n t ) ) ;
Count := Count + 1;
Val ue := Count ;
end I ncr ement ;
del ay My Del ay ;
accept I ncr ement ( Cl i e n t : i n Po s i t i v e ;
Val ue : out Nat ur al ) do
Put Li ne ( Count er i s i n #2 r endez vous wi t h t as k
& Po s i t i v e I mage ( Cl i e n t ) ) ;
Count := Count + 1;
Val ue := Count ;
end I ncr ement ;
end l oop ;
end Count er ;
task type Cl i e n t i s
entry As s i gn I D ( As s i gne d I D : i n Po s i t i v e ) ;
end Cl i e n t ;
task body Cl i e n t i s
My ID : Po s i t i v e ;
Cur r ent : Nat ur al ;
begi n
accept As s i gn I D ( As s i gne d I D : i n Po s i t i v e ) do
My ID := As s i gne d I D ;
end As s i gn I D ;
f or Count i n 1 . . Numbe r Of I t e r a t i ons l oop
del ay My Del ay ;
Count er . I ncr ement ( Cl i e n t => My ID ,
Val ue => Cur r ent ) ;
Put Li ne ( Cl i e n t & Po s i t i v e I mage ( My ID) &
got a v a l ue of &
Nat ur al I mage ( Cur r ent ) ) ;
end l oop ;
end Cl i e n t ;
type Cl i e n t Ar r a y i s ar r ay (1 . . Number Of Cl i ent s )
of Cl i e n t ;
Cl i e n t s : Cl i e n t Ar r a y ;
begi n
Rendezvous w i l l a l l t he t a s k s i n a r r a y Cl i e n t s
f or I ndex i n Cl i e nt Ar r a y Range l oop
Rendezvous wi t h a c l i e n t ,
g i v e i t t he same ID as i t s i nde x
Cl i e n t s ( I ndex ) . As s i gn I D ( As s i gne d I D => I ndex ) ;
end l oop ;
end Rendezvous Demo ;
Program Rendezvous Demo contains the singleton task Counter and task
type Client. Task Counter includes the declaration of the entry Increment
and task type Client includes the declaration of the entry Assign ID.
Clients is an array of ve Client tasks.
The main subprogram executes a for loop that makes an entry call to
each task in the array Clients. The rst statement in the body for task
type Client is an accept statement. When both the entry call and the
accept have been made, the rendezvous between the main task and one of
the ve tasks making up array Clients begins. During this rendezvous,
the ID from the main task is copied to the local variable My ID. When the
assignment statement inside the accept statement is completed, both the
main task and the task Clients(ID) continue to execute concurrently. In
these ve rendezvous, the ve tasks making up the array Clients act as
servers for the main task.
After the main task makes its ve rendezvous, each of the client tasks has
an ID equal to the index of its position in the array Clients. In Chapter 4,
we used task discriminants to assign IDs to tasks (see, for example, the four
door monitoring tasks in the museum program on page 130). Discriminants
cannot be used with arrays of tasks so the rendezvous is a common approach
for assigning IDs to tasks making up an array.
After receiving their IDs, each of the ve client tasks executes a loop in
which they delay for a random duration and then call task Counters entry
Increment. When the rendezvous is complete, the client displays its ID and
the value of the count it got back from Counter.
Task Counter contains a loop in which it participates in two dierent ren-
dezvous. While we could obtain the same results with one accept statement
instead of two in our loop, we wanted to demonstrate that there can be
multiple accept statements for every entry declared in a tasks specication.
With ve client tasks calling the one server tasks entry, there is sure to
be some competition between the clients for the servers attention. As with
protected entries, each task entry includes a queue in which entry calls wait
their turn. Note that this queue is associated with the entry, not each accept
statement. When tasks are waiting on an entry queue, the execution of any
accept statement in the task removes the rst client task from the entry
queue for the rendezvous.
The basic rendezvous follows a wait forever model. Once a client has made
an entry call, it must wait until the server accepts the call. There is no limit
on the amount of time the client will wait for the server to rendezvous.
Similarly, once a server has executed an accept statement, it must wait until
some client issues an entry call. Again, there is no limit on the amount of
time the server will wait for a client to rendezvous. In the next sections,
well look at methods for giving servers and clients more control over the
indenite wait for their rendezvous partner.
5.2 The selective accept statement
The selective accept statement gives the server member of the rendezvous
pair more control in the acceptance of entry calls. As this statement has
many options, it is worthwhile looking at its denition in Adas variant of
BNF.
1
selective accept ::= select
[guard]
select alternative
{or
[guard]
select alternative }
[else
sequence of statements ]
end select;
The select statement provides one or more alternatives. Like an if state-
ment, when the select statement is executed only one of the alternatives is
1
Backus-Naur Form. Section 1.1.4 of the ARM describes this BNF variant. The symbol ::= is
read is dened as. Bold text and punctuation are literals. Square brackets, [ ], enclose
optional expressions. Curly brackets, { }, enclose expressions that may occur zero or more
times. Vertical bars, |, separate alternatives.
executed. Here are the denitions of the two new terms given in the deni-
tion of the selective accept.
select alternative ::= accept alternative
| delay alternative
| terminate alternative
accept alternative ::= accept statement
[sequence of statements]
guard ::= when condition =>
The delay alternative, terminate alternative, and else part are mutually
exclusive only one of them can be included in a given select statement.
We will examine all these alternatives in the next sections.
5.2.1 The accept alternative
We use the accept alternative with its optional sequence of statements to
wait for a rendezvous on one of several entries. Here is an example of its use.
The following task is part of an application that controls the preparation of
hot drinks in a beverage vending machine. Other tasks in this application
include one that takes orders, accepts money, and makes change, one that
plays music to attract customers, and one that controls the animated signage
on the front of the machine.
task Make Beverage i s
entry Cof f e e ( Sugar : i n Bool ean ;
Cream : i n Bool ean ) ;
entry Tea ( Sugar : i n Bool ean ;
Mi l k : i n Bool ean ;
Lemon : i n Bool ean ) ;
entry Cocoa ;
end Make Beverage ;
task body Make Beverage i s
Wi t h Sugar : Bool ean ;
Wi th Cream : Bool ean ;
Wi t h Mi l k : Bool ean ;
Wi th Lemon : Bool ean ;
begi n
l oop
s el ect
accept Cof f e e ( Sugar : i n Bool ean ;
Cream : i n Bool ean ) do
Wi t h Sugar := Sugar ;
Wi th Cream := Cream ;
end Cof f e e ;
Run Cof f ee Sys t em ( Wi th Sugar , Wi th Cream ) ;
Sa n i t i z e Co f f e e Sy s t e m ;
or
accept Tea ( Sugar : i n Bool ean ;
Lemon : i n Bool ean ) do
Wi t h Mi l k := Mi l k ;
Wi th Lemon := Lemon ;
end Tea ;
Run Tea System ( Wi th Sugar , Wi th Mi l k , Wi th Lemon ) ;
Sani t i z e Te a Sy s t e m ;
or
accept Cocoa ;
Run Cocoa System ;
Sani t i z e Coc oa Sy s t e m ;
end s el ect ;
Sa n i t i z e Di s p e n s e r Sy s t e m ;
end l oop ;
end Make Beverage ;
Task Make Beverage has three entries. The select statement in the task
body has three accept alternatives. When the select statement is executed,
all the entry queues are evaluated. There are three possibilities.
If all the entry queues are empty, the server task is blocked. The server
task will wake up as soon as some client calls one of the three entries.
The server task then makes the rendezvous with the appropriate accept
statement.
If all of the entry queues save one are empty when the server task executes
the select statement, the server task will immediately rendezvous with the
rst task in that non-empty entry queue.
If there are tasks waiting in more than one entry queue when the server
task executes the select statement, the server task will immediately ren-
dezvous with a task from one of the entry queues. Which entry queue
is selected is not specied by the language. You should assume that the
selection is arbitrary. The Real-Time Systems Annex (Appendix D of the
ARM) provides pragma Queuing Policy which we may use to specify a
deterministic selection. Well discuss this pragma in Chapter 8.
The entry Cocoa has no parameters. For parameterless entries, we usually
omit the accept statements optional sequence of statements executed during
the rendezvous. Compare the accept statement for Cocoa with those for
Coffee and Tea. The rendezvous code for Coffee and Tea is short it
copies the parameters to local variables. The client task is not blocked during
the actual brewing or cleaning of the system. These jobs are done after each
rendezvous is complete.
5.2.2 Guarded alternatives
The BNF denition of the selective accept shows that each selective accept
can have a guard associated with it. A guard serves the same function as
the protected entrys barrier. A guard is a Boolean expression that is eval-
uated when the select statement is executed. If the expression is False, the
alternative is said to be closed. A closed select alternative is not eligible for
selection during this execution of the select statement. If the expression is
True, the alternative is said to be open and is eligible for selection during this
execution of the select statement. An alternative without a guard is always
open. The exception Program Error is raised if all alternatives are closed.
It is important to note that all of the guards in a select statement are
evaluated when the select statement rst begins its execution they are
not reevaluated if the task is blocked by the select statement.
Lets look at an example. The following task controls an electric motor. We
can set the motors direction, start the motor, and stop the motor. To start
the motor, we rst energize a set of low-current draw windings. After the
motor begins turning, we switch over to the running windings. The motor
could be damaged if we change its direction while it is running. To ensure
that the motor is not damaged, we include a guard on the select alternative
that sets the motors direction. When the motor is running, the guard is
False and the accept for Set Direction is not eligible for selection.
type Di r e c t i on Ty pe i s ( Cl ockwi s e , Count e r Cl oc kwi s e ) ;
type Wi ndi ng St at e i s ( Of f , On ) ;
task Motor i s
entry St a r t ;
entry Stop ;
entry Se t Di r e c t i o n ( Di r e c t i o n : i n Di r e c t i on Ty pe ) ;
end Motor ;
task body Motor i s
Runni ng : Bool ean := Fa l s e ;
begi n
l oop
s el ect
accept St a r t ;
Se t St a r t Wi ndi ngs (To => On ) ;
Runni ng := True ;
del ay 3 0 . 0 ;
Se t St a r t Wi ndi ngs (To => Of f ) ;
Set Run Wi ndi ngs (To => On ) ;
or
accept Stop ;
Set Run Wi ndi ngs (To => Of f ) ;
Runni ng := Fa l s e ;
or
when not Runni ng =>
accept Se t Di r e c t i o n ( Di r e c t i o n : Di r e c t i on Ty pe ) do
Se t Wi ndi ng Po l a r i t y ( Di r e c t i o n ) ;
end Se t Di r e c t i o n ;
end s el ect ;
end l oop ;
end Motor ;
As with barriers, we recommend that guards do not use global variables
which may be changed by other tasks.
5.2.3 The terminate alternative
The terminate alternative provides a means for ending the execution of a
task when it is no longer required. The terminate alternative is selected
when two conditions are true:
The tasks master (see Section 3.3.2) is completed.
Each task that depends on the master considered is either already termi-
nated or similarly blocked at a select statement with an open terminate
alternative.
Here is the select statement for our coee vending machine example with
the addition of a terminate alternative.
s el ect
accept Cof f e e ( Sugar : i n Bool ean ;
Cream : i n Bool ean ) do
Wi th Cream := Cream ;
end Cof f e e ;
Run Cof f ee Sys t em ( Wi th Sugar , Wi th Cream ) ;
Sa n i t i z e Co f f e e Sy s t e m ;
or
accept Tea ( Sugar : i n Bool ean ;
Lemon : i n Bool ean ) do
Wi t h Mi l k := Mi l k ;
Wi th Lemon := Lemon ;
end Tea ;
Run Tea System ( Wi th Sugar , Wi th Mi l k , Wi th Lemon ) ;
Sani t i z e Te a Sy s t e m ;
or
accept Cocoa ;
Run Cocoa System ;
Sani t i z e Coc oa Sy s t e m ;
or
termi nate ;
end s el ect ;
With the terminate alternative, task Make Beverage will terminate when
any task that could rendezvous with it is either nished or also waiting on
a select statement with an open terminate alternative.
5.2.4 The delay alternative
The delay alternative provides a means to limit the amount of time that a
server waits for a client to rendezvous. You can use either of two dierent
delay statements to express this time. Here are the BNF denitions for the
delay alternative.
delay alternative ::= delay statement
[sequence of statements]
delay statement ::= delay relative statement | delay until statement
delay relative statement ::= delay delay expression;
delay until statement ::= delay until delay expression;
The expected type for the delay expression in a delay relative statement
is the predened type Duration. We have already used the relative delay
statement in many examples. The expected type for the delay expression in
a delay until statement is a time type, either the type Time from package
Ada.Calendar (described in section 9.6 of the ARM) or the type Time from
the package Ada.Real Time (described in section D.8 of the ARM). The
clock in package Ada.Calendar is often referred to as a wall clock. Its
value is adjusted for leap years and may jump forward or backward as a re-
sult of daylight savings time changes and leap seconds. The high-resolution
clock in package Ada.Real Time keeps monotonic time time that never de-
creases. A call to that clock returns the amount of time that has passed since
some implementation-dened epoch unaected by the events that change
wall clock time. We will discuss package Ada.Real Time in more detail in
Chapter 8.
Relative delays
As an example of a delay alternative with a relative delay, lets look at a
task that controls the temperature of a house. Here is its specication:
task Ther mostat i s
entry Enabl e ( Se t Poi nt : i n Degr ees ) ;
entry Di s a bl e ;
end Ther mostat ;
Entry Enable turns on the heating system and sets the desired tempera-
ture. Entry Disable turns o the heating system. When it is enabled, the
thermostat turns the furnace on when the temperature is half a degree below
the desired temperature and turns the furnace o when the temperature is
half a degree above the desired temperature. When the furnace is o, the
thermostat checks the temperature every 0.5 seconds. While the furnace is
running, it checks the temperature every 1.5 seconds. Here is the body of
the thermostat task:
task body Ther mostat i s
Cur r ent : Degr ees ; Cur r ent house t emper at ur e
Tar get : Degr ees ; De s i r e d house t emper at ur e
Furnace On : Bool ean := Fa l s e ; Fl ag f o r guar ds
begi n
accept Enabl e ( Se t Poi nt : i n Degr ees ) do
Tar get := Se t Poi nt ;
end Enabl e ;
l oop
s el ect
end Enabl e ;
or
accept Di s a bl e ;
Tur n Fur nace Of f ;
Furnace On := Fa l s e ;
end Enabl e ;
or
when Furnace On =>
del ay 1 . 5 0 ;
or
when not Furnace On =>
del ay 0 . 5 0 ;
end s el ect ;
Get Temper at ur e ( Cur r ent ) ;
i f Furnace On and Cur r ent >= Tar get + 0. 5 then
Tur n Fur nace Of f ;
Furnace On := Fa l s e ;
e l s i f not Furnace On and Cur r ent <= Tar get 0. 5 then
Tur n Fur nace On ;
Furnace On := True ;
end i f ;
end l oop ;
end Ther mostat ;
Initially, the heating system is o. The accept Enable statement before
the loop turns on the system. The select statement in the loop has four alter-
natives. We may call Enable to change the desired temperature or Disable
to turn the system o. After Disable is called, the furnace is turned o
and the thermostat task is blocked until Enable is called. Note that the
accept statement for this Enable is a simple accept statement, not a select
alternative. The other two alternatives are guarded delay statements. At a
given time, only one of these alternatives will be open. If neither Enable
nor Disable is called before the open delay expires, that delay alternative is
selected. Control continues to the code that checks the current temperature
and, if necessary, makes appropriate calls to the furnace.
Absolute delays
Now lets look at an example of a delay alternative with an absolute delay.
The following task body controls a commercial-size tea kettle. So that the
water is hot when the sta arrives in the morning, we have included a delay
alternative that will turn the heater on at 5:00 AM every morning. Another
delay alternative turns the heater o when the cafe closes at 11:00 PM. Two
entries allow us to turn the heater on and o manually. For this application,
the clock in Ada.Calendar is appropriate.
task body Ke t t l e i s
Year : Ada . Cal endar . Year Number ;
Month : Ada . Cal endar . Month Number ;
Day : Ada . Cal endar . Day Number ;
Seconds : Ada . Cal endar . Day Dur at i on ;
On Time : Ada . Cal endar . Time ;
Of f Ti me : Ada . Cal endar . Time ;
begi n
Read t he c l oc k f o r c u r r e n t dat e / t i me
On Time := Ada . Cal endar . Cl ock ;
S p l i t t he t i me v a l ue i n t o Year , Month , Day , and Seconds
Ada . Cal endar . S p l i t ( On Time , Year , Month , Day , Seconds ) ;
Set t he t ur n on t i me t o mi dni ght ( t he s t a r t of t oday )
On Time := Ada . Cal endar . Ti me Of ( Year , Month , Day , 0 . 0 ) ;
Set t he t ur n on t i me t o 5: 00 AM (5 hr s a f t e r mi dni ght )
On Time := On Time + Dur at i on (5 60 60) ;
Set t he t ur n o f f t i me t o 11: 00 PM (18 hr s a f t e r on t i me )
Of f Ti me := On Time + Dur at i on (18 60 60) ;
l oop
s el ect
accept Turn On ; manual t ur n on
Turn On Heat ;
or
accept Tur n Of f ; manual t ur n o f f
Tur n Of f Heat ;
or
del ay unt i l On Time ; automated t ur n on
Turn On Heat ;
Turn on agai n i n 24 hour s
On Time := On Time + Dur at i on (24 60 60) ;
or
del ay unt i l Of f Ti me ; automated t ur n o f f
Tur n Of f Heat ;
Turn o f f agai n i n 24 hour s
Of f Ti me := Of f Ti me + Dur at i on (24 60 60) ;
end s el ect ;
end l oop ;
end Ke t t l e ;
Function Ada.Calendar.Clock returns the current time. We split the time
value into the components Year, Month, Day, and Seconds. Then we recom-
bine these components with a value of zero for Seconds to obtain the time
of midnight of the current day. Finally, we add ve hours to midnight to
obtain our 5:00 AM start time. Our closing time is then calculated to be
18 hours after the opening time. Each time one of the two delay alterna-
tives expires, we carry out the operation and reset the time for 24 hours
later.
5.2.5 The else part
The optional else part of the select statement and its sequence of statements
is executed if no other alternative can be selected immediately. Such is the
case if no client has issued a entry call for the server or the guards have
closed any entry whose queue is not empty. Use this option with caution as
removing the possibility of not blocking the task on some entry can lead to
busy waiting (polling) logic that may starve other tasks. Here is an example.
task body Moni t or Temper at ur e i s
My Del ay : Dur at i on := 5 . 0 ;
Cur r ent : Degr ees ;
begi n
l oop
s el ect
accept Change Rate ( Val ue : i n Dur at i on ) do
My Del ay := Val ue ;
end Change Rate ;
el s e
nul l ;
end s el ect ;
Get Temper at ur e ( Cur r ent ) ;
Di s pl ay Temper at ur e ( Cur r ent ) ;
del ay My Del ay ;
end l oop ;
end Moni t or Temper at ur e ;
Task Monitor Temperature periodically obtains a temperature and dis-
plays it. At the beginning of each iteration, the task checks to see if it should
change the temperature sampling rate. Usually, no change is requested and
the task executes the empty else part, samples and displays the tempera-
ture, and delays until the next cycle. As there is a delay statement after
the select statement, the use of the else part does not create a busy waiting
loop that could starve other tasks. An alternative solution would be to use
a delay alternative in place of the else part. However, with this alternative,
a request change will result in a shortening of the cycle for that one period.
Moving the delay out of the select statement ensures that the delay is never
terminated by an entry call.
5.3 Entry call options
In the last section we looked at options that the server (the called task) has
available when handling entry calls. The server may wait indenitely, wait
for a specic amount of time, wait until all of its clients have terminated, or
not wait at all. The client tasks also have options when making entry calls.
The calls can be to task entries or to protected entries. Well look at the
options for entry calls in this section.
5.3.1 Timed entry calls
A timed entry call allows a client to specify how long they are willing to
wait for the protected object or server to accept the call. Here is an exam-
ple of a timed entry call to the Disable entry of the Thermostat task on
page 177.
s el ect
Ther mostat . Di s a bl e ; Attempt t o r endez vous
Put Li ne ( Di s abl e d t he t he r mos t at ) ;
or
del ay 5 . 0 ; Wai t f o r 5 s econds f o r r endezvous
Put Li ne ( Gave up wa i t i ng f o r r endez vous ) ;
end s el ect ;
After disabling the furnace once, a second entry call to Disable is blocked
since task Thermostat is waiting to accept an entry call to Enable. Using
the timed entry call, our client can abandon the attempt to rendezvous with
the thermostat task.
When the time specied in a timed entry call expires, the task is removed
from the entry queue in which it was waiting. Removal from the queue
can cause problems for a server or protected object that uses the Count
attribute to determine how many client tasks are waiting in a queue. See
Section 4.7 and Exercise 4.14 for some examples that may be complicated
by the use of timed entry calls or abort statements.
5.3.2 Conditional entry calls
Conditional entry calls may be used to call protected entries or to perform a
rendezvous. A conditional entry call is equivalent to a timed entry call with
an immediate expiration time. Here is an example of a conditional entry call
to the Disable entry of the Thermostat task.
s el ect
Ther mostat . Di s a bl e ; Attempt t o r endez vous
Put Li ne ( Di s abl e d t he t he r mos t at ) ;
el s e
Put Li ne ( Coul d not r endez vous r i g h t away ) ;
end s el ect ;
5.4 State machines
The state machine is an important model in the design of real-time and
embedded systems. We assume that the reader is familiar with the basics of
state machine diagrams and their usefulness in the design of applications.
For a detailed description of state diagrams in software design see Blaha
and Rumbaugh (2004) or Douglass (1998). A state diagram describes the
behavior of an object. Each state represents a stage in the behavior pattern
of an object. A transition is a change from one state to another. It is triggered
by an event that is either internal or external to the object. In Chapter 3
we used simple state diagrams to illustrate the behavior of the Ada task.
We typically draw a state diagram for each object in our design that has
non-trivial behavior.
event / effect
[condition]
State Name
do / activity
Figure 5.2 State machine diagram notation
A state diagram is built from the two primary elements shown in Fig-
ure 5.2: rounded boxes representing states and arrows indicating transitions
from one state to another. The rounded rectangle includes the name of the
state and a do option that indicates an activity that continues while the
object is in this state. Do activities include continuous operations such as
ashing a light and sequential activities that terminate by themselves after
an interval of time, such as closing an airlock door. A do activity may be
interrupted by an event that is received during its execution. For example,
a closing door may encounter an obstacle, causing it to cease moving. The
arrow is annotated with the name of the event that causes the transition
out of a state. A transition may include an optional eect and an optional
guard condition. An eect is an action that happens instantaneously such
as displaying a message, incrementing a counter, or setting a bit. Like the
guard on a select alternative, the guard condition on a state transition closes
the transition when the condition is False. When a transition is closed, the
event does not cause a change of state.
There are a number of techniques for implementing state machines in Ada.
Since a state is an abstraction of an objects attributes, we can represent
it as a collection of values. We change the state by changing these values.
When the state of the object is controlled by a single task, this collection
of values can be as simple as a record. When multiple tasks generate state-
changing events, we can encapsulate the data within a protected object. Both
of these approaches work well for passive objects. A passive object is one
whose state changes only in response to events generated by other objects.
A passive object does not change its state by itself. An active object is one
that can change its state by itself. An active object requires its own thread
of control to change itself. So active objects are often implemented as tasks.
Usually, we can determine whether an object is active or passive from its
state diagram. Indications that an object is active include do activities and
transitions based on time. In the next sections well look at some techniques
for implementing the state machines for passive and active objects.
5.4.1 Implementing state machines for passive objects
Figure 5.3 is a state diagram for the headlights in a car. The black circle
with an unlabeled transition to the O state indicates that O is the initial
state for this diagram. In the On state, the headlights are illuminated at the
normal brightness level. In the High state, the high beam lament is powered
to give additional light. The driver controls the headlights with two switches
on the dashboard. These switches may be polled by a task that periodically
checks all dashboard controls or may generate an interrupt when a switch
is changed. In either case, some external object generates the events shown
in the gure. The switch o event is also generated by the main task when
the car is turned o.
switch off
On
high on
high off switch on
switch off
High Off
Figure 5.3 State diagram for car headlights
As is usual for state diagrams, each state in Figure 5.3 is aected by only
a few of the possible events. For example, while in the state O, the event
high on does not change the state of the headlights; they remain o.
Here is a package specication for the headlights object.
package He a dl i ght s i s
type St at e Type i s ( Off , On, Hi gh ) ;
type Event Type i s ( Swi tch On , Swi t ch Of f , High On , Hi gh Of f ) ;
procedure Si gna l Ev e nt ( Event : Event Type ) ;
Si g na l an event t hat may p o s s i b l y
change t he s t a t e of t he h e a d l i g h t s
f uncti on Cur r e nt St a t e r etur n St at e Type ;
Ret ur n t he c u r r e n t s t a t e of t he h e a d l i g h t s
end He a dl i ght s ;
Nested case statements
We will show you two of the many techniques for implementing a passive
object state machine. The most common technique uses nested case state-
ments. Since multiple tasks generate headlight events, well encapsulate these
case statements within a protected object. Here is the body that uses this
approach.
wi th Li g ht s ; Package wi t h l i g h t c o n t r o l / s t a t u s r e g i s t e r s
package body He adl i ght s V1 i s
protected Cont r ol i s
pr i vat e
St at e : St at e Type := Of f ;
end Cont r ol ;
protected body Cont r ol i s
procedure Si gna l Ev e nt ( Event : Event Type ) i s
begi n
case St at e i s
when Of f =>
case Event i s
when Swi tch On =>
St at e := On;
Li g ht s . Se t He adl i ght s On ;
when Swi t c h Of f | Hi gh On | Hi gh Of f =>
nul l ;
end case ;
when On =>
case Event i s
when Swi t c h Of f =>
St at e := Of f ;
Li g ht s . Se t He a d l i g h t s Of f ;
when Hi gh On =>
St at e := Hi gh ;
Li g ht s . Set Hi gh Beams On ;
when Swi tch On | Hi gh Of f =>
nul l ;
end case ;
when Hi gh =>
case Event i s
when Swi t c h Of f =>
St at e := Of f ;
Li g ht s . Set Hi gh Beams Of f ;
when Hi gh Of f =>
St at e := On;
when Swi tch On | Hi gh On =>
nul l ;
end case ;
end case ;
end Si gna l Ev e nt ;
f uncti on Cur r e nt St a t e r etur n St at e Type i s
begi n
r etur n St at e ;
end Cur r e nt St a t e ;
end Cont r ol ;
Ex t e r na l Ope r at i ons
begi n
Cont r ol . Si gna l Ev e nt ( Event ) ;
begi n
r etur n Cont r ol . Cur r e nt St a t e ;
end He adl i ght s V1 ;
The bodies for the two operations dened in the package specication
make calls to operations in the protected object Control. The outer case
statement in the protected procedure Signal Event selects the alternative
for the current state. Within each of those alternatives, a case statement
based on the event may change the state or not. When the state does change,
calls are made to appropriate procedures to change the powering of the
headlight laments. These are the eects of the state change.
With the nested case statement approach, the amount of code necessary
is proportional to the product of the number of states and the number of
events. This approach can become unwieldy when the number of states or
the number of events is large.
State transition tables
Another technique for implementing passive state machines is based on the
state transition table. Given the current state and an event, the state tran-
sition table can tell us the next state. Table 5.1 is a state transition table for
our headlight state diagram. The rst row shows the states we can transition
to from the O state, the second row shows the states we can transition to
from the On state, and the third row shows the states we can transition to
from the High state.
switch on switch o high on high o
O On O O O
On On O High On
High High O High On
Table 5.1 A state transition table for the state machine of Figure 5.3
If we are in the O state and the event switch on occurs, we can look at
the rst column and determine that the next state is On. If we are in the
O state and the event high on occurs, we can look at the third column
and determine that the next state is O there is no change of state.
We can put the data from a state transition table into a two-dimensional
array with the state as the row index and the event as the column index. To
nd the next state, we simply look up the value in the row for the current
state and the column for the event.
There is one additional problem to solve for this implementation. With
each transition, there is often an eect that requires that we execute some
code. For example, when our headlights transition from the O state to the
On state, we must change the bit in the control/status register of the cars
lighting system that energizes the main bulb laments. We implement this
by storing a pointer to an appropriate eect procedure with each entry in
our two-dimensional array. We rst declare a pointer type that designates a
procedure with no parameters. Then we dene a pointer to each of our ve
eect procedures using the attribute Access with each procedure name.
Here is the package body that uses a state transition table approach.
wi th Li g ht s ; Package wi t h l i g h t c o n t r o l / s t a t u s r e g i s t e r s
package body He adl i ght s V2 i s
procedure Bot h Of f i s
begi n
end Bot h Of f ;
type Ef f e c t Pt r i s access procedure ;
L Of f : constant Ef f e c t Pt r := Li ght s . Se t He a dl i ght s Of f Access ;
L On : constant Ef f e c t Pt r := Li g ht s . Set Headl i ght s On Access ;
H Of f : constant Ef f e c t Pt r := Li g ht s . Set Hi gh Beams Of f Access ;
H On : constant Ef f e c t Pt r := Li g ht s . Set Hi gh Beams On Access ;
B Of f : constant Ef f e c t Pt r := Both Of f Access ;
type Tabl e Ent r y i s
record
Ne xt St at e : St at e Type ;
Ef f e c t : Ef f e c t Pt r ;
end record ;
type Tr a n s i t i o n Ar r a y i s ar r ay ( St at e Type , Event Type )
of Tabl e Ent r y ;
Tr a n s i t i o n Ta b l e : constant Tr a n s i t i o n Ar r a y :=
( ( ( On, L On ) , ( Of f , nul l ) , ( Of f , nul l ) , ( Of f , nul l ) ) ,
( ( On, nul l ) , ( Of f , L Of f ) , ( Hi gh , H On) , (On, nul l ) ) ,
( ( Hi gh , nul l ) , ( Of f , B Of f ) , ( Hi gh , nul l ) , (On, H Of f ) ) ) ;
protected Cont r ol i s
pr i vat e
end Cont r ol ;
protected body Cont r ol i s
begi n
Car r y out any e f f e c t f o r t he s t a t e change
i f Tr a n s i t i o n Ta b l e ( St at e , Event ) . Ef f e c t /= nul l then
Tr a n s i t i o n Ta b l e ( St at e , Event ) . Ef f e c t . a l l ;
end i f ;
Det er mi ne t he next s t a t e f rom t he t a b l e
St at e := Tr a n s i t i o n Ta b l e ( St at e , Event ) . Ne xt St at e ;
begi n
r etur n St at e ;
end Cont r ol ;
begi n
Cont r ol . Si gna l Ev e nt ( Event ) ;
begi n
r etur n Cont r ol . Cur r e nt St a t e ;
end He adl i ght s V2 ;
The array Transition Table is dened as a constant. The value of this
constant is set by a two-dimensional array aggregate. The elements of this
array aggregate are record aggregates.
5.4.2 Implementing state machines for active objects
Figure 5.4 is a state diagram for a large electric induction motor. To start
this motor, we apply power to a set of low-current draw start windings.
After one minute, the motor is turning fast enough that we can switch over
to the normal run windings. While the motor is running, we monitor its
temperature. Should the temperature exceed some maximum value, we turn
the motor o.
switch off
Starting
temperature > max
Running
do / monitor temperature
1 minute
switch on
switch off
Off
Figure 5.4 State diagram for a large induction motor
Two features of this state diagram indicate that the motor controller is an
active object. First, the transition between Starting and Running is based
on time. Second, while in the Running state the do activity requires that the
motor continually check its temperature. Here is our specication for this
motor.
package I nduc t i on Mot or i s
type St at e Type i s ( Of f , St a r t i ng , Runni ng ) ;
Ex t e r na l motor e v e nt s
procedure Swi tch On ;
procedure Swi t c h Of f ;
end I nduc t i on Mot or ;
Our implementation of this active motor object uses a task that responds
to external events and generates its own events. The code within the mo-
tor control task is similar to our nested case statement solution for passive
objects. We use a case statement based on the three possible states of the
motor. In each case alternative we use a select statement. Each select state-
ment includes an alternative for each possible entry.
We keep the state of the motor in a protected object that is shared by
the motor control task and any external task that calls function Current
State. Here is the package body.
wi th I nduc t i on Mot or . Ope r at i ons ; use I nduc t i on Mot or . Ope r at i ons ;
package body I nduc t i on Mot or i s
protected Motor i s For t he s har ed s t a t e
procedure Se t St a t e (To : i n St at e Type ) ;
pr i vat e
end Motor ;
protected body Motor i s
procedure Se t St a t e (To : i n St at e Type ) i s
begi n
St at e := To ;
end Se t St a t e ;
begi n
r etur n St at e ;
end Motor ;
task Cont r ol i s
entry Swi tch On ;
entry Swi t c h Of f ;
end Cont r ol ;
task body Cont r ol i s
begi n
l oop
case Motor . Cur r e nt St a t e i s
when Of f =>
s el ect
accept Swi t c h Of f ;
or
accept Swi tch On ;
Motor . Se t St a t e (To => St a r t i n g ) ;
Ope r at i ons . Se t St a r t Wi ndi ngs (To => On ) ;
end s el ect ;
when St a r t i n g =>
s el ect
Motor . Se t St a t e (To => Of f ) ;
Ope r at i ons . Se t St a r t Wi ndi ngs (To => Of f ) ;
or
accept Swi tch On ;
or
del ay 6 0 . 0 ; f o r motor t o get up t o s peed
Motor . Se t St a t e (To => Runni ng ) ;
Ope r at i ons . Se t St a r t Wi ndi ngs (To => Of f ) ;
Ope r at i ons . Set Run Wi ndi ngs (To => On ) ;
end s el ect ;
when Runni ng =>
s el ect
Ope r at i ons . Set Run Wi ndi ngs (To => Of f ) ;
or
accept Swi tch On ;
or
del ay 1 . 0 ; Check t emper at ur e once a second
i f Ope r at i ons . Cur r ent Temper at ur e > Max then
Ope r at i ons . Set Run Wi ndi ngs (To => Of f ) ;
end i f ;
end s el ect ;
end case ;
end l oop ;
end Cont r ol ;
procedure Swi tch On i s
begi n
Cont r ol . Swi tch On ;
end Swi tch On ;
procedure Swi t c h Of f i s
begi n
Cont r ol . Swi t c h Of f ;
end Swi t c h Of f ;
begi n
r etur n Motor . Cur r e nt St a t e ;
end I nduc t i on Mot or ;
The child package Operations contains the low-level operations (setting
the windings bits and reading the temperature) called by task Control.
The external procedures Switch On and Switch Off rendezvous with task
Control on entries of the same names. The external function Current State
calls the protected function of the same name in the shared object Motor.
It is important that every select statement has an accept alternative for
each of the tasks entries. If we, for example, left out the accept alterna-
tive for Switch Off in the case alternative for state Off, a task calling
Switch Off when the motor is in the o state would be blocked
indenitely.
Summary
The rendezvous is a mechanism for direct communication between two
tasks.
The rendezvous uses a client-server model.
A rendezvous does not take place until both the client and the server
request it. The client requests a rendezvous by executing an entry call.
The server requests a rendezvous by executing an accept statement.
The client and server synchronize when a rendezvous takes place.
The entry parameters provide two-way direct communication between the
client and the server.
The client is blocked while the server executes the optional rendezvous
code the sequence of statements within the accept statement. The
rendezvous code should be as short as possible to minimize blocking.
The selective accept statement allows a server to wait for one of several
dierent entries. Only one alternative is serviced during the execution of
the select statement.
We use guards to control individual alternatives in a selective accept state-
ment. Closed alternatives are not considered during the execution of the
selective accept statement.
The delay alternative of the selective accept statement allows a server to
give up waiting for a rendezvous after some period of time.
The terminate alternative is used to shut down a server task when all of
its potential clients are nished.
The optional else clause of the selective accept statement is executed when
none of the alternatives are ready. Use it with care to avoid busy wait
loops.
The delay alternative, terminate alternative, and else part are mutually
exclusive only one of them can be included in a given select statement.
The timed entry call allows a task to limit how long it will wait to start
a protected entry or rendezvous.
The conditional entry call is similar to a timed entry call with no wait
time.
State machines are important models for objects in real-time embedded
applications. Objects may be active (change state by themselves) or pas-
sive (only change state in response to some external event).
Exercises
5.1 Modify program Museum (page 130). Replace the four separate task
variables, North Door, South Door, East Door, and West Door, with
an array of tasks indexed by compass direction. Replace the discrim-
inant of task type Entrance Monitor with an entry that is called to
give the task its identity (door). Add the code to the main program to
rendezvous with each task in the array and give them an identity equal
to their location in the array.
5.2 The body of the server task Counter in program Rendezvous Demo
(page 168) contains an innite loop. Why is this loop necessary? What
would happen if we removed the loop from this task body?
5.3 True or false. When a select statement is executed, only one of the
alternatives is executed.
5.4 Suppose that when the select statement in task Make Beverage (page
172) is executed, there are two tasks waiting to rendezvous on entry
Coffee, three tasks waiting to rendezvous on entry Tea, and one task
waiting to rendezvous on entry Cocoa. Which beverage will be pre-
pared?
5.5 Download program Coffee Vending from the book website. This pro-
gram makes random rendezvous with task Make Beverage (page 172).
Compile and run the program. Delete the terminate alternative from
task Make Beverage, then compile and run the program again. What
is dierent between the two executions? Explain the dierence.
5.6 In this exercise you will extend the task Make Beverage (page 172) to
handle the restocking of materials in the vending machine. The machine
holds enough supplies to make 500 cups of each drink. Here is a new
extended task specication.
type Bever age Type i s ( Cof f ee , Tea , Cocoa ) ;
task Make Beverage i s
entry Cof f e e ( Sugar : i n Bool ean ;
Cream : i n Bool ean ) ;
entry Tea ( Sugar : i n Bool ean ;
Lemon : i n Bool ean ) ;
entry Cocoa ;
entry R e f i l l ( Bever age : i n Bever age Type ) ;
end Make Beverage ;
Exercises 193
1. Entry Refill restocks the supply of the given drink. Extend the
code of the original task body to handle this new entry.
2. Add guards so that when the machine is out of stock of a particular
drink the appropriate select alternative is closed.
3. Finally, add appropriate calls in the task to the following procedure
that controls three out-of-stock lights on the front of the vending
machine.
type Li g h t St a t e i s ( Of f , On ) ;
procedure Swi t c h Li ght ( Which : i n Bever age Type ;
To : i n Li g h t St a t e ) ;
5.7 After adding the guards described in the previous question to task
Make Beverage, the order-taking task seems to hang when the customer
selects a beverage that is out of stock. When the guarded alternative
is closed, the order-taking task is blocked until the vending machine is
restocked. This is a serious problem as no other orders can be taken
while the order-taking task is waiting.
1. Write a timed entry call for the order-taking task that displays Out
of stock, please make another selection if it is unable to rendezvous
with the Make Beverage task within two seconds.
2. Using a timed entry call works ne as long as there is only a single
task calling the beverage entries. Explain why this solution would
fail if the vending machine were to have multiple order-taking tasks.
3. Devise a solution that works for multiple order-taking tasks.
5.8 Write a program that calls the function Ada.Calendar.Clock to obtain
the current time. Your program should then display this time in the
format
Day/Month/Year Hour:Minute:Seconds
where Hour ranges from 0 to 23.
5.9 All of the state machine examples in this chapter have been singletons
with the state machine object encapsulated in a package body. In this
exercise you will develop a state machine class and declare multiple
state machine objects. The following simple state machine describes
the behavior of a turnstile in the museum described in Chapter 4.
There is a turnstile at each of the four entrances to the museum.
Write a package called Turnstiles that implements a state machine
type. The specication of Turnstiles should contain the types for
the states and events. It should also contain the specication for the
protected type Turnstile Control that implements the state machine.
pass / lock
pass / alarm
ticket / unlock
Unlocked Locked
Type Turnstile Control should include the discriminant ID of type
Natural.
Write the body for package Turnstiles. This body will contain the
body for protected type Turnstile Control. It should also contain
the three procedures Alarm, Lock, and Unlock that carry out the three
eects for each state transition. Each procedure should simply display
an appropriate message that includes the identication number of the
turnstile and the eect (turnstile jumper detected, locking, or unlock-
ing).
Finally, write a program that tests all possible combinations of states
and events. Use at least two variables of type Turnstile Control.
5.10 Suppose that entry Switch On in our induction motor control task
(page 189) is called when a start button is pressed by an operator.
A particularly impatient operator pushes the start button to switch
on the motor. After 30 seconds have passed, the operator notices that
the motor is running slowly so he pushes the start button again. Af-
ter another 30 seconds, the motor is still being powered by the start
windings. So the operator presses the start button a third time. The op-
erator continues to press the start button every 30 seconds. The motor
never switches from the start windings to the run windings.
1. Explain why the switch from start windings to run windings was
never made.
2. Make the necessary changes and additions to x the problem. You
may assume that the motor will never be started during a daylight
savings time change.
6
Distributed systems with Ada
Distribution is an important issue in software engineering, providing scalable
systems across networks. Distribution supports a variety of new services from
banking systems to social networks to video-on-demand. It is also used in
embedded systems like cars and planes built with numerous interconnected
computation-intensive blocks. When one processor is not enough, distribu-
tion is a natural complement to concurrency. In this chapter, we provide
some of the elements to build a distributed system using Ada.
1
6.1 What are distributed systems?
Formally speaking, a distributed system is a federation of interconnected
computers that collaborate to fulll a task. As an example, one can cite
web-based applications or constellations of satellites. Distributed systems
rely on mechanisms to let information circulate from one node to another.
In this section, we review key elements of distributed systems and discuss
their strengths and limits.
6.1.1 Why distribute systems?
Before entering into the details of distribution and middleware, it is impor-
tant to clarify the reasons why someone would want to build a distributed
system. Distributing an application across several nodes requires an under-
standing of (1) the network (topology, technology, etc.), (2) its maintenance
lifecycle (potential down time), and (3) its cost (performance and money). In
addition, we need to be able to evaluate the value it adds to our application.
1
We focus only on the communication aspects of distributed systems: programming language
artifacts and library support. Distributed algorithms are not discussed.
196 Distributed systems with Ada
From an historic point of view (Vinoski, 2004), distribution was intro-
duced in the early 1960s in large mainframe computer systems used for air-
line ticketing and banking. The objective was to share information quickly
across a large geographic area without the need for traditional paper mail.
To support these operations, the rst middleware was developed to allow
communication over regular phone lines in a point-to-point topology.
The use of a dedicated network topology, with many-to-many connection,
provided a way to avoid single points of failure. The United Statess DARPA
2
commissioned several teams to build a decentralized network capable of
providing an acceptable level of service when a portion of the network fails.
In 1969, the rst four nodes of ARPANET
3
were deployed in California and
Utah. From this pioneering work, ARPANET evolved into the internet, a
network used by universities in the 1980s. With the introduction of HTML
in the 1990s, internet usage rapidly spread to a wider audience.
Several applications such as electronic mail and bulletin boards used this
network to allow people to communicate and exchange data. Computers
could now share information in order to provide more computational power
for large applications.
Distributed systems are now mature and are present in a large variety
of systems. The smart electronic systems of todays cars are built from in-
terconnected microcontrollers. Nearly every company and many homes now
have networks to connect all of their resources. Web 2.0 provides social net-
working, cloud computing, and the infrastructure required for computation-
intensive simulations needed to build the next generation of automobiles,
aircraft, and energy systems. Distribution fullls many needs including:
Information exchange Information is exchanged in order to share knowl-
edge or to build a bigger knowledge set. For instance, the list of seats
available for a concert allows attendees to make a better purchasing deci-
sion.
Information availability A piece of information may be made available
to multiple recipients. Distributed systems allow us to transmit it quickly.
Information redundancy Information can be duplicated among multi-
ple sites. This redundancy provides a backup in case one of the copies is
not available.
Sharing CPU resources For large applications, one may need more than
one processor. Distributed systems can provide load-balancing features, or
build a virtual processor by aggregating several nodes.
2
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.
3
Advanced Research Projects Agency Network.
In addition to satisfying these needs, middleware must also provide sup-
port services such as security to guarantee data integrity, safety to en-
sure the system is resilient to faults, and performance or even real-time
guarantees for systems with stringent timing requirements. Services are also
needed to solve heterogeneity across nodes, to provide naming in order
to access entities through a logical name rather than a cryptic numeric ID,
and to dene protocols that provide a standard organization of the data
being exchanged.
Middleware was introduced to provide a framework for building distributed
systems. A middleware provides a collection of supporting routines to help
in the development of distributed systems. There is a large variety of mid-
dleware designed to cope with the even larger variety of application needs.
6.1.2 Family of middleware
App. Node #1
Middleware
Node #1
OS #1
App. Node #n
Middleware
Node #n
Middleware
Node #n
OS #n
Network
Figure 6.1 Overview of a middleware
A middleware is a set of software components that sits between the
application and the operating system (see Figure 6.1). It provides an abstract
view of the operating system and transport mechanisms to provide a uniform
framework. A middleware supports one or more distribution models.
A distribution model is dened by the various distribution mechanisms it
makes available to applications. Remote Procedure Calls (RPC), Distributed
Objects, and Message Passing are the most commonly used distribution
mechanisms. See Figure 6.2.
Message Passing is notionally equivalent to sending a message from a
publisher to a consumer. Messages contain data dened by the application.
Figure 6.2 Distribution models
Remote Procedure Call (RPC) is a distributed analog of Adas proce-
dure call. Calling a remote procedure ultimately results in a set of mes-
sages on the network and interaction with a remote server that processes
the messages. The client becomes blocked after sending the request to the
server. After the server processes the messages and sends the answer back,
the caller retrieves the results and continues its execution.
Distributed Objects extend the RPC by dening the notion of dis-
tributed objects that can be placed on any node in the distributed applica-
tion. When the object has been located on a particular node, interactions
are equivalent to those in an RPC.
Distributed Shared Memory provides transparent access to memory
areas distributed across nodes.
Other distribution models have been dened to support a wider range of
semantics. Web-services are close to Distributed Objects over the internet.
Distributed Components provide a stricter consistency check of interfaces.
Service-Oriented Architecture and Cloud Computing address scalability
and reliability issues to meet requirements for large internet-based applica-
tions like social networks. For more details about distribution, please refer
to Coulouris et al. (2005).
To support these mechanisms, middleware are dened as an API
4
or as
an extension to a programming language. Middleware is a proxy between
application code and operating system primitives that implement the distri-
bution model. In a message-based middleware, an API is dened to support
the full message life cycle (creation, sending, receiving, and analyzing) and
the quality of services (policies for retransmission, buering, etc). In an
RPC or Distributed Object Computing middleware, stubs and skeletons are
4
Application Program Interface.
dened to support transparent request building and sending. The stub is
reponsible for client-side management of requests; the skeleton performs the
dual role on the server side. In addition, middleware may dene dierent
qualities of service policies to exchange requests.
6.1.3 Misconceptions of distributed systems
We commonly think that distributing a system across a network helps solve
many problems of modern computing (e.g. scalability and gaining access to
more computation power). Actually, distribution may hinder our applica-
tion.
Building a distributed system requires an understanding of many hetero-
geneous concerns including protocols, operating system issues, concurrency
issues, and system engineering. Debugging a distributed system can be ex-
tremely challenging. The occurrence of transient errors that are hard to
reproduce when logging or debugging tools are activated is particularly frus-
trating. Such errors are often called Heisenbugs, named after the Heisen-
berg uncertainty principle.
Peter Deutsch, a Sun Fellow, published what are now known as the Eight
Fallacies of Distributed Computing. They remind the developer that build-
ing a distributed system is always a complex task that should not be under-
estimated:
The Eight Fallacies of Distributed Computing
Peter Deutsch
Essentially everyone, when they rst build a distributed application, makes the fol-
lowing eight assumptions. All prove to be false in the long run and all cause big
trouble and painful learning experiences.
1. The network is reliable
2. Latency is zero
3. Bandwidth is innite
4. The network is secure
5. Topology doesnt change
6. There is one administrator
7. Transport cost is zero
8. The network is homogeneous
Middleware may help address these issues by providing an analytical
framework to evaluate and use resources. Middleware also helps us to con-
gure and deploy applications. In the following sections, we introduce the
key elements of middleware.
6.2 Middleware, architectures, and concepts
Middleware is software between your application and the underlying oper-
ating system and hardware. Being in-between adds some fuzziness to the
concept. Where exactly does middleware stand?
There are dierent families of middleware ranging from generic ones for
all-purpose application to ones specialized for video streaming, banking
systems, etc. In this chapter, we restrict our focus to generic middle-
ware.
Middlewares share common assets. To illustrate them, let us consider a
simple interaction between two nodes. We will use the following convention:
the client is a node requesting a service, provided by a server. A node
is a software process.
Let us suppose we want to build a system to manage students registration
to courses. A student is a client of this system, requiring a service from
a server. This client can perform activities like registering to a course, or
getting its score to a course.
To support this interaction, depicted in Figure 6.3, we need to coordinate
several elementary services. Each service provides one small step to support
this interaction,
5
and provide an answer to one simple question: What do I
need to enable interaction? To do so a middleware needs to address many
issues.
Figure 6.3 Interaction using a middleware
5
This list of services has been fully dened in the PolyORB middleware (Hugues et al., 2003)
that we present later in this chapter.
6.2 Middleware, architectures, and concepts 201
Naming The client needs to nd the server. The naming service man-
ages a directory that stores mapping from logical name (e.g. Student
Management System) to its actual location (e.g. network address + node-
specic identier).
Binding Once the server has been located, the students client needs to
be bound to the server in a way that enables communication. The bind-
ing service handles resource allocation, such as opening a communication
channel.
Protocol/transport Now that both the client and the server are con-
nected, they need to agree on an exchange mechanism. One usually splits
it into two parts: protocol and transport. Protocol denes the organiza-
tion and semantics of a set of messages: meta-data and a payload; it also
denes how to combine these to form valid interactions. A typical case is
an RPC made of a request and a reply message. The transport mechanism
denes how it is transferred. In most cases, the Internet Protocol TCP/IP
is used, but embedded systems may use other transport mechanisms based
on dedicated buses.
Marshalling The payload is the users data. We need to agree on a
representation mechanism for a serialized version of the user data we want
to send. The marshalling scheme denes the corresponding value for each
type. So, for example, in one scheme, 20
16
represents the space character
while in another scheme it represents the integer 32.
This common representation also helps resolve heterogeneous represen-
tation of data by dierent processors: all data exchanged shall use this
unique description.
Activation Prior to engaging in any interaction with the client, the server
needs to declare its willingness to do so. It rst needs to activate some
elements to accept it. Basically, the server has to register some software
element with the middleware to make it accessible to the client through
the naming service.
Execution The client may now engage interaction with the server. But
to do so, the server needs to allocate some execution resource, provided
by the execution service. Execution resources may be memory to handle
the incoming request, threads to process it, etc.
One can show these services are the root of all distribution middleware,
for all distribution models. In the following two sections, we illustrate how
these services are coordinated to support two well-known models: Adas
Distributed Systems Annex, and CORBA.
6.3 DSA, the Distributed Systems Annex
The Ada standard denes a set of annexes to address various issues: the
standard library, connections with other languages, etc. The 1995 revision
of Ada dened the Distributed Systems Annex (Annex E). In this section, we
introduce this annex, illustrate its behavior, and discuss one implementation
based on PolyORB.
6.3.1 Introduction to the Distributed Systems Annex
The Distributed Systems Annex (DSA) denes a set of compilation pragmas
to map an ordinary monolithic application onto a distributed one. This is a
major strength of the annex: we write the code for a system the same way
whether it is going to be executed distributed across several interconnected
nodes or as a program running on a single processor. Annex E was designed
to minimize the number of modications of the source needed to convert a
monolithic program into a distributed one.
As dened by the Ada Reference Manual, a distributed system is the
interconnection of several processing nodes and zero or more storage nodes.
A distributed program is made of several partitions. A partition is an
aggregate of library units,
6
communicating using shared data or RPCs. The
DSA distinguishes between active partitions, housing threads of control, and
passive partitions, which are storage nodes.
The application programmer controls which library units are assigned to
a partition. In the spirit of the DSA, partitioning is a post-compilation pro-
cess: the programmer categorizes each unit making up the program. This
information is processed during the building process to build the full appli-
cation. Four pragmas are used to categorize library units:
1. Pure To categorize stateless packages.
2. Remote subprograms A remote subprogram is an extension of a sub-
program call to the distributed case. Such subprograms are declared in
units categorized as Remote Call Interface.
3. Distributed Objects Access types can designate remote objects. A re-
mote call is performed transparently when a primitive dispatching opera-
tion is invoked on an object. Such types are declared in units categorized
as Remote Types.
4. Shared objects Shared objects provide a shared memory space for active
partitions. Entryless protected objects allow safe concurrent access and
6
See Section 2.5.
update of shared objects such as a database. Such types are declared in
units as Shared Passive.
To support these mechanisms, the DSA denes a set of coding guidelines.
In order to enable distribution and to ensure that the application is fast and
reliable, these guidelines restrict some constructs. For instance, the notion of
remote rendezvous does not exist tasks cannot be invoked directly from
one partition to another.
6.3.2 Categorization pragmas
A pragma is a compiler directive. Pragmas are used by the compiler to
congure the application. We have already described a number of pragmas
including Atomic, Inline, Pack, Storage Size, and Volatile. In this sec-
tion, we introduce the conguration pragmas that are used to distribute a
program.
pragma Pure
Pragma Pure indicates that a package does not contain any state information
(e.g. variables). Packages designated as pure are useful to dene entities
(types, constants, subprograms) shared by several packages. Because it has
no state, a pure package can be safely replicated on several partitions.
package Pur e Package i s
pragma Pure ; Package de f i ne d as pur e , i . e . s t a t e l e s s
type A Type i s new I n t e g e r ;
end Pur e Package ;
pragma Remote Call Interface
Library units categorized by the pragma Remote Call Interface (RCI) can
include subprograms that may be called and executed remotely. RCI units
are servers for remote calls.
A subprogram call that invokes such a subprogram is an RPC operation.
It is a statically bound call because the compiler can compute the identity
of the subprogram being called.
We can also dene dynamically bound calls using access types:
Remote Access-to-Subprogram (RAS) is the dereference of an access-to-
subprogram.
Remote Access-to-Class-Wide (RACW) is a dispatching call whose dis-
patching argument is an access-to-class-wide type. They can be dened
in RCI packages.
RAS and RACW types dene logical names to refer to remote entities. In-
ternally, such a name is composed of an identier of the remote partition for
a particular protocol, and a local identier for representing the subprogram
or the object.
The Ada Reference Manual indicates that an implementation may allow
multiple copies of an RCI unit, provided that internal states are propagated
to all replicas. As the propagation of internal states requires signicant over-
head at run-time, RCI units are rarely replicated.
In the following, we will show how to implement the example we presented
in Section 6.2 using the DSA, using the dierent mechanisms to support
interactions: rst using Remote Access-to-Suprogram, then Remote Access-
to-Class-Wide.
The example below
7
illustrates statically bound RCIs. It denes a stu-
dent management system. A server provides basic services for accessing and
managing a students account with operations for checking scores, managing
course registrations, etc. Our example is built from three packages:
The Types package denes some types, shared by both the client
(RCIClient) and the server (RCIStudent).
The RCIStudent package denes the server side of the application: the
server managing student information. It uses the pragma Remote Call
Interface to indicate that these subprograms may be called remotely.
All other declarations are ordinary Ada code having nothing to do with
the distribution.
The RCIClient procedure denes the client side of the application: a client
requesting scores for the student joe, for the Ada lectures.
package Types i s
Thi s package d e f i n e s some t y pe s t o be used by t he
St udent exampl e .
pragma Pure ;
type St udent Type i s new St r i n g (1 . . 10) ;
type Passwor d Type i s new St r i n g ;
end Types ;
7
See the RCIClient example on our website for the full code of this example.
wi th Types ; use Types ;

package RCI Student i s
Thi s package d e f i n e s subpr ogr ams t hat can be ac c e s s e d
r e mot e l y by c l i e n t s , t hanks t o t he pragma :
pragma Re mo t e Ca l l I n t e r f a c e ;
f uncti on Get Scor e ( St udent : i n St udent Type ;
Password : i n Passwor d Type ;
Cour se : i n St r i n g )
r etur n I n t e g e r ;
procedure Re gi s t e r To Cour s e ( St udent : i n St udent Type ;
Password : i n Passwor d Type ;
Cour se : i n St r i n g ) ;
. . .
end RCI Student ;

wi th RCI Student ;
procedure RCI Cl i e nt i s
Scor e : I n t e g e r ;
S : St udent Type := John Doe ;
P : Passwor d Type := xxxx ;
begi n
Po s s i b l y a r emote c a l l
Scor e := RCI Student . Get Scor e ( S , P, Ada ) ;
Put Li ne ( Here i s my s c or e & I nt e ge r I mage ( Scor e ) ) ;
end RCI Cl i e nt ;
In the next example,
8
we use a three-tier architecture. In addition to
the client and the student management server, we add a third tier with
the computations to be performed. This addition allows us to separate the
application across two servers: one for displaying the data and another for
performing the computations. This architecture is typical in many web-based
applications. The user code registers itself to the middle tier (the student
management server) using an access-to-subprogram during the elaboration
9
of the package Compute Score. The access-to-subprogram is dened in the
package RASStudent. As the operations in both of these packages may be
called remotely, each is categorized as Remote Call Interface.
8
See the RASClient example on our website for full code of these examples.
9
Recall from Chapter 3 that the elaboration of a package body consists of the elaboration of
any declarations followed by the execution of the optional package body initialization
sequence. We use the initialization code to register procedure Compute.
package RASStudent i s
type Compute Score i s access
f uncti on ( St udent : i n St udent Type ;
Password : i n Passwor d Type )
procedure Re g i s t e r ( Compute Functi on : i n Compute Score ) ;
f uncti on Get Comput e Funct i on r etur n Compute Score ;
[ . . . ] Other s e r v i c e s
end RASStudent ;

package Compute Score i s
f uncti on Compute ( St udent : i n St udent Type ;
[ . . . ] Other s e r v i c e s
end Compute Score ;
wi th RASStudent ;
package body Compute Score i s
f uncti on Compute ( St udent : i n St udent Type ;
r etur n I n t e g e r i s
The Scor e : I n t e g e r := 0;
begi n
. . .
r etur n The Scor e ;
end Compute ;
begi n
Re g i s t e r a dy na mi c a l l y bound r emote subpr ogr am ( Compute )
t hr ough a s t a t i c a l l y bound r emote subpr ogr am ( Re g i s t e r )
dur i ng t he e l a b o r a t i o n of t h i s package
RASStudent . Re g i s t e r ( Compute Access ) ;
end Compute Score ;
Now, let us suppose we want the Registrar of the University to send mes-
sages to students when their registration has been validated.
10
We wish to
send messages using whatever mechanism a student prefers (mobile phones,
electronic mail, etc.). We can dene a generic terminal using polymorphic
(tagged) types to handle all possible mechanisms. Each student can register
their own terminal to the server. In the code below, Terminal Type is the
root type of the distributed terminal hierarchy.
package Ter mi nal i s
pragma Pure ;
type Ter mi nal Type i s abst r act tagged l i mi t ed pr i vat e ;
Ter mi nal Type i s an a b s t r a c t t agged type , meani ng i t
i s an i n t e r f a c e t hat w i l l be l a t e r i mpl ement ed by ot he r
t y pe s t hat s p e c i a l i z e i t .
procedure Not i f y (MyTerm : access Ter mi nal Type ;
St udent : i n St udent Type ;
Scor e : i n I n t e g e r ) i s abst r act ;
Not i f y i s an a b s t r a c t pr oc e dur e at t ac he d t o t he
Ter mi nal Type . Each s p e c i a l i z a t i o n of Ter mi nal Type
s h a l l e i t h e r be a b s t r a c t i t s e l f , or pr ov i de an
i mpl ement at i on of t h i s pr ocedur e
pr i vat e
type Ter mi nal Type i s abst r act tagged l i mi t ed nul l record ;
end Ter mi nal ;
The RCI unit RACWStudent denes Terminal Access, a remote access to
a class-wide type. Terminal Access is a reference to a distributed object so
it is declared as a general access type.
wi th Ter mi nal ; use Ter mi nal ;
package RACWStudent i s
type Te r mi nal Ac c e s s i s access a l l Ter mi nal Type Cl a s s ;
procedure Re g i s t e r ( MyTermi nal : i n Te r mi nal Ac c e s s ;
Password : i n Passwor d Type ) ;
. .
f uncti on Compute Score ( St udent : i n St udent Type ;
end RACWStudent ;
10
See the RACWClient example on our website for the full code of this example.
In the next section, we will see how to derive and extend Terminal Type,
how to create a distributed object and how to use a reference to it using
remote types.
pragma Remote Types
Library units categorized with the pragma Remote Types (RT) dene dis-
tributed objects and remote methods attached to them. RCI and RT units
can both dene a remote access type (RACW). It is important to note that
the subprogram itself is not distributed, only the access type is. The code
of the unit is replicated on each partition that uses it.
If we want to implement the notication feature proposed in the pre-
vious section, we must create a specialized Terminal Type for each user.
This extension of our tagged type can be done in a remote types unit as
in A Terminal below. Any object of type Email Terminal Type
becomes a distributed object and any reference to such an object becomes
a fat pointer a reference to a distributed object (see the declaration
of Terminal Access in the previous section). A typical pointer is just a
numerical value referring to a memory area; a fat pointer has more informa-
tion to refer to both the partition and the memory area on this
partition.
From that point, the server implementation in RACWStudent can call back
the student notication function. Note that we have to be cautious when
manipulating references to objects. Since there is no global address space,
we cannot exchange references to objects that are dynamically allocated,
but only to statically allocated objects, as shown in Student Terminal.
This restriction ensures we can easily compute the fat pointer associated to
this variable.
wi th Ter mi nal ; use Ter mi nal ;
package A Ter mi nal i s
pragma Remote Types ;
type Emai l Ter mi nal i s new Ter mi nal Type wi th nul l record ;
Emai l Ter mi nal i s a s p e c i a l i z a t i o n of Ter mi nal Type
over r i di ng
procedure Not i f y (MyTerm : access Emai l Ter mi nal ;
Scor e : i n I n t e g e r ) ;
end A Ter mi nal ;

wi th A Ter mi nal ;
package St udent Ter mi nal i s
The Ter mi nal : al i as ed A Ter mi nal . Emai l Ter mi nal ;
end St udent Ter mi nal ;

wi th RACWStudent ;
wi th Ter mi nal ;
wi th St udent Ter mi nal ;
procedure St udent 1 i s
My I d : St udent Type := John Doe ;
Password : Password Type := s e c r e t ;
My Score : I n t e g e r ;
begi n
RACWStudent . Re g i s t e r
( St udent Ter mi nal . The Ter mi nal Access , My Id , Password ) ;
My Score := RACWStudent . Compute Score ( My Id , Password ) ;
Put Li ne ( My s c or e i s & I nt e ge r I mage ( My Score ) ) ;
. .
end St udent 1 ;
Here is the body of package RACWStudent whose specication was given

earlier.
package body RACWStudent i s
type St udent Recor d i s record
Term : Te r mi nal Ac c e s s ;
St udent : St udent Type ;
end record ;
St udent Tabl e : ar r ay (1 . . 10) of St udent Recor d
:= ( others => ( nul l , ) ) ;
procedure Re g i s t e r ( MyTermi nal : i n Te r mi nal Ac c e s s ;
Password : i n Passwor d Type ) i s
begi n
f or J i n St udent Tabl e Range l oop
i f St udent Tabl e ( J ) . Term = nul l then
St udent Tabl e ( J ) := ( MyTermi nal , St udent ) ;
r etur n ;
end i f ;
end l oop ;
r ai s e Co n s t r a i n t Er r o r ;
I f we r each t h i s poi nt , i t means t hat t he r e i s
no f r e e s l o t i n t he t a b l e
end Re g i s t e r ;
f uncti on Fi nd Te r mi nal ( St udent : i n St udent Type )
r etur n Te r mi nal Ac c e s s i s
begi n
f or J i n St udent Tabl e Range l oop
i f St udent Tabl e ( J ) . St udent = St udent then
r etur n St udent Tabl e ( J ) . Term;
end i f ;
end l oop ;
r etur n nul l ;
end Fi nd Te r mi nal ;
f uncti on Compute Score ( St udent : i n St udent Type ;
r etur n I n t e g e r i s
Scor e : I n t e g e r := 0;
Term : Te r mi nal Ac c e s s := Fi nd Te r mi nal ( St udent ) ;
Fi nd St udent t e r mi na l
begi n
Compute s c or e
Scor e := . . .
i f Term /= nul l then
Not i f y on s t ude nt t e r mi na l
Not i f y ( Term , Student , Scor e ) ;
end i f ;
r etur n Scor e ;
end Compute Score ;
end RACWStudent ;
pragma Shared Passive
Units categorized with the pragma Shared Passive (SP) dene entities to
be mapped onto a shared address space such as a le, memory or database.
When two partitions intend to access such a shared area, the middleware
uses the most appropriate mechanism (lesystem, database APIs, etc.). En-
tryless protected objects can be used to provide atomic access to shared
data, allowing for limited transactional support.
In the code below, we dene two kinds of shared objects: Unprotected
Scores requires that the dierent partitions updating this data synchronize
to avoid conicting operations on shared objects; Protected Scores pro-
vides a way to get an atomic operation on shared objects. Note that only
entryless protected objects are allowed in a shared passive unit.
11
Synchro-
nization must be done with protected procedures.
package Shar edObj ect s i s
pragma Sha r e d Pa s s i v e ;
Max Student : constant I n t e g e r := 42;
type Sc or e Ar r ay i s ar r ay (1 . . Max Student ) of I n t e g e r ;
Unpr ot e c t e d Sc or e s : Sc or e Ar r ay ;
The us e r needs t o pr ov i de p r o t e c t i o n
a g a i n s t c onc ur r e nt a c c e s s
protected Pr ot e c t e d Sc or e s i s
procedure Set ( I ndex : i n I n t e g e r ;
Scor e : i n I n t e g e r ) ;
procedure Get ( I ndex : i n I n t e g e r ;
Scor e : out I n t e g e r ) ;
pr i vat e
The Scor es : Sc or e Ar r ay ;
end Pr ot e c t e d Sc or e s ;
end Shar edObj ect s ;
Categorization and dependencies
Categorization pragmas impose a hierarchy of dependency rules:
Pure packages can depend on (can with) only other pure packages.
Shared Passive ones can depend either on other Shared Passive packages,
or Pure packages.
Remote Types can depend on other Remote Types, Shared Passive, or
Pure packages.
Remote Call Interface can depend on any other categorized packages.
Conclusion
Adas Distributed Systems Annex provides support for the distribution of
an Ada program. It supports the common distribution models: Remote Pro-
cedure Calls, Distributed Objects, and Shared Memory. We use categoriza-
tion pragmas to add distribution features to an Ada program. We can add
11
The rationale for forbidding entries in shared protected objects is to avoid distributed locks
and queues. The potential blocking of callers would require some high run-time cost
mechanism to maintain the queue associated with the entry. Additional problems could arise
from the disconnection of the blocked task from the network.
these pragmas to any valid monolithic Ada program. We can then compile
this program as usual to build an executable to run on a single CPU. Or
we may use a special compilation chain to build a distributed system. In
the next section we will illustrate a mechanism for building the distributed
version.
6.4 PolyORB: compilation chain and run-time for the DSA
In the previous section, we focused on how to describe distribution features
as part of an Ada program. In this section, we present how the Ada run-time
helps supporting distribution features of the Distributed Systems Annex. Let
us rst review how an Ada program is compiled and executed.
A complete Ada program is formed by a set of compilation units (its
packages) that are checked for compliance with the Ada standard. Dur-
ing the compilation process, an Ada compiler checks many naming and le-
gality rules (typing rules, syntactic rules, etc.). This process results in an
Abstract Syntax tree that is fully decorated with cross-reference informa-
tion.
When this process is completed, the compiler enters into an expansion
phase where each high-level Ada construct is turned into much simpler ones.
For instance, Ada task creations are mapped onto lower-level calls to the Ada
run-time (see Section 9.1 for more details).
Figure 6.4 Ada user code and the Ada run-time
6.4 PolyORB: compilation chain and run-time for the DSA 213
The Ada run-time provides a software library to support language con-
structs. It is a wrapper onto lower-level services provided by the host oper-
ating system (see left side of Figure 6.4).
When building distributed systems, the compiler uses a dierent expan-
sion scheme, adding calls to the Ada Partition Communication Subsys-
tem (PCS). The Ada PCS is responsible for routing subprogram calls from
one partition to another.
There exists only one validated PCS for Ada, implemented by the Poly-
ORB middleware. It is the successor of GLADE (Pautet and Tardieu, 2000),
an early implementation of a PCS. Both PolyORB and GLADE work in
conjunction with the GNAT compilation chain. They were developed by
joint work between AdaCore and Telecom ParisTech CS laboratory.
PolyORB (Du et al., 2010) is an Ada middleware that is generic and
highly congurable. It is part of AdaCores oering of Ada products. We can,
for example, set how tasks are used to process requests, how to use memory,
the level of debug information, etc. Generic middleware is an extension of
the concept of a generic package (see Section 2.5.3). After many years of
distributed systems design and middleware implementations, people noticed
that middleware implementations have similar design, thus they may be built
around canonical elements using a functionality-oriented approach; these
elements are then adapted to conform to a specic distribution model during
a personalization process.
PolyORB uses this idea of personalization to build a schizophrenic mid-
dleware, that is, a middleware that can have multiple personalities. In this
section, we present the Distributed Systems Annex personality. Well intro-
duce the CORBA personality later.
The Ada standard document mandates only the semantic requirements an
Ada program must fulll to be compiled and used as a distributed system.
It leaves many aspects unspecied.
From the previous examples, and the discussion on middleware services in
Section 6.2, you may wonder for instance: how do we map Ada entities onto
partitions? What is the protocol used? How can one partition know about
the others? The Ada standard leaves all of these details implementation-
dened. It is details such as these that are covered by internals of the Poly-
ORB middleware.
Since the developer has little to add to distribute an application onto
partitions, the PCS must be tightly coupled to the Ada compiler in order
to generate intermediate code to turn a subprogram call into a remote in-
teraction. Yet, one important issue remains: how do we specify where to
put each partition? PolyORB denes a conguration language that denes
the various partitions, as well as additional parameters. Here is an example.
It is the conguration le for the RCIStudent example we discussed in
Section 6.3.2.
c o n f i g u r a t i o n RCI St udent 1 i s
pragma Name Ser ver ( Embedded ) ;
Naming s e r v e r i s par t of t he a p p l i c a t i o n
A s e r v e r p a r t i t i o n t hat e x e c ut e s t he s e r v e r package
S e r v e r Pa r t i t i o n : p a r t i t i o n := ( r c i s t u d e n t ) ;
A c l i e n t p a r t i t i o n t hat e x e c ut e s t he c l i e n t mai n pr oc e dur e
Cl i e n t Pa r t i t i o n : p a r t i t i o n ;
procedure RCI Cl i e nt i s i n Cl i e n t Pa r t i t i o n ;
The p a r t i t i o n s e x e c u t a b l e s s houl d be put i n . / bi n
f or Pa r t i t i o n Di r e c t o r y use r c i s t u d e n t b i n ;
end RCI St udent 1 ;
This conguration le denes two partitions, one that hosts the RCI from
the RCIStudent package and one that hosts the client code (RCIClient
procedure). From these two denitions, the compilation chain knows enough
to deduce which units form each partition.
For Server Partition, we list the library units hosted in the partition.
Actual code is deduced from the packages that are depended upon, and
the fact that some packages are categorized as Remote Call Interfaces
or Remote Types. It is just a container for server-side code, i.e. code
that can be called by clients.
For Client Partition, we list the main entrypoint of the program.
Finally, the Name Server pragma indicates how the naming service, man-
aging reference of all objects, is deployed: in this case, it is embedded in
the application.
The PolyORB utility po gnatdist uses this conguration le to produce
an executable le for each partition. For each partition, it computes the list
of les to be compiled and creates the additional run-time code required to
marshal/unmarshal requests and congure the communication channels and
other services. Some congurable services are discussed in the next section.
From this high-level description, one may wonder what goes where? The
compilation chain will process the Ada code, and interpret the conguration
pragmas to allocate source code to either the client or server role. There
are some general guidelines to this mapping.
1. First, the denition of a client role (sending requests) and a server
role is on a per-invocation basis. Hence, a partition can be client of one
partition, and server for another.
2. For each kind of invocation, we have the following rules:
The specication of Pure, Remote Types, Remote Call Interface, and
Shared Passive packages are replicated on each partition that requires
them.
The body of Shared Passive, Remote Types, and Remote Call
Interfaces are replicated on each server partition that supports
them, for instance as specied in the conguration le used by po
gnatdist.
Note: as mentioned before, RCI units are rarely replicated since it is
hard to propagate any modication of its internal state to all replicas.
3. Depending on the role for a particular invocation, the compilation chain
will duplicate code required to produce requests (stubs) on the client side,
and the skeletons that process them.
The DSA mandates that a semantically correct program shall be mapped
transparently to a distributed application. Hence, all these allocations are
performed transparently to the end user, after semantic checks performed
by both GNAT compilation chain and po gnatdist. This mechanism saves
a lot of time to the developer.
6.5 Advanced DSA concepts
In this section, we discuss some of the more advanced concepts in the Dis-
tributed Systems Annex of Ada.
6.5.1 Exceptions
The Distributed Systems Annex mandates that calls are executed at most
once: they are made exactly one time or they fail with an exception. When
a communication error occurs, the exception System.RPC.Communication
Error is raised. However, it provides limited information on the actual
cause of error: network disconnection, marshalling error, server not ready,
etc.
Any exception raised in a remote method or subprogram call is propagated
back to the caller. Exception semantics are preserved in the normal Ada
way.
6.5.2 pragma Asynchronous
To be equivalent to the monolithic case, all remote calls are, by default,
blocking. This behavior is illustrated in Figure 6.5. The caller waits until
the remote call is complete and the response has been received. The middle-
ware performs all actions to congure both the caller and the callee, open
communication channels, and allocate resources to process the request: tasks
and memory buers.
Figure 6.5 Sequence of actions for synchronous calls
Figure 6.6 Sequence of actions for asynchronous calls
When a remote subprogram is labeled with the pragma Asynchronous,
remote calls to these subprograms will be executed asynchronously. The
caller of an asynchronous procedure does not wait for the completion of the
remote call, it continues its execution. Figure 6.6 illustrates the behavior of
an asynchronous call.
As the caller does not wait, an asynchronous call cannot return any in-
formation. Hence, the remote procedure can have only in mode parameters.
Another consequence of asynchronous execution is that any exception raised
during the execution of the remote procedure is lost.
Pragma Asynchronous can be applied directly to a regular subprogram
or to a remote access-to-subprogram (RAS) type. Here is an example that
illustrates both of these options.
package Asynchr onousRCI i s
procedure Asynch Exampl e (X : i n I n t e g e r ) ;
pragma Asynchr onous ( Asynch Exampl e ) ;
procedure Synch Exampl e (X : i n I n t e g e r ) ;
type AsynchRAS i s access procedure (X : i n I n t e g e r ) ;
pragma Asynchr onous ( AsynchRAS ) ;
end Asynchr onousRCI ;
Any direct call to procedure Asynch Example will be executed
asynchronously. An indirect call to any remote procedure designated by
an access value of type AsynchRAS will also be executed asynchronously.
We can also apply pragma Asynchronous to remote access-to-class-wide
(RACW) types as well. In this case, the invocation of any operation with
a dispatching in mode parameter is always performed asynchronously. In-
vocation of operations with out or in out parameter modes are, as you
would expect, performed synchronously. The following package denes po-
tentially asynchronous dispatching calls for the class hierarchy rooted at
Object.
package AsynchronousRT i s
pragma Remote Types ;
type Obj ect i s tagged l i mi t ed pr i vat e ;
type AsynchRACW i s access a l l Obj ect Cl a s s ;
pragma Asynchr onous (AsynchRACW) ;
procedure As ynch Oper at i on (X : i n Obj ect ) ;
procedure Synch Oper at i on (X : i n out Obj ect ) ;
f uncti on Cr eat e r etur n AsynchRACW;
pr i vat e
type Obj ect i s tagged l i mi t ed nul l record ;
end AsynchronousRT ;
An asynchronous RAS can be both asynchronous and synchronous. The
mode depends on the designated subprogram. For instance, in the program
AsynchronousMain below, remote call (1) is asynchronous (the referenced
subprogram is marked as asynchronous) whereas remote call (2) is syn-
chronous (for similar reasons the referenced subprogram is synchronous).
Calls (3) and (4) illustrate calls to methods of an object designated by an
asynchronous RACW. These examples show both the standard procedure
call syntax and the object.method syntax that we may use with tagged ob-
jects. The two calls (3) to Asynch Operation are performed asynchronously
as the methods only parameter is mode in. As the procedure has an in
out mode parameter, the two calls (4) to Synch Operation are performed
synchronously.
wi th AsynchronousRCI , AsynchronousRT ;
procedure Asynchr onousMai n i s
Acces s ( p o i n t e r ) v a r i a b l e s
RAS : Asynchr onousRCI . AsynchRAS ; t o a pr oc e dur e
RACW : AsynchronousRT . AsynchRACW; t o an o bj e c t
begi n
Asynchr onous Dynami cal l y Bound Remote Ca l l ( 1)
RAS := Asynchr onousRCI . Asynch Exampl e Access ;
RAS. a l l ( 0 ) ;
Synchr onous Dynami cal l y Bound Remote Ca l l ( 2)
RAS := Asynchr onousRCI . Synch Exampl e Access ;
RAS. a l l ( 0 ) ;
RACW := AsynchronousRT . Cr eat e ;
Asynchr onous Dynami cal l y Bound Remote Ca l l s ( 3)
AsynchronousRT . As ynch Oper at i on (RACW. a l l ) ;
RACW. a l l . As ynch Oper at i on ; Obj ect . Method s ynt ax
Synchr onous Dynami cal l y Bound Remote Ca l l s ( 4)
AsynchronousRT . Synch Oper at i on (RACW. a l l ) ;
RACW. a l l . Synch Oper at i on ; Obj ect . Method s ynt ax
end Asynchr onousMai n ;
The behavior we have illustrated follows the conventional message-passing
paradigm dened in object-oriented language. A dispatching call to an object
can be seen as sending a message to it.
Note that pragma Asynchronous can be dangerous. Its use breaks the
assumption that the distributed system behaves exactly like the monolithic
one (assuming that (1) the monolithic one runs on a multi processor system,
and (2) there is no error in the communication channel). Asynchronous calls
are not available in monolithic programs. This dierence has two impacts:
1. It makes debugging distributed programs more dicult. We cant simply
debug our program by running it on a single CPU.
2. It can introduce race conditions on the server side.
6.5.3 pragma All Calls Remote
A pragma All Calls Remote in an RCI unit forces remote procedure calls
to be routed through the partition communication subsystem even for a
local call. This eases the debugging of an application in a non-distributed
situation that is very close to the distributed one, because the communica-
tion subsystem (including marshalling and unmarshalling procedures) can
be exercised on a single node.
6.5.4 Starting and terminating a distributed application
One of the most complex issues in running a distributed application is how
to actually start it. We need to coordinate multiple nodes, and start the
application. Later, the application may eventually nish, and we need to
stop all nodes gracefully. The Distributed Systems Annex includes some
features to address these issues.
Elaboration and consistency
We introduced elaboration in Chapter 2. Elaboration performs the steps
to initialize all entities (constants, variables, tasks, packages, etc.) in an
ordered fashion. The DSA extends elaboration to distributed applications.
The DSAs underlying Partition Communication Subsystem (PCS) and as-
sociated compilation tool-chain will order the elaboration of all packages,
and its own run-time, so that the user code can make remote calls even
when executing statements (such as function calls) in the declarative part.
Yet, this is not enough to ensure that the system may run. A distributed
system is made up of a collection of partitions, possibly geographically scat-
tered all over the world. We need to make sure the system is consistent
that all functions come from the same set of compilation sources. The DSA
denes some attributes that check the internal consistency of an application.
Ada denes the Version attribute, attached to compilation units. If P is
a compilation unit, then PVersion yields a value of the predened type
String that identies the version of the compilation unit that contains the
declaration of the program unit. The version of a compilation unit changes
when the unit changes signicantly. Since this is a rather vague concept, it
is left implementation-dened. This attribute is checked at elaboration time
to ensure that all partitions are based on the same set of compilation units.
The exception Program Error will be raised in one or both partitions.
Naming of partitions
There is no need for a naming service to be visible at the user level all
partitions are connected transparently by the PCS. However, it might be
useful for an application to display information about its partitions.
The Partition Id attribute returns a universal integer. It applies to
library-level declaration, and identies the partition in which the entity was
elaborated. If this entity is an RCI unit, the value corresponds to the parti-
tion where the body was elaborated.
Abortion
From a developer point of view, calls to local or remote subprograms are
equivalent. Therefore, the DSA places no restrictions on the abortion of
remote subprograms. The remote subprogram is canceled. The actual way
to cancel a remote call is implementation-dened.
Termination
In the monolithic case, Ada denes a full list of rules to determine when to
nish a task, and how to handle a full hierarchy of tasks (see Section 3.2.4).
The DSA extends these rules to the distributed case. A partition termi-
nates when its environment task terminates; a set of partitions terminates
when no messages are to be delivered. These conditions can be checked
in several ways, each involving sending PCS-private messages among the
nodes. Determining when a program reaches the terminated state is known
as a consensus problem (Pease et al., 1980). In the general case, it is
known to be NP-hard. PolyORB includes several algorithms we may use
to specify how we want to nish the application.
6.5.5 Some nal comments on the DSA
Adas Distributed Systems Annex provides a set of mechanisms to transform
a monolithic Ada program into a distributed one. It has several limitations.
It is restricted to Ada, it does not address the denition of the protocol layer,
it does not allow for interoperability with other languages, and it leaves many
elements as implementation-dened (compilation chain, deployment, etc.).
6.6 CORBA, the Common Object Request Broker Architecture 221
It would be useful to have a server using Ada for highly critical compu-
tations while allowing clients that display some information to be written
in Java. In the next section, we present CORBA, the Common Object Re-
quest Broker Architecture, and show how it addresses DSAs limitations to
provide interoperability among languages and transport mechanisms.
6.6 CORBA, the Common Object Request Broker Architecture
In this section, we introduce some concepts of the Common Object Request
Broker Architecture (CORBA). CORBA is the Object Management Groups
(OMG)
12
answer for building scalable information systems. It denes a full
set of technology standards to support the construction of such systems.
OMG is a not-for-prot consortium made up of hundreds of organizations
across the computing industry. Its goal is to develop integration technology
standards to support the development of computer-based systems. Its main
standards are UML and CORBA. UML (Unied Modeling Language) is
a standard for modeling computer-based systems prior to implementation.
We used a UML class diagram in Chapter 2 to illustrate the relationships
between dierent kinds of commercial ovens. CORBA is a set of technology
standards to support the construction of applications that are based on
distributed, interacting objects.
The object-oriented paradigm is the heart of OMG technologies. Object
orientation allows us to structure a design as a set of classes and relation-
ships between them. OMG uses object concepts to provide standards that
are independent of any particular programming language. The motivation
behind this independence is to allow us to design complex applications with-
out thinking about implementation details. Of course, eventually we must
use a particular language or set of languages to implement the application.
CORBA provides a complete framework that denes both a run-time
infrastructure (including the APIs and the protocol layer) and a development
process. The API is dened using the CORBA Interface Denition Language
(IDL). The mappings dened by OMG allow us to use this API with each
programming language.
In the following sections, well briey introduce CORBA. A detailed ref-
erence on CORBA can be found in McHale (2007). The complete CORBA
standard is freely available (OMG, 2004).
12
http://www.omg.org
6.6.1 CORBA concepts
A CORBA-based application is a collection of nodes. Each node can act
either as a client that requests a service or a server that provides the service.
One node can be both a client and a server depending on the context.
Application services are objects dened through an interface written in
the Interface Denition Language (IDL). The IDL specication denes the
publicly visible facets of an object the list of services and attributes it
oers. This IDL specication is processed by an IDL compiler to produce
stubs for the client and skeletons for the server. Stubs are the client-
side glue code responsible for building requests to a server. Skeletons are
the server-side glue code responsible for handling requests from a client.
Figure 6.7 shows the relationships between the client, stub, skeleton, and
server object. The stub and skeleton hide the details of the actual network
communication through the Object Request Broker (ORB).
Figure 6.7 Overview of CORBA
Clients and objects are implemented in a target language (Ada, C, C++,
Python, etc.) following the rules of the IDL-to-x mapping specication.
These rules detail how to map each construct of the IDL to language x.
Once implemented, application objects are bound to CORBA servants. A
servant encapsulates all the machinery to make the object visible through
the ORB. The ORB handles all the details of routing a request from a client
to a server.
In the following sections, we illustrate the development of a CORBA
application. We use the same student management example we used to
illustrate the Distributed Systems Annex of Ada. The steps we use to build
our CORBA application are:
1. Use the Interface Denition Language (IDL) to dene an interface to our
server object that manages student information.
2. Use an IDL-to-Ada compiler to create Ada packages for the stub used by
clients and the skeleton that denes the servant.
3. Implement the server object (the servant) in Ada.
4. Write the Ada code to set up the node that hosts the servant.
5. Implement the client in Ada. Clients call subprograms dened in the stub
package to obtain services from the server object.
CORBA is a very powerful middleware with many features and options,
13
and requires some investment to master them all. In the following, we de-
sign our examples to give you a sucient understanding to build your own
CORBA applications.
6.6.2 CORBA IDL
Like the DSA, CORBA middleware hides the details of the network connect-
ing the distributed components of our application. Unlike the DSA, CORBA
was designed to be independent of programming language. Using CORBA,
we can write our applications mission-critical code running on one computer
in Ada and write the user interface running on other computers in Java.
To obtain such interoperability, we need to dene contracts between clients
and servers in a neutral language: the Interface Denition Language. This
language borrows many features from the C language family.
An IDL specication is made of a set of one or more modules. Modules
dene a namespace hierarchy similar to the hierarchy provided by Adas child
packages. Modules may contain declarations of types, interfaces, and other
modules. The interfaces dene the visible facets of a remote object that
provides services to clients. Modules are optional, but highly recommended
to dene libraries of reusable components. Like all C family languages, IDL
is case-sensitive. Let us suppose we wish to implement the Student Man-
agement system using CORBA.
IDL for the Student Management service
module CORBAStudents {
// De f i n i t i o n of two unbounded s t r i n g t y pe s
13
Its full specications are more than three times as large as the Ada Reference Manual.
typedef s t r i ng s t ude nt t y pe ;
typedef s t r i ng pas s wor d t ype ;
excepti on i n v a l i d s t u d e n t { s t r i ng name ; } ;
i nt er f ace Student Management {
// I n t e r f a c e d e f i n i t i o n of t he Student Management o bj e c t
shor t Get Scor e
( i n s t ude nt t y pe s t udent ,
i n pas s wor d t ype password ,
i n s t r i ng c our s e ) r ai s e s ( i n v a l i d s t u d e n t ) ;
voi d Re gi s t e r To Cour s e
( i n s t ude nt t y pe s t udent ,
i n pas s wor d t ype password ,
i n s t r i ng c our s e ) r ai s e s ( i n v a l i d s t u d e n t ) ;
};
};
The above listing denes the interface of the CORBA version of the
student management system we developed earlier for the DSA. Lines be-
ginning with // indicate comments. The rst non-comment lines in this
listing dene the types that our client and server share. A typedef denes a
new name for an existing type. In this case we declare the names student
type and password type to be new names for the CORBA type string. In
our DSA example, these types were dened in the denition package Types.
The interface Student Management denes the two services that our server
provides. As in Ada, the parameters of an operation have a specied direc-
tion, which can be in (meaning that the parameter is passed from the client
to the server), out (the parameter is passed from the server back to the
client), or inout (the parameter is passed in both directions). Operations can
have a return value (like an Ada function) or not (like an Ada procedure).
In the above listing, the operation Get Score has three in parameters and
returns a short value. The word void indicates that operation Register
To Course does not return a value.
As in Ada, an operation can raise an exception. CORBA uses the term
throw instead of raise. CORBA has predened exception types, called sys-
tem exceptions, that may be thrown when using services provided by the
CORBA run-time (e.g. communication errors, invalid parameters, etc.). A
CORBA programmer can also dene his own exceptions. IDL exceptions
include a string with information. Here, we use this feature to return the
oending name when a student name is invalid. Programmer-dened excep-
tions that may be raised by an operation must be included in that operations
declaration. The caller of such operations should be ready to process these
exceptions.
Parameters to an operation (and the return value) can be one of the built-
in CORBA types, such as string, boolean, and long, or a programmer-
dened type that is declared in an IDL le. Of course, we can always use
typedef to create synonyms that are more meaningful in our application
than the built-in type names (e.g. student type is a more descriptive name
in our application than string).
Programmer-dened types allow us to dene the following additional types
in our IDL modules and interfaces:
An enum is conceptually similar to a collection of constant integer dec-
larations. For example:
typedef enum { red , gr een , bl ue } c o l o r ;
typedef enum { Dubl i n , London , Par i s , Rome } c i t y ;
Internally, CORBA uses integer values to represent dierent enum val-
ues. Except for the specic link to integer constants, enum is equivalent
to Adas enumeration types.
A xed type holds xed-point numeric values, whereas the oat and dou-
ble types hold oating-point numeric values (see Section 2.3.1, page 36).
typedef f i xed <18,2> Money ;
A sequence. This is a collection type. It is like a one-dimensional array.
IDL denes unbounded and bounded sequences.
// Unbounded s equence of s hor t
typedef sequence<short> U sequence ;
// Bounded s equence of s hor t , of s i z e 10
typedef sequence<short ,10> B s equence ;
An array. The dimensions of an IDL array are specied in the IDL le,
so an array is of xed size. The sequence type is more exible and so is
more commonly used.
// An a r r a y of 5 l ong v a l ue s i nde xe d f rom 0 t o 4
typedef l ong s i mp l e a r r a y [ 5 ] ;
A struct. This is similar to an Ada record. The following typedef denes
the struct type array struct with two members (elds) the array
elements and length.
typedef s t r uct {
l ong el ement s [ 1 0 ] ;
unsi gned shor t l e ngt h ;
} a r r a y s t r u c t ;
A union. This type can hold one of several values at run-time, for exam-
ple:
typedef uni on swi tch ( shor t ) {
case 1: bool ean bool Val ;
case 2: l ong l ongVal ;
case 3: s t r i ng s t r i n g Va l ;
} Foo ;
An instance of Foo could hold a boolean, a long, or a string. The case
label (called a discriminant) indicates which value is currently active. An
IDL union is equivalent to an Ada record with a variant part. To learn
about variant parts, consult one of the general Ada references listed at
the beginning of Chapter 2.
Like Ada packages, IDL modules dene a set of namespaces. IDL provides
the import keyword which is similar to Adas with mechanism. Import
allows us to access denitions from other modules. Names are fully qualied
using the syntax < module name >::< module name 2 >::< entity >,
where entity is dened in module name 2, which is nested within module
name.
6.6.3 IDL-to-Ada mapping
The IDL denes the interface of objects that are remotely accessible through
the ORB. Clients use this interface to interact with them. To do so, an IDL
compiler will generate the glue code to enable interaction. This mapping
follows the rule of the IDL-to-Ada mapping dened as part of the CORBA
specications (OMG, 2001). The IDL compiler translates an IDL module
into an Ada package hierarchy. This hierarchy includes:
A root package with the same name as the IDL module.
The specication of this package denes the Ada types and exceptions
equivalent to the CORBA types and exceptions dened in the IDL module.
These types and exceptions are shared by the client code and server object.
This package plays the same role as package Types in our DSA example.
The application programmer uses these types with no concern of the code
within the package body generated by the IDL compiler.
A child package for each interface dened in the IDL module.
The child package specication contains the Ada denition of the object
that provides the service dened by the IDL interface. The operations
dened in this package are called by the client to request a service from
the object. As with the parent package, the application programmer needs
not be concerned with the code inside the child package body.
The application programmer must write the code to implement the object
dened in a child package. We make use of Adas inheritance mechanism
to provide this implementation in a grandchild package.
For each element of the IDL specication, the IDL compiler will apply
specic rules to map IDL constructs onto semantically equivalent Ada con-
structs. The mapping rules are summarized in Table 6.1. The package CORBA,
supplied with the IDL-to-Ada compiler, contains the Ada type equivalents
to CORBAs built-in types.
IDL Ada
short CORBA.Short
long CORBA.Long
long long CORBA.Long Long
float CORBA.Float
double CORBA.Double
long double CORBA.Long Double
char, wchar CORBA.Char, CORBA.WChar
string, wstring CORBA.String, CORBA.WString
boolean Standard.Boolean
octet CORBA.Object
any CORBA.Any
void Nothing
struct record type
enum enumerated type
union discriminanted type
fixed Ada xed point
array array
sequence instance of CORBA.Sequences
const constant
exception Ada exception + accessors
module package
interface package + a tagged type
attribute Ada methods
operation Ada methods
Table 6.1 IDL-to-Ada mapping rules
Let us now study the Ada packages generated by the IDL compiler
14
for
the CORBAStudents module given on page 223. Here is the root package
generated by the IDL compiler.
14
These Ada packages were generated using the iac IDL compiler, part of the PolyORB
middleware.
wi th CORBA;
package CORBAStudents i s
Re p o s i t o r y I d : constant St r i n g :=
IDL : CORBAStudents : 1 . 0 ;
type s t ude nt t y pe i s new CORBA. St r i n g ;
s t u d e n t t y p e Re p o s i t o r y I d : constant St r i n g :=
IDL : CORBAStudents/ s t ude nt t y pe : 1 . 0 ;
type pas s wor d t ype i s new CORBA. St r i n g ;
p a s s wo r d t y p e Re p o s i t o r y I d : constant St r i n g :=
IDL : CORBAStudents/ pas s wor d t ype : 1 . 0 ;
i n v a l i d s t u d e n t : excepti on ;
type i nv a l i d s t ude nt Me mbe r s i s
new CORBA. I dl Exc e pt i on Me mbe r s wi th record
name : CORBA. St r i n g ;
end record ;
i n v a l i d s t u d e n t Re p o s i t o r y I d : constant St r i n g :=
IDL : CORBAStudents/ i n v a l i d s t u d e n t : 1 . 0 ;
procedure Get Members
( From : Ada . Ex c e pt i ons . Ex c e pt i on Oc c ur r e nc e ;
To : out CORBAStudents . i nv a l i d s t ude nt Me mbe r s ) ;
end CORBAStudents ;
Let us look at each of the elements in this root package specication.
The types student type and password type were constructed from the
IDL type denitions using the IDL-to-Ada mapping rules. Both our client
code and server code will make use of these two types.
A number of Repository Id constants provide information on the current
package and trace it and its types back to the IDL specications. Like the
DSAs version attribute, these IDs hold information on the version of the
interface.
The Ada exception invalid student is a mapping of the IDL exception.
IDL allows us to attach information to an exception. To implement this
feature in Ada, the IDL mapping prescribes the generation of a Mem-
bers type and a conversion procedure that allows us to retrieve this
information.
The body of the root package does not contain anything of direct interest
to the application programmer so we do not show it here.
Now lets look at the specication of the child package CORBAStudents.
Student Management. This package denes the server object specied by the
interface CORBAStudents::Student Management given on page 224. You can
see the entire specication on our web site.
wi th CORBA. Obj ect ;
package CORBAStudents . Student Management i s
type Ref i s new CORBA. Obj ect . Ref wi th nul l record ;
Re p o s i t o r y I d : constant St r i n g :=
IDL : CORBAStudents/Student Management : 1 . 0 ;
f uncti on Get Scor e
( S e l f : Ref ;
s t ude nt : CORBAStudents . s t ude nt t y pe ;
passwor d : CORBAStudents . pas s wor d t ype ;
c our s e : CORBA. St r i n g )
r etur n CORBA. Shor t ;
procedure Re gi s t e r To Cour s e
( S e l f : Ref ;
c our s e : CORBA. St r i n g ) ;
. . .
f uncti on I s A
( S e l f : Ref ;
Lo g i c a l Ty pe I d : St r i n g )
r etur n CORBA. Bool ean ;
pr i vat e
. . .
end CORBAStudents . Student Management ;
Elements to observe in this child package include:
This package also denes a Repository Id constant.
IDL and CORBA are object-based. Therefore, the basic unit of processing
is the object. Each interface is supported by one object. CORBA.Object.Ref
is the root type of all remotely accessible objects. The type Ref ex-
tends this root type and adds the two new primitive operations, Get
Score and Register To Course, dened in the IDL specication. Both
of these operations include the parameter Self, a reference to the server
object.
It would appear that the IDL compiler failed to ll in the parameter modes
for the subprograms. This omission is not an error. When a parameter
mode is not given, the Ada compiler uses the default mode in.
CORBA mandates the denition of an Is A function for each server object
type to test membership. This function returns true if the parameter is of
the correct type as deduced from its repository ID.
You can see the complete package on our web site. Again, the body of this
IDL compiler-generated package does not contain anything of direct interest
to the application programmer so we do not show it here.
All of this Ada code is generated from the IDL specication. In the next
three sections, we look at the code the programmer must write to complete
the distributed application. From the description we made in Section 6.6.1,
we must rst implement the servant object that will hold the application
logic, then dene the server that will host it, and nally the client that will
interact with the server.
6.6.4 Implementing the servant
We have completed the rst two of our ve steps to create a CORBA-based
distributed application: the creation of an IDL specication of the server
object and the compilation of that specication to create a root package for
our CORBA module, CORBAStudents, and a child package for the interface,
CORBAStudents::Student Management. In this section we will construct the
servant that encapsulates our server object.
The IDL-to-Ada mapping rules mandate that the implementation code for
a server object is in a child package of the interface package named Impl.
So the complete package name is in the form <Module Name>.<Interface
Name>.Impl. This naming convention ensures that the implementation code
can be used by the code automatically generated for the skeleton. The IDL
compiler produces a dummy version of this package for the application pro-
grammer to ll in. Here is the dummy version the IDL compiler produced
for our example.
wi th Po r t a bl e Se r v e r ;
wi th CORBA;
package CORBAStudents . Student Management . I mpl i s
type Obj ect i s
new Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . Ser vant Bas e wi th pr i vat e ;
f uncti on Get Scor e
( S e l f : not nul l access Obj ect ;
c our s e : CORBA. St r i n g )
r etur n CORBA. Shor t ;
procedure Re gi s t e r To Cour s e
( S e l f : not nul l access Obj ect ;
c our s e : CORBA. St r i n g ) ;
pr i vat e
type Obj ect i s new Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . Ser vant Bas e wi th record
I n s e r t components t o hol d t he s t a t e of
t he i mpl ement at i on o bj e c t .
nul l ;
end record ;
end CORBAStudents . Student Management . I mpl ;
Package Impl denes an implementation type whose mandatory name
is Object. Type Object is an extension (subclass) of the CORBA type
PortableServer.Servant Base. The package declares the two subprograms
Get Score and Register To Course, versions of the operations originally
dened in our IDL specication. Each of these subprograms has a formal
parameter named Self that is a pointer to our server object. As you might
imagine, the notation not null prevents us from calling these subprograms
with a null value for Self.
To complete this dummy package, the application programmer must:
1. Complete the full denition of type Object in the private section. We
must add all of the components necessary to hold the state of our server
object.
2. Complete the package body. We must write the code for the operations
dened in the package specication.
You can nd the completed Impl package specication and body on our
web site.
6.6.5 Setting up the server node
Our next task is to write the program that contains the server object and
runs on the server node. We need to congure this program so it will accept
remote calls. Here is the server program for our example application. It
contains a great deal of CORBA-specic operations that we shall examine
next. You may use this program as a template for creating your own server
programs.
wi th CORBA. I mpl ;
wi th CORBA. Obj ect ;
wi th CORBA. ORB;
wi th Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . POA. Hel per ;
wi th Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . POAManager ;
wi th CORBAStudents . Student Management . I mpl ;
wi th PolyORB . Setup . No Tas ki ng Se r ve r ;
pragma Warni ngs ( Of f , PolyORB . Setup . No Tas ki ng Se r ve r ) ;
Conf i gur e s e r v e r wi t h b a s i c s e r v i c e s , wi t hout t a s k i ng
procedure Se r v e r i s
procedure Co nf i g ur e Se r v a nt s i s
Root POA : Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . POA. Loc a l Re f ;
Ref : CORBA. Obj ect . Ref ;
Obj : constant CORBA. I mpl . Obj e c t Pt r
:= new CORBAStudents . Student Management . I mpl . Obj ect ;
begi n
Re t r i e v e Root POA
Root POA := Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . POA. Hel per . To Local Ref
(CORBA. ORB. Re s o l v e I n i t i a l Re f e r e n c e s
(CORBA. ORB. To CORBA Stri ng ( RootPOA ) ) ) ;
Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . POAManager . Ac t i v a t e
( Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . POA. Get The POAManager ( Root POA ) ) ;
Set up new o bj e c t
Ref := Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . POA. Se r v ant To Re f e r e nc e
( Root POA , Po r t a bl e Se r v e r . Ser vant ( Obj ) ) ;
Output IOR
Put Li ne (CORBA. To St andar d St r i ng
(CORBA. Obj ect . Obj e c t To St r i ng ( Ref ) ) ) ;
end Co nf i g ur e Se r v a nt s ;
begi n
Per f or m CORBA c o n f i g u r a t i o n and i n i t i a l i s a t i o n
CORBA. ORB. I n i t (CORBA. ORB. To CORBA Stri ng ( ORB ) ,
CORBA. ORB. Command Li ne Arguments ) ;
Conf i gur e a p p l i c a t i o n s p e c i f i c s e r v a nt
Co nf i g ur e Se r v a nt s ;
Launch t he s e r v e r
CORBA. ORB. Run ;
end Se r v e r ;
The context clause of our server program indicates that this program de-
pends on many packages. The package CORBAStudents.Student Manager.
Impl is the implementation of the server object developed in the previous
section. The three packages rooted at CORBA are obviously CORBA-related.
The two packages rooted at PortableServer are also CORBA packages.
The package rooted at PolyORB contains the code to set up and cong-
ure the server with basic services. We have used the open-source CORBA
provided by PolyORB in our examples. Other vendors
15
would supply equiv-
alent packages to set up the server. Pragma Warnings is an implementation-
dened pragma. The GNAT compiler issues a warning when a package is
withed but not directly used. Program Server makes no direct use of the
resources in package PolyORB. However, this package must be elaborated to
set up the server. The pragma disables the warning that package PolyORB
is not used by program Server.
When we execute procedure Server from the command line, we can in-
clude some optional command line arguments to congure the servers ob-
ject request broker (ORB). These optional arguments are retrieved using
the CORBA.ORB.Command Line Arguments function.
The call to procedure CORBA.ORB.Init initializes the ORB, including
tasking policies, protocol stacks, and other internal objects. The two pa-
rameters passed to this procedure are the name we wish to assign to this
ORB (we used the name ORB) and the optional ORB conguration pa-
rameters from the command line. One important internal object initialized
by CORBA.ORB.Init is the RootPOA.
16
This object is responsible for man-
aging the servants lifecycle.
Once the call to CORBA.ORB.Init has congured the ORB, we call the
Configure Servants procedure to congure our application. It builds one
instance of a CORBA.Impl.Object: it sets up our server object so it can han-
dle the remote requests later. The elaboration of the constant Obj allocates
the actual server object whose type we dened earlier in the private part of
package CORBAStudents.Student Manager.Impl.
15
Objective Interface Systems and PrismTech are two vendors of commercial CORBA products
with Ada support.
16
POA stands for Portable Object Adapter. Well look more at the POA in Section 6.7.3.
After the elaboration of the procedures declarations, there are ve steps
needed to prepare our server for processing requests from clients on other
nodes.
Call the function CORBA.ORB.Resolve Initial References to lookup the
RootPOA object that was created earlier to dispatch requests to our ob-
ject. This function provides a reduced name service, local to a node, that
retrieves objects congured on and accessible from the current node.
Activate the RootPOA (that we just looked up) with a call to procedure
PortableServer.POAManager.Activate. The activation is performed
through the RootPOAs attached POAManager object. Once activated,
our RootPOA can process incoming requests.
Create a reference to our servant that is accessible from other nodes.
To accomplish this task, we call function Servant To Reference passing
our RootPOA and the local reference to our server object. This function
returns a remote reference called an Interoperable Object Reference (IOR)
that clients running on other nodes use to access our server object.
Display the IOR. The function CORBA.Object.Object To String con-
verts the IOR stored in the variable Ref to a unique string. Well make
use of the value displayed on the console in the next section when we start
up our client.
Finally, we call the procedure CORBA.ORB.Run which launches the server.
The ORB is now up and running. It can now direct requests from other
nodes to our server object.
6.6.6 Setting up the client node
The client program follows a path similar to that of the server. Here is the
client program for our example application. You may use this program as a
template for creating your own client programs.
wi th Ada . Command Line ;
wi th CORBA. ORB;
wi th CORBAStudents . Student Management ;
wi th PolyORB . Setup . Cl i e n t ;
pragma Warni ngs ( Of f , PolyORB . Setup . Cl i e n t ) ;
Conf i gur e c l i e n t wi t h b a s i c s e r v i c e s
procedure Cl i e n t i s
use Ada . Command Line ;
use Ada . Text I O ;
use CORBAStudents . Student Management ;
use CORBAStudents ;
use CORBA;
A St udent : CORBAStudents . Student Management . Ref ;
begi n
CORBA. ORB. I n i t i a l i z e ( ORB ) ;
i f Argument Count /= 1 then
Put Li ne ( usage : c l i e n t <I OR s t r i n g f r o m s e r v e r > ) ;
r etur n ;
end i f ;
Ge t t i ng t he CORBA. Obj ect
CORBA. ORB. St r i ng To Obj e c t
(CORBA. To CORBA Stri ng ( Ada . Command Line . Argument ( 1 ) ) ,
A St udent ) ;
Checki ng i f i t worked
i f CORBAStudents . Student Management . I s Ni l ( A St udent ) then
Put Li ne ( mai n : cannot i nvoke on a n i l r e f e r e n c e ) ;
r etur n ;
end i f ;
Re gi s t e r To Cour s e
( A Student , To CORBA Stri ng ( John Doe ) ,
To CORBA Stri ng ( xxx ) , To CORBA Stri ng ( Ada ) ) ;
end Cl i e n t ;
Our client program rst initializes the ORB. Next it must set up a refer-
ence to the remote object we created on the server. We have taken a very
simple approach to setting up this reference. When we start up the client
program, we include the string value of the IOR displayed on the console by
the server program given in the previous section.
17
We make use of the operations in package Ada.Command Line to process
the command line that started the execution of program Client. If the user
did not include an IOR string on the command line, the program displays
an error message and terminates.
Next we call the procedure CORBA.ORB.String To Object to convert the
IOR string into an actual IOR stored in variable A Student, and initialize all
internal structures to enable interaction. Given the complexity of the IOR
string, there is a high likelihood that we may make an error when typing
the command line. The call to the Boolean function Is Nil returns True if
17
The server hosting one instance of a Student Management servant displayed the IOR string
IOR:010000002900000049444c3[..].
the call just made to String To Object fails. In this case we also terminate
the client program.
Finally, the client can do its job. In our example client, that job is to
register one student on one course. We simply make the remote call to pro-
cedure Register To Course using the remote reference stored in variable A
Student. All of the messages necessary to make this remote procedure call
are managed by CORBA.
From the perspective of the application programmer, once the initializa-
tion part of the code has been performed, the client behaves exactly like
a monolithic application. From the server side, the deployment phase (set-
ting up servants, and publishing their references) allows one to control on
which node elements are set. This is explicitly part of the CORBA model of
computation.
We used a string copied from the server to supply the IOR of the server
object to our client. This simple method of making the service known to the
client is inconvenient and error prone. In the next section we discuss how to
use a naming service to locate the remote object.
Compared to the DSA, we note there is no explicit mechanism by which
one can allocate functions to partitions. All is done implicitely through Ada
with mechanisms and an API:
Clients have a dependency on stubs generated by the IDL compiler, and
use it to interact with the servers.
Servers depend on the implementation code to set up servants on each
partition.
Then, the CORBA naming mechanisms are used to bind clients and
servers. This is discussed in the next section.
6.7 Advanced CORBA concepts
In the previous section we focused on the basic concepts of CORBA. In this
section, well introduce some additional useful features and discuss some of
the concepts that underlie CORBA.
6.7.1 CORBA naming service
As we saw in the previous sections, the use of an IOR string to identify
a service requires some eort on the end users part. They need to write
down the IOR string displayed when they start up the server program and
type it on the command line when they start up each client that uses the
service. Having multiple services further complicates this process. To solve
this problem, CORBA denes the Naming Service like a telephone white
pages, where we can store or retrieve object references associated with a
logical name.
As will all CORBA resources, the functionality of the Naming Service is
dened through the operations of its IDL interfaces. There are operations
we can use to create/modify/delete a naming context hierarchy. There are
operations to bind (that is, advertise) an IOR in the Naming Service with a
specied name. And there are other operations to resolve (that is, look up)
an IOR associated with a specied name. Here is a portion of the CORBA
module for the Naming Service.
module CosNaming {
// . . .
typedef s t r i ng I s t r i n g ;
s t r uct NameComponent {
I s t r i n g i d ;
I s t r i n g ki nd ;
};
typedef sequence<NameComponent> Name ;
i nt er f ace Nami ngContext {
excepti on I nval i dName {};
voi d bi nd ( i n Name n , i n Object obj )
r ai s e s ( I nval i dName / , . . . / ) ;
voi d r e bi nd ( i n Name n , i n Object obj )
r ai s e s ( I nval i dName / , . . . / ) ;
};
};
The Naming Service denes a full hierarchy: each level is called a nam-
ing context. It is per construction a CORBA object, dened by the Cos-
Naming::NamingContext interface. Furthermore, the IDL-to-Ada mapping
indicates that the corresponding Ada type is called Ref, and is found in the
CosNaming.NamingContext package. Since CORBA objects can be accessed
remotely, the Naming Service can itself be distributed across several nodes.
Still, one needs to be able to nd the root of the Naming Service.
As we did for the RootPOA, we rely on the initial reference to nd
the root of the Naming Service. This reference is stored as part of the
conguration of the ORB, passed at start-up time. CORBA denes a
command-line based mechanism to register an initial reference using the
-ORBInitRef NamingService=<IOR>. Once this initial bootstrap prob-
lem has been solved, the Naming Service can be used.
RNS : constant Nami ngContext . Ref :=
To Ref (CORBA. ORB. Re s o l v e I n i t i a l Re f e r e n c e s
(CORBA. ORB. To CORBA Stri ng ( Nami ngSer vi ce ) ) ) ;
It is common for an implementation of the Naming Service to provide
some command-line utilities and/or a GUI tool that can be used to do
administrative tasks on the Naming Service, such as create/modify/delete a
naming context hierarchy. Such administrative functionality is implemented
by invoking corresponding IDL operations on the Naming Service. Hence,
instead of manipulating IOR, we can rewrite our client and server, and use
the following mechanisms to store and retrieve a reference to a student by
its name in the Naming Service.
At t ach a name t o an o bj e c t
decl ar e
A St udent : CORBA. Obj ect . Ref ; i n i t i a l i z e d by us e r
A Student Name : CosNaming . Name ;
begi n
Append ( A Student Name ,
NameComponent ( i d => To CORBA Stri ng ( j ohn doe ) ,
ki nd => To CORBA Stri ng ( ) ) ) ;
bi nd (RNS, A Student Name , A St udent ) ;
end ;
Re t r i e v e an o b j e c t f rom i t s name
decl ar e
A Student Name : CosNaming . Name ;
A St udent : CORBA. Obj ect . Ref ;
begi n
Append ( A Student Name ,
NameComponent ( i d => To CORBA Stri ng ( j ohn doe ) ,
ki nd => To CORBA Stri ng ( ) ) ) ;
A St udent := r e s o l v e (RNS, A Student Name ) ;
end ;
6.7.2 Asynchronous requests
As a default, all CORBA requests are processed synchronously. The oneway
IDL keyword allows for at-most-one semantics, meaning that the request
will be issued only once, and eventually be processed by the receiver. Note
there is no synchronization mechanism in place to ensure the request is
actually processed. In most cases, CORBA ORB will use an asynchronous
communication mode when issuing a request. See the following example:
i nt er f ace a s y n c i {
oneway voi d a s y nc r e que s t ( i n s t r i ng S ) ;
};
Since the request is now asynchronous, it cannot have return values.
Hence, the IDL legality rules forbid return values, out and inout parame-
ters, or exceptions.
6.7.3 How does CORBA work?
In this section we examine some of the details of the underlying mecha-
nisms CORBA uses to implement distributed systems. While they may not
be directly applicable to writing distributed Ada programs, a better under-
standing of such details gives us a better idea of the power and exibility of
CORBA.
GIOP and CDR marshalling
CORBA fully denes its infrastructure. This includes the network transport
layer and associated protocol. GIOP is the Generic Inter-ORB Protocol.
It is an abstract protocol that denes how to build messages. These mes-
sages are then sent through a particular transport mechanism. IIOP is the
Internet Inter-ORB Protocol, an instance of GIOP on top of TCP/IP.
Other variants exist for other buses such as CAN.
18
GIOP denes eight dierent types of messages that can be transmitted
between client and server applications. A knowledge of the dierent message
types can be useful when debugging a CORBA application using a low-level
packet snier.
The GIOP message types are:
Request and Reply messages: these message types are used to send requests
from a client to a server and to send replies back from the server to a client.
A request holds some meta data that indicates how the request should
be processed (also called Quality of Service or QoS), e.g. information
on code sets for strings, priority, etc.; an identier of the remote servant;
the name of the method to invoke and its arguments. All these pieces
of information are used by the Portable Object Adapter to process the
request.
LocateRequest and LocateReply messages: a LocateRequest message is like
a ping message that asks: is the object there? The reply is sent back in a
LocateReply message.
18
The Controller Area Network is a bus commonly used to connect computing components in
automobiles.
Fragment messages: if a Request or Reply message is very large then the
CORBA run-time system may decide to transmit it in several pieces rather
than as one monolithic message. In such cases, the rst piece is sent as a
normal Request or Reply message, but a ag in the header of the message
indicates that there are more pieces to follow. The remaining pieces are
transmitted as Fragment messages.
CancelRequest messages: a CORBA client may specify a timeout value
when making a remote call, or the CORBA run-time system in the client
may also (but is not obliged to) send a CancelRequest message to the
server, to let the server know that the client will ignore a Reply message
if one is later sent.
The CORBA run-time system in the server can use the CancelRequest
message as a hint to discard the previously received Request. However
the server can ignore this hint and, in fact, will ignore it if the server
has already started dispatching the previously received Request message.
Such hints are usually ignored because the CORBA run-time system in
the server cannot cancel partially executed application-level code in the
body of an operation.
CloseConnection messages: CORBA allows idle socket connections to be
closed. If a connection from a client to a server is closed then a new
connection can be opened transparently if, later on, the client makes more
calls to the server.
MessageError messages: they are sent when a CORBA node receives a
message that is not in the correct format.
GIOP messages are dened by a complete description of the packet struc-
ture, and the method used to encode data onto streams. We call mar-
shalling the act of placing native types (e.g. an Ada integer) into a binary
buer. Conversely, extracting types from a binary buer is called unmar-
shalling.
The CORBA marshalling scheme is called Common Data Representation
(CDR). CDR has two main objectives: handling heterogeneity between pro-
cessors (endianess, memory alignment, etc) and eciency. Here are the main
rules of CDR:
CDR can use either big-endian or little-endian. The marshalled data use
the endianess of the sender. The senders endianess is included in the
GIOP header.
For each basic data type, CDR denes how many bytes are used, and the
associated memory alignment requirements:
Char, octet, and boolean use 1 byte, and have no alignment require-
ments.
Short and unsigned short use 2 bytes, and must be aligned on a 2-byte
boundary.
Long, unsigned long, and oat use 4 bytes, and must be aligned on a
4-byte boundary.
Long long, unsigned long long, and double use 8 bytes, and must be
aligned on an 8-byte boundary.
Long double use 16 bytes, and must be aligned on an 8-byte boundary.
The alignment rules of CDR were chosen to match alignments of CPUs,
allowing for another level of optimization: instead of processing data, one
may just copy them.
For compound types, CDR denes a recursive scheme based on basic type
marshalling rules:
An enum is marshalled as an unsigned long.
A string is marshalled as the length of the string (an unsigned long), fol-
lowed by each character of the string, and is followed with a terminating
null character.
A struct is marshalled by marshalling each eld.
An exception is marshalled as the exceptions repository id, which is a
string, followed by each of its members.
A union is marshalled as its discriminant followed by the active branch
(if any).
A sequence is marshalled as the number of elements it contains (repre-
sented as an unsigned long) followed by each element.
An array is marshalled by marshalling every element in the array.
An object reference is marshalled by marshalling an IOR, which is a
struct shown in Figure 6.8.
This list is far from being complete, yet it is representative of how CDR
works. Let us note that memory alignment rules imply that a GIOP message
may contain padding bytes, which is wasted memory (and thus bandwidth).
Fortunately, padding bytes usually account for a small percentage of a GIOP
message.
The Interoperable Object Reference (IOR)
We use an IOR to exchange the contact details required to reach the server
node. In our student management application, we manually transferred the
IOR displayed by our server to our client. The IOR encapsulates all relevant
information in a compact form. Interoperability means that all CORBA
implementations are able to process it. CORBA denes a limited set of
mandatory elements for an IOR and allows for the inclusion of extensions,
either standard ones or vendor-specic ones. However, an implementation
may ignore extensions.
Figure 6.8 lists the content of an IOR. The IOR is a struct with many com-
ponents. The type id eld of the IOR struct contains the objects repository
id. It denes the type of the object (see the listing on page 228).
Figure 6.8 Components of an IOR
Following the Repository Id is a sequence of TaggedProles. Each prole
lists contact information for the node, the tag being there to specify how
to interpret it (just like Ada tagged types). For instance, the tag value TAG
INTERNET IOR denotes the use of the IIOP protocol; other values can be
dened for future usage. This sequence allows one to dene multiple access
mechanisms (such as IIOP, DIOP, or SOAP) to reach an object.
Each prole contains the information needed to reach the servant itself
in the hierarchy of the POAs: POA identier, Object identier, and other
information. The Portable Object Adapter is the subject of the next section.
An IOR is dened as a stringied component. CORBA implementations
usually provide tools to parse an IOR. The server hosting one instance of a
Student Management servant displays the following IOR:
IOR:010000002900000049444c3[..]
Using the po catref tool provided with PolyORB, we extracted the
following information:
Type Id: IDL:CORBAStudents/Student_Management:1.0
Found: 2 profiles in IOR
Profile number: 1
IIOP Version: 1.2
Address: 127.0.0.1:56196
Object_Id: /000000011Tf813dc581180cf8f
Tagged components: 1
Component #1:
Tag: 1
Type: TAG_Code_Sets
SNCS-C: 0x00010001; ISO 8859-1:1987; Latin Alphabet No. 1
SNCS-W: 0x00010100; ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993; UCS-2, Level 1
SCCS-W: 0x00010101; ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993; UCS-2, Level 2
SCCS-W: 0x00010102; ISO/IEC 10646-1:1993; UCS-2, Level 3
Profile number: 2
DIOP Version: 1.0
Address: 127.0.0.1:49727
Tagged components: 0
The two dierent GIOP proles in this IOR indicate that the servant
can be reached using either the IIOP or the DIOP (a variant of IIOP over
UDP sockets) protocol. The IOR also displays information on the GIOP
version (version 1.2 for the IIOP), the Object Id of the servant managed by
the POA, and some information related to code set manipulations (how to
interpret strings).
The Portable Object Adapter (POA)
When discussing the implementation of the CORBA Student Management
example, we made a distinction between a CORBA object and a servant.
A CORBA object is the natural element of the Distributed Object Com-
puting paradigm. It is the element on which to reason when running the
application: a client requests a service from an instance of a particular ob-
ject, this instance processes the request, and returns a value. A servant is
part of the machinery behind CORBA.
A servant is a placeholder to bridge the gap between the run-time infras-
tructure of CORBA and the implementation code. A servant is associated
with an Object Adapter (OA). This Object Adapter adapts the concepts
of a CORBA object to the abilities and requirements of the host language.
In cooperation with the ORB, an OA handles low-level issues such as:
Reading incoming data, unmarshalling the requests parameters, and dis-
patching to the corresponding operation on a servant.
Providing an API to map the object reference to a servant, and vice versa.
Dynamic creation of servants and management of servant lifecycles.
Allocating tasks to process the request.
The CORBA Portable Object Adapter (POA) is the second generation of
object adapters dened by the CORBA specication. It denes a collection
of servants, organized as a tree. Each node in this tree can host servants and
can have child OAs. Each OA in the hierarchy can be congured through
service policies. The tree hierarchy may be used as a way to organize a
namespace of servants or as a way to segregate between dierent levels of
policies.
The CORBA standard mandates that the name RootPOA be used for
the root OA in the hierarchy. From that point, the application developer
can build a hierarchy of POAs as a tree (see Figure 6.9): the two children of
RootPOA are POA A and POA B, and POA C is a child of POA
B. Each POA can be congured with its own policy to handle requests.
A POA handles a collection of servants. CORBA provides the developer
with several options for how the servants are handled by a POA.
The application developer can register the servant in the Active Object
Map prior to allowing invocations. Upon reception of a request, the POA
will look up the reference provided in the request in this map to nd the
actual servant on which to dispatch. This is the option chosen in all our
examples (see RootPOA or POA A).
To avoid preallocating resources for all servants, the developer can cong-
ure a Servant Activator to build servants on demand for his POA (see
POA B). The Servant Activator denes an interface to be implemented.
It allows the developer to perform proper action to create a servant from
a given reference.
The Servant Locator complements the activator with the ability to build
your own cache of servants (see POA C). It denes a set of mechanisms
to be implemented by the developer to build this cache, e.g. to retrieve
servant information from a database, and then later save it, etc.
The developer can register a Default Servant that will handle all requests
to be served by the POA (see POA A). This allows us to have a unique
servant instance to handle calls to services to be provided by a family of
references, e.g. services to be performed by an object representing accounts
of all students on a campus, or when no matching servant is found in the
Active Object Map.
Finally, the Adapter Activator allows one to create a child POA on
demand (see POA B).
Each POA is associated with a POA Manager. The managers role is to
allow or disallow request processing by a POA. When the manager stops
request processing, incoming requests can be stored in a queue or discarded.
A single POA Manager can control multiple POAs.
Figure 6.9 Hierarchy of POAs
6.7.4 Details of a CORBA remote invocation
We have detailed both how to implement a client and a server using CORBA,
and the internals of the CORBA model. We now show they combine together
to support remote interactions. Let us suppose both the client and the server
are congured as explained in Sections 6.6.5 and 6.6.6 and let us suppose
the client initiates a remote call using one of the available methods.
On the client side, calling this method wil invoke code that is part of
the stub. This code is in charge of formatting the request: arguments are
marshalled and a GIOP request message is built from the information on
the remote object (known QoS parameters, identier of the servant, name
of the method, and marshalled arguments).
This request is sent through the network. Upon reception of a request on
the server side, the GIOP protocol stack and the Portable Object Adapter
collaborate to process the request:
First, the servant identier and QoS parameters are extracted from the
request by the GIOP protocol stack.
Using this information, the POA hosting the servant is retrieved; the QoS
parameters are used to congure how the request will be processed; tasks
are allocated, other resources are allocated.
The name of the method is retrieved from the request. From the name
of the method, the skeleton knows how to interpret the arguments. Ar-
guments are extracted from the request. We are now ready to call the
servant code.
Finally, the servant code is executed.
Any result parameters follow the reverse path: marshalled by the skeleton,
send through the network, unmarshalled by the stub, passed back to user
code.
6.7.5 Revisiting the CORBA architecture
In Section 6.2, we introduced a generic middleware architecture, and claimed
it is generic and serves as a guideline to understand middleware internals.
This architecture is based on several services. Let us review how CORBA
ts this scheme.
Naming is the mechanism by which we can nd a remote entity. This
is supported by CORBA IOR or CORBA Naming Service.
Binding performs all the internal steps required to enable interaction.
This is performed, on the client side, when calling CORBA.ORB.String To
Object, or other functions that retrieve a CORBA object from a reference
like the resolve function of the CORBA Naming Service.
Protocol/Transport is dened as part of the GIOP protocol, and its
associated IIOP variant that maps GIOP concepts on top of TCP/IP.
Marshalling mechanisms are supported by the CDR marshalling scheme.
Activation is supported, on the server side, by the Portable Object
Adapter, which turns a servant into a remotely accessible entity.
Execution service is provided, on the server side, by the POA. It ensures
execution resources are available when demultiplexing a request: it rst
retrieves the corresponding servant, then allocates a task to process it.
6.7.6 Some nal comments on CORBA
CORBA provides a large set of APIs and mechanisms to support distributed
systems. In this chapter, we covered a limited subset of mechanisms.
CORBA denes a range of services for transactional support, messaging,
security, and even real-time systems (RT-CORBA). Because of this ever-
increasing complexity, the OMG denes the CORBA Component Model
(CCM), a paradigm that provides a clear separation between user code and
deployment/conguration of the application through XML-based descrip-
tors; and associated modeling tools to generate them.
CORBA is now widely used as the middleware for distributed applica-
tions in many dierent domains. Its interoperability and performance sat-
isfy the requirements of many applications. Since there is no one size ts
all middleware, CORBA coexists with many other middleware technologies
including SOAP, XML-RPC, and Enterprise Java Beans. CORBA concepts
are present in various forms in most other middleware. We might then say
that CORBA is the root of many middleware technologies.
6.8 CORBA versus the DSA
In this chapter, we have introduced concepts of distributed systems, and
presented the Distributed Systems Annex of Ada and the Common Object
Request Broker Architecture. Lets compare these two middlewares.
The DSA allows a seamless migration from a monolithic program to a
distributed program. We simply add the necessary conguration pragmas
to our packages to indicate the distribution. The ability to run the same
program on a single node or distributed over several nodes is extremely useful
for debugging a distributed program. The DSA does not specify the steps
necessary to build a distributed program from a collection of units. Nor does
the DSA specify the Partition Communication System (PCS) responsible
for routing subprogram calls. Currently the only PCS is that supplied in
PolyORB for the GNAT compiler.
The object is the basis for distribution in CORBA. As CORBA is pro-
gramming language neutral, these objects are dened in the independent
interface denition language, IDL. We compile the IDL modules to create
the stubs and skeletons that act as glue code between our application and
the CORBA code that sends all of the messages between nodes. Unlike the
DSA approach, we must include calls to CORBA APIs in our servers and
clients to register the server objects and initialize the CORBA run-time
system. Some of these API calls are specic to a particular CORBA ven-
dor. Being language neutral, CORBA infrastructure can be used to allow
interoperability between programming languages.
In Section 6.2 we described a number of services that middleware need
to provide to enable interactions between clients and servers. Lets compare
the DSA and CORBA in terms of these services.
Naming The naming service is implicit in DSA, based on the identi-
er names in the program. These names must be included in the Poly-
ORB/DSA deployment conguration le. The DSA relies on explicit ob-
ject reference exchange, and can be dynamic. CORBA denes a hierarchi-
cal naming service through IDL interfaces. The application programmer
must make specic API calls to register or locate services.
Binding It is transparent in both cases, through variables of object ref-
erences.
Protocol/Transport/Marshalling The DSA does not mandate any
transport, protocol, or marshalling mechanism. It is implementation-
dened. CORBA mandates each one to ensure interoperability.
Activation/Execution They are implicit in DSA, whereas CORBA pro-
vides full control on execution resources through the POA.
One may note an important dierence in the process of building a dis-
tributed application: DSA uses an explicit conguration le to dene the
deployment of client or server capabilities onto specic partitions using a
PCS-specic conguration le. CORBA relies on dependencies across pack-
ages to set up a le. This implicit mechanism requires some glue code to be
manually written. This can be an error-prone and complex process for large
applications.
Despite their dierences, CORBA and DSA share many elements. That
the PolyORB middleware implements both DSA and CORBA is strong ev-
idence for this claim. PolyORB borrows many mechanisms from CORBA
to implement the DSA. PolyORBs ability to handle both the DSA and
CORBA has earned it the name schizophrenic middleware. Pautet et al.
(1999) discuss these two complementary technologies in some detail.
The choice of a middleware technology is the result of a careful analysis of
requirements: xed or dynamic topology, interoperability, legacy code. All
these elements must be clearly evaluated as they deeply aect the entire
architecture of your application.
Summary
Distribution allows us to map one application onto several processing
nodes interconnected through a network.
The ISO Ada standard document denes the Distributed Systems Annex
(DSA) in its Annex E.
The DSA allows a seamless migration from a monolithic to a distributed
conguration it preserves Ada semantics (tasking, exceptions, pro-
tected objects, types, and subprograms).
The DSA relies on conguration pragmas to indicate distributable fea-
tures. Here is the list of standard pragmas:
The Remote Call Interface categorization allows: subprograms to be
called and executed remotely, statically bound remote calls (remote sub-
programs), and dynamically bound remote calls (remote access types).
It forbids variables and non-remote access types and prevents the spec-
ication from depending on (withing) normal units.
The Remote Types categorization supports the denition of distributed
objects. It allows dynamically bound remote calls (via remote access
types) and non-remote access types (with marshalling subprograms).
Units with this categorization cannot have a specication that depends
on any normal unit.
The Shared Passive categorization allows direct access to data from
dierent partitions. It provides support for shared (distributed) mem-
ory. It supports memory protection by means of entryless protected
objects. Units with this categorization cannot have a specication that
depends on any normal unit.
Even in the presence of categorization pragmas, one can still build a mono-
lithic application, using the traditional compilation chain. To build a dis-
tributed system, you need to use an alternative compilation chain.
If no asynchronous calls are used and there are no network errors, and if
we assume there is no fault in the communication stack, then a monolithic
and a distributed application built with the DSA behave identically, from
a functional point of view. Actual interleaving of tasks may change.
The DSA allows for interoperability between heterogeneous processors,
using specic marshallers. However, it does not mandate interoperability
with other languages or other protocols.
The Distributed Systems Annex of Ada is implemented by the GNAT
compiler; its PCS is based on the PolyORB middleware.
The DSA compilation chain handles the allocation of source code to each
partition transparently, based on (1) the Ada conguration pragmas and
(2) a PCS-specic conguration le. This allocation is done transparently.
CORBA denes the notion of object, a remotely accessible entity. This
object can be reached through an Object Request Broker (ORB).
CORBA clients request services hosted by server nodes. A node can be
simultaneously a client of one service and a server for another.
CORBA denes the notion of contracts between clients and servers. They
are written using the IDL, a C-like interface denition language.
An IDL compiler is used to generate stubs and skeletons. They are in
charge of building and processing requests. There is a dedicated mapping
from IDL to most programming languages.
On the server side, CORBA objects are built from a servant, a placeholder
for user code, connected to a Portable Object Adapter (POA).
On the client side, CORBA objects are proxies to the remote object. They
are built from references. CORBA denes IOR and a Naming Service that
allows units to look up references from a logical name.
An IOR is a stringied representation of a CORBA object reference.
All CORBA services (POA, Naming Service, etc.) are dened as a set of
CORBA objects, with IDL specications.
The user must explicitly write glue code to set up client and server using
CORBA services and the POA.
Exercises
6.1 Have you ever encountered a Heisenbug? How did you x it?
6.2 Explain why each of the eight fallacies is actually a fallacy.
6.3 How do you compare rendezvous and synchronous RPC? The use of
protected objects and message passing?
6.4 Discuss portability issues of an Ada-based middleware compared to
other languages like C or Java.
6.5 What are stubs in an RPC implementation?
6.6 Name dierent occurrences of a naming service youve ever used.
6.7 What are some of the error conditions we need to guard against in a
distributed environment that we do not need to worry about in a local
programming environment?
6.8 Why are pointers (references) not usually passed as parameters to a
Remote Procedure Call?
6.9 Compare the power of expression of CORBA and DSA, and balance it
with the ease of control of some of their internals.
6.10 In Section 6.4, we indicate where each element of the user code is
located after compilation. Review the example in 6.3.2 and indicate
the location of each package for the RCI and RACW variants of this
example.
7
Real-time systems and scheduling concepts
Real-time systems are dened as those systems in which the correctness of
the system depends not only on the logical result of computation, but also
on the time at which the results are produced (Stankovic, 1988). When we
design a real-time system, we must ensure that it meets three properties:
Correctness of functionality. We expect that our system will produce
the correct output for every set of input data. Meeting this property is an
expectation of all types of software including information technology and
web applications. Traditional verication techniques such as testing and
formal proof may be used to demonstrate functional correctness.
Correctness of timing behavior. As we stated in Chapter 1, the re-
quirements of a real-time system include timing properties that must be
met by the implementation. Deadlines may be assigned to particular sys-
tem functions, and then to the tasks that implement these functions. Cor-
rect timing behavior is veried by checking that task execution times
never exceed the required deadlines. This analysis of the timing behavior
is called schedulability analysis.
Reliability. Software reliability is the probability of failure-free software
operation for a specied period of time in a specied environment (Lyu,
1995). Real-time systems are often safety or mission critical a failure
may result in loss of life or property. Therefore, reliability is usually an
important property of a real-time system.
In this chapter we examine methods for checking the correctness of timing
behavior. Our goal is to compute the timing behavior of the system before
execution time. Computing the timing behavior of a real-time system is a
complex job. Many real-time systems are built with operating systems pro-
viding multitasking facilities. Multitasking facilities increase eciency of the
252 Real-time systems and scheduling concepts
overall systems since they make it possible to perform ecient I/O opera-
tions and to run applications on multiprocessor architectures. Multitasking
facilities also ease the design of complex systems running on single proces-
sors. Each function of the system can be mapped to one or more tasks. Our
example of the pressure cooker in Section 1.3.2 demonstrated the simplicity
of a multitasking design over a sequential one. Unfortunately, multitasking
makes the timing behavior analysis more dicult to do. We must take the
scheduling of dierent tasks into account in order to check that all specied
temporal constraints are met.
If the system is small enough, a timing analysis can be performed by
hand. But if the system is complex, containing a large number of tasks with
varying deadlines, the analysis requires the use of models and tools such as
formal methods (Heitmeyer and Mandrioli, 1996), queuing systems theory
(Kleinrock, 1975a, 1975b), or real-time scheduling theory (Briand and Roy,
1999; Burns and Wellings, 2009; Cottet et al., 2002; George et al., 1996;
Klein et al., 1994).
The foundations of real-time scheduling theory came out in the 1970s
(Liu and Layland, 1973) and led to extensive research. Real-time scheduling
theory provides two dierent methods for verifying timing constraints:
Analytical methods (also called feasibility tests). These methods pro-
vide a means for the designer to analyze (compute) the systems timing
behavior without computing potential scenarios of task interleavings. Fea-
sibility tests usually lead to a proof that time constraints are met.
Simulations based on algorithms that determine a set of task interleav-
ings constrained by some timing requirements. Usually, simulations do
not lead to a proof that the timing constraints are met. But with some
task types and some schedulers, real-time scheduling theory allows veri-
cation by exhaustive simulations. By exhaustive simulations, we mean
simulations that inspect all possible states of the real-time system to be
veried. Exhaustive simulations involve running simulations during a time
interval called hyper-period, which is repeated during the entire lifetime
of the system. If we can prove that all deadlines are met during this time
interval, we prove that deadlines are met at any time during execution
time.
This chapter introduces you to the foundations of real-time scheduling
theory. We show how this theory can help you model and analyze a real-
time system. Aside from a few brief examples to aid in the understanding of
terminology, our discussions in this chapter are independent of any program-
ming language. In Chapter 8, we will show you how to implement real-time
applications in Ada which are compliant with the real-time scheduling the-
ory assumptions we discuss in this chapter.
In the next section we dene the terms that describe tasks in the context
of real-time scheduling theory. Then in the remaining sections we will de-
scribe two widely used real-time schedulers and show how to verify timing
constraints with each. At rst we will make some unrealistic assumptions to
simplify the analysis. Once you are comfortable with the underlying prin-
ciples, we will remove these assumptions and extend the theory to realistic
systems. In this book, we focus only on real-time scheduling theory related to
monoprocessor systems. You should notice that real-time scheduling theoret-
ical results may be quite dierent for multiprocessors or distributed systems.
For further reading, a comprehensive presentation of real-time scheduling
theory is provided by Briand and Roy (1999), Burns and Wellings (2009),
Cottet et al. (2002), George et al. (1996) and Klein et al. (1994).
7.1 Task characteristics
We may view a task as a set of statements and a set of data. Task statements
run sequentially. Task data includes values stored in memory and registers.
A tasks context is the minimal set of data that must be saved in order to
suspend the execution of the task at one point and resume its execution later.
Such suspensions may be the result of an interrupt (described in Chapter
4) or a context switch carried out by the task scheduler (described in this
chapter). The context usually includes the processor registers and memory
management unit (MMU) registers that manage the memory used by the
task.
A tasks context also includes the state of the task. We discussed the
possible states of an Ada task in Chapter 3. The three task states relevant
to real-time scheduling are ready, blocked, and running. These task states
and the transitions between them are shown in Figure 3.2 on page 112.
A task that is in the running state holds all the resources, including the
processor, that are required to run its set of statements. A running task
stays on the processor (remains in the running state) until
1. It has completed the execution of its set of statements or
2. It becomes blocked or
3. The scheduler chooses to run a dierent task.
When the scheduler chooses to stop the running task to run another one,
the change is called a preemption. One task must always be running on
the processor. When a task leaves the processor, we must replace it with
another.
1
The process of replacing the currently running task with another
is called a context switch. To perform a context switch, we must save
the context of the currently running task and restore the context of the
replacement task. The context is stored in a data structure called the task
control block associated with each task. The task control block is created
when the task is created (see Section 3.2.1). As the saving and restoring of
data during a context switch requires a certain amount of time, we like to
minimize the number of context switches.
A blocked task is a task that is waiting for one or more resources other
than the processor. An input/output operation, an access to a protected
entry with a closed barrier, or an attempt to rendezvous with a task that is
not executing an accept statement are examples of statements that lead to a
blocked task. Since a blocked task requires resources beyond the processor,
a blocked task is ignored by a scheduler when it selects the next task to run
on the processor.
Finally, a task may hold all the resources it needs except for the processor.
Such a task is called a ready task. A scheduler always chooses the next task
to run from among the set of ready tasks of the system.
7.1.1 Task types
We can classify tasks into dierent types based on behavior properties. A
critical task is a task for which missing a timing constraint results in
the failure of the application. Using the terminology from Chapter 1, an
application with one or more critical tasks is a hard real-time application.
Missing a timing constraint in a hard real-time application leads to serious
damage to the system and the services it provides.
An urgent task is a task which has a short deadline to meet. An urgent
task may also be a critical task if missing that short deadline results in the
failure of the application. If missing the short deadline has no disastrous
consequences, that urgent task is not a critical task. As it is possible to have
a critical task with a long deadline, not all critical tasks are urgent tasks.
We may also classify a task as an independent task or a dependent task. An
independent task runs independently of the other tasks in the application.
It does not communicate with other tasks either directly via a rendezvous
or indirectly via shared data. An independent task can run at any time,
provided that the processor is available and that the scheduler chooses to
1
Should none of the application tasks be ready to run, some operating systems run a default
task called the idle task or shut down the processor to reduce energy consumption.
run it. Independent tasks do not interfere with the execution of other tasks
in the application. The concurrent pressure cooker example in Section 1.3.2
consisted of two independent tasks one task maintains the temperature
of the cooker while the other maintains the pressure. These two tasks do not
communicate with each other.
In contrast, a dependent task may have to wait for an event before be-
ing run. This event is usually generated by the execution of another task.
For example, suppose some value in memory is shared by two tasks. If one
of those tasks is currently using that shared memory, the other task must
wait to access it. In this example, the second task must wait for the event
of the shared memory becoming available. The four entrance monitoring
tasks in our museum application (page 130) all share the protected object
Population and are therefore dependent tasks. Another form of task de-
pendence, called a precedence constraint, occurs when two tasks must
synchronize their execution. The bounded buer producer-consumer pattern
described in Chapters 1 and 4 is a classic example of a precedence constraint.
A consumer task cannot proceed unless there is a value in the buer. Sim-
ilarly, a producer task cannot proceed unless there is space in the buer
for a new value. The barrier, broadcast, and resource allocation patterns
described in Chapter 4 and the rendezvous discussed in Chapter 5 are also
examples of precedence constraints.
It is common for a task to perform the same job multiple times. Many
of the task examples in previous chapters included loops which repeatedly
carried out an activity. The time that a task rst requests the processor is
called the activation time or release time. Each request for the processor
to begin work on another iteration marks another release time. We classify
tasks on the basis of their release times.
If a xed duration exists between two successive activation/release times
of a task, the task is called a periodic task. The two tasks in the pressure
cooker example of Chapter 1 are periodic tasks. In both cases, the time
between successive task releases is a constant. As you will see later in this
chapter, the characterization of periodic tasks plays an important part in
the use of real-time scheduling theory to compute an accurate model of
processor demand. We can construct models from periodic tasks to analyze
the timing of critical and urgent application functions.
Tasks that are activated by events outside of our system are rarely pe-
riodic. Consider, for example, the tasks that monitor the turnstiles at the
entrances of the museum described in Chapter 4. Each task waits until
someone passes through its turnstile. As the time between turnstile events
is unlikely a constant, these tasks are not periodic tasks. Tasks that are not
periodic are divided into two types.
A sporadic task is one for which we can specify a minimum amount
of time between releases. Perhaps the mechanical nature of the turnstile
limits the rate of entry to one person every two seconds. Of course, the time
between turnstile events is usually much longer. Our scheduling theory can
provide a worst case evaluation of the processor demand by sporadic tasks.
It is likely that in order to meet such a worst case, our processor will usually
be under-loaded. Sporadic tasks are well suited for the modeling of event-
driven functions that are critical to an application. To check deadlines of
sporadic tasks, we can apply feasibility tests that are devoted to periodic
tasks. There are also some feasibility tests that are specically designed for
sporadic tasks (Baker and Cirinei, 2006). We do not address sporadic tasks
any more in this chapter.
An aperiodic task is one for which we have no limit on the time between
activations. Like sporadic tasks, aperiodic tasks are event-driven. Since we
can say nothing about the minimum time between event arrivals, we cannot
determine whether or not the task can meet its deadline for processing an
event before the next event arrives. Therefore we cannot use aperiodic tasks
to model critical functions in an application.
7.1.2 Scalar properties of periodic tasks
Periodic tasks are the foundation of real-time scheduling theory. Each peri-
odic task is dened by a set of parameters. The four most frequently used
periodic task parameters are (Cottet et al., 2002):
S
i
, the rst release time of task i. This is the rst time that the task
requests the processor.
C
i
, the worst case execution time (WCET) of the task i, also called the
tasks capacity. Although the actual amount of time a task requires for a
particular iteration can vary, we always use the WCET in our scheduling
analyses to ensure that deadlines are met even in the worst cases. The
capacity of a task is usually determined by running the task alone on the
processor and making measurements of its execution time or by static
analysis of the sequential code of the task (Wilhelm et al., 2008).
P
i
, the period of task i. P
i
is a xed delay between two successive acti-
vations of the task. Each P
i
units of time, the task is supposed to run on
the processor and use C
i
units of processor time.
D
i
, the timing constraint the task i has to meet. This constraint is called
a deadline. If the task is released at time t, we expect that it has run its
capacity before or at time t +D
i
. D
i
is a relative timing constraint.
Figure 7.1 illustrates three of these periodic task parameters. The arrow
indicates the ow of time from left to right. The vertical bar labeled S
i
marks
the time of the rst release of task i. The other four vertical bars show four
successive releases of the task. The amount of time between releases of task
i is constant and labeled P
i
. In this example, the period is 10 units of time.
The black rectangles indicate the times for which task i is in the running
state (has the processor). In this example, the capacity of task i, C
i
, is
two time units shown as two black squares in the gure. The task runs
immediately after its rst release at time S
i
. The gap between the black
squares during the rst period indicates that task i was preempted by the
scheduler and then resumed and completed its execution before the second
release. The task did not run immediately after its second release but did
complete the execution of its capacity in time for the third release. The task
also completes the execution of its capacity in the third and fourth periods
shown in the gure.
Figure 7.1 Parameters of a periodic task
7.2 Real-time schedulers
A scheduler is responsible for selecting the running task for each unit of
time from among the set of ready tasks. There are various ways to make this
choice. The literature is lled with descriptions of dierent schedulers. Each
scheduler provides a solution to the needs of some specic real-time system
requirements. We can classify schedulers based on those needs (Panwalkar
and Iskander, 1976). A scheduler may be based on xed priorities or based
on dynamic priorities. Scheduling may be done o-line or on-line. Finally,
schedulers may be preemptive or not. In this section, we look at each of
these possibilities.
All real-time schedulers use the notion of priority in making scheduling
decisions. A priority is a task attribute (usually an integer) that allows the
scheduler to choose the next task to run. As you might expect, when there
are multiple tasks ready to run, the scheduler will pick the task with the
highest priority. When task priorities are assigned at design time and do not
change at execution time, we call them xed priorities. A xed priority
scheduler is a scheduler that handles tasks whose priorities are determined
prior to the execution of the application and do not change during execution.
A dynamic priority scheduler is one that makes use of priorities that may
change at execution time.
Depending on the nature of our application, we use dierent criteria to
assign xed priorities to tasks. These criteria include:
Urgency: tasks that have shortest timing constraints will have the highest
priority level.
Rate Monotonic and Deadline Monotonic are two methods for assigning
xed priorities to tasks based on urgency. With Rate Monotonic, a tasks
priority is inversely proportional to its period. The task with the shortest
period has the highest priority. Deadline Monotonic assigns the highest
priority level to the task with the shortest deadline.
Criticality: the most critical task has the highest priority level.
Shared resources: in Section 7.3, we explain how a tasks priority may
change while it is using shared resources.
Precedence: when task a must be run before task b, a simple way to
enforce this execution order is to assign a higher priority to a than to b.
Priority assignment also depends on the properties of the system on which
the application is run. Dierent operating systems provide dierent numbers
of priority levels. In some operating systems, the higher the priority number,
the higher the priority level, while in other operating systems, the lower
the priority number, the higher the priority level. For example, VxWorks
provides 256 dierent priority levels (numbered 0 to 255) with 0 as the
highest priority level. Linux provides 100 priority levels (numbered 0 to 99)
with 99 as the highest priority level. The number of processors in a system
may also have an impact on the assignment of xed priorities.
An on-line scheduler is a scheduler that makes scheduling decisions
while the application is executing. An o-line scheduler works out a com-
plete schedule at design time. This schedule is then hardcoded into the
application so no operating system is required. The cyclic executive is an
example of an o-line scheduler. The cyclic executive uses a single thread of
control which cycles through a repeated set of activities at a set rate. Each
activity is a portion of a tasks capacity. Here, for example, is an algorithm
for a cyclic executive which schedules three tasks:
loop
Do the rst part of task #1
Do the rst part of task #2
Do the second part of task #1
Do all of task #3
Do the last part of task #1
Do the last part of task #2
end loop
The sequential control algorithms for cooking chutneys developed in Chap-
ter 1 are really cyclic executives for scheduling two tasks one that controls
the temperature and one that controls the pressure. O-line scheduling is
well suited for highly critical systems since it leads to a very deterministic
task scheduling. The space shuttles ight control software is a hard real-time
control system that uses a cyclic executive to schedule activities (Carlow,
1984). Of course, o-line scheduling is not exible. If we need to modify
the system later by adding an additional task or changing the timing con-
straints, the overall scheduling must be completely redesigned and analyzed
again.
A preemptive scheduler is a scheduler which is allowed to stop the
running task in order to run a higher priority task that has just changed
its state from blocked to ready. A task running under a non-preemptive
scheduler does not relinquish the processor until it executes some blocking
operation such as a delay, an entry call, or an input/output operation. Usu-
ally, a preemptive scheduler allows the tasks to meet more deadlines than
a non-preemptive scheduler. However, non-preemptive schedulers have two
advantages over preemptive schedulers:
1. Non-preemptive schedulers ease the sharing of resources. There is no need
for mutual exclusion if instructions for the task accessing the shared re-
source are not interleaved with the execution of instructions by other
tasks.
2. The scheduling overhead is lower in non-preemptive systems since fewer
context switches occur.
Each of the types of schedulers we have described has properties which
designers must consider when deciding which type of scheduler to use with
their application. The trade-os they must take into account include:
Predictability. Usually, static priority schedulers are more deterministic
than dynamic priority schedulers and are therefore more suitable for very
critical systems.
Eciency. In the best case, we look for schedulers that have a low over-
head (induce few context switches) and which are optimal. An optimal
scheduler is a scheduler which is always able to compute a valid schedule
if one exists. A valid schedule is one in which all task deadlines are met.
Eciency of a scheduler may also include the ability to build feasibility
tests that are not complicated. The tests should be easy to implement and
scalable (can be applied on architectures with a large number of tasks and
processors). Optimal schedulers are usually dynamic priority schedulers.
Suitability for the operating system. The selected scheduler should be
easy to implement and run under the operating system used for the ap-
plication. The most ecient schedulers are usually more complex, and
therefore more dicult to implement.
In the next two sections, we present two widely used on-line schedulers.
The rst scheduler is a xed priority scheduler. We mostly focus on task
sets with priorities assigned according to Rate Monotonic. The second one is
a dynamic priority scheduler called Earliest Deadline First. We will
look at both preemptive and non-preemptive versions of these two
schedulers.
7.2.1 Fixed priority scheduling
Properties and assumptions
Fixed priority schedulers are particularly well suited for static, hard real-
time systems. A static real-time system is one in which the number of
tasks does not change during execution time. The timing of static real-time
systems can be fully analyzed at design time (in case of periodic tasks)
a property that is important for engineers developing systems with critical
functions.
One of the most widely used real-time scheduling methods based on xed
priority schedulers is called Rate Monotonic. The term Rate Monotonic
may refer to one or more of three dierent aspects of real-time scheduling:
A scheduling algorithm
An analysis method
A priority assignment rule
The context in which the term Rate Monotonic is used usually makes it
clear to which of these aspects it refers. The primary use of Rate Monotonic
is the analysis and scheduling of periodic tasks. However, extensions exist
for analyzing systems containing both periodic and aperiodic tasks (Sprunt
et al., 1989). Rate Monotonic is known to be the optimal priority assignment
rule for xed priority scheduling.
Fixed priority scheduling is very easy to implement with real-time operat-
ing systems. It is implemented in a large number of them including VxWorks
(Wind River, 1997) and RTEMS (OAR, 2004).
To begin our explanation of xed priority scheduling and Rate Monotonic
priority assignment we make the following assumptions:
1. All tasks are independent.
2. i : D
i
= P
i
A tasks deadline is the same as its period. That is, a task
must nish its current job before its next release time.
3. i : S
i
= 0 All tasks are released at the same time.
In this book, periodic tasks that meet these three assumptions are called
synchronous periodic tasks. The rst assumption, that all tasks are in-
dependent, is not a very realistic one for actual real-time systems. We will
relax this assumption in Section 7.3. The second assumption, that a tasks
deadline is equal to its period, is sometimes called deadlines on requests.
The third assumption, that all tasks have an equal rst release time denes
a point in time called the critical instant. Having a critical instant leads to a
worst case on processor demand: all tasks request the processor at the same
time. If deadlines are met when a critical instant occurs, then subsequent
task deadlines will also be met. Many feasibility tests are built with the
assumption that this critical instant exists.
How it works
This type of scheduling can be seen as a two-step process. The rst step is
the priority assignment step and the second one, the election step.
The priority assignment step is an o-line process: priorities are assigned
to tasks at design time. Priorities can be assigned on the basis of urgency: a
tasks priority can be inversely proportional to its period (with Rate Mono-
tonic priority assignment rule) or to its deadline (with Deadline Monotonic
priority assignment rule). In these cases, the task with the shortest period
(or deadline) has the highest priority.
But engineers may also assign priorities according to other rules. For ex-
ample, they may consider:
Critically of tasks: the highest critical task will have the highest priority.
Task precedence relationships: if task i must be scheduled before task j,
task i will have the highest priority.
Other problem or domain specic criteria.
The election step is an on-line statement. During execution time, the
scheduler ensures that the running task has the highest priority level among
all the ready tasks of the application.
Lets look at an example. Suppose we have two synchronous periodic tasks,
T
1
and T
2
. Task T
1
has a period of 10 units of time and a capacity of 6
units of time. Task T
2
has a period of 30 units of time and a capacity of 9
units of time. We assume Rate Monotonic priority assignment. The following
table summarizes the task attributes and shows the Rate Monotonic priority
assignments.
Task Period Capacity Deadline Priority
T
1
P
1
= 10 C
1
= 6 D
1
= 10 High
T
2
P
2
= 30 C
2
= 9 D
2
= 30 Low
Figure 7.2 shows the scheduling of these two tasks with a preemptive
scheduler. Since T
1
is the higher-priority task, each time T
1
is released, T
2
is preempted and T
1
is immediately run. You can check that for each task
release, both tasks have enough time to run all their capacity before their
deadline (their next release time).
Figure 7.2 Example of scheduling with preemptive xed priority scheduler
and Rate Monotonic priority assignments
Figure 7.3 shows the scheduling of the same task set but with a non-
preemptive scheduler. In contrast to Figure 7.2, the scheduling of Figure
7.3 shows a missed deadline of task T
1
. This example shows that a non-
preemptive scheduler is usually less ecient than the corresponding pre-
emptive scheduler.
Figure 7.3 Example of scheduling with non-preemptive xed priority sched-
uler and Rate Monotonic priority assignments
Checking deadlines
Fixed priority schedulers are important for practitioners because they have
a deterministic behavior which leads to simple and ecient ways to check
deadlines. At the beginning of this chapter we briey described two methods
for verifying that we can meet all deadlines in a real-time system: exhaustive
simulations and feasibility tests.
Exhaustive simulations involve running simulations during the hyper-
period. The hyper-period is a duration containing a scheduling sequence
which is repeated during the entire lifetime of the system. If we can prove
that all deadlines are met during the hyper-period, we prove that deadlines
are met at any time during execution time. In the context of a synchronous
period task set, the hyper-period is the interval:
[0, LCM((P
i
)
i=1..n
)] (7.1)
with LCM(i : P
i
), the least common multiple
2
of all period values of the
task set. In the case of Figures 7.2 and 7.3, the hyper-period is the interval
[0, 30].
The determination of the hyper-period is a little more complex when the
periodic tasks have dierent rst release times. In this case, the hyper-period
is given by the interval:
[0, LCM((P
i
)
i=1..n
) + 2 max(i : S
i
)] (7.2)
At the end of this section, we will show an exhaustive simulation of three
tasks in an application embedded within a car.
The second approach to check deadlines is to apply a feasibility test. There
are a number of dierent feasibility tests for xed priority schedulers. A very
simple feasibility test for xed priority scheduling is the processor utilization
factor test. The processor utilization factor expresses the fraction of the
time that the processor is busy executing our set of tasks. With a set of
synchronous periodic tasks, it is computed as follows:
U =
n
i=1
C
i
P
i
(7.3)
with n being the number of tasks in our application.
We are guaranteed that all task deadlines are met when this processor
utilization factor is less than or equal to the bound computed by
B = n (2
1
n
1)
(Liu and Layland, 1973). When n is large, this bound tends to B = 0.69.
This test is valid only when priorities have been assigned according to Rate
Monotonic and the tasks are run with a preemptive scheduler.
This feasibility test is a sucient but not necessary schedulability test
which means that:
1. When U B, all task deadlines will be met.
2. When U > B, the result is not denitive. It is still possible that all our
task deadlines may be met. But it is also possible that one or more task
deadlines will be missed. In other words, when U > B the feasibility test
cannot prove whether or not task deadlines will be met.
A harmonic set of periodic tasks is a case that illustrates the second
property. A harmonic set of periodic tasks is one in which the period of
2
The LCM is the smallest non-zero number that is a multiple of two or more numbers.
each task is an exact multiple of every task that has a shorter period. For
example, a set of four tasks with periods 10, 20, 40, and 120 form a harmonic
set. Harmonic sets never miss deadlines when U 1.
The processor utilization factor test is a pessimistic test. In contrast to
exhaustive simulations, which compute the exact scheduling of the system,
the processor utilization factor test is not always able to provide an exact
result. Furthermore, it is limited to simple task sets as in our example of
synchronous periodic tasks.
Another feasibility test, based on worst case response time, provides a
more accurate test of schedulability. The worst case response time fea-
sibility test consists of computing for each task its worst case response time.
We can then compare that with its deadline. A tasks worst case response
time, noted r
i
, is the delay between task release time and task completion
time.
Equation (7.4), conceived by Joseph and Pandya (1986), expresses the
worst-case response time for a set of synchronous periodic tasks with a pre-
emptive xed priority scheduler.
_
i : r
i
D
i
with r
i
= C
i
+
jhp(i)
_
r
i
P
j
_
C
j
(7.4)
hp(i) is the set of tasks which have a higher priority level than task i and
x returns the smallest integer not smaller than x.
3
In the context of synchronous periodic tasks, this feasibility test is a suf-
cient and a necessary condition to check task deadlines. In contrast to the
processor utilization factor test, equation (7.4) can be easily extended to
take into account dierent delays such as those due to shared resource ac-
cess, the execution environment, message exchanging, and others. Note that
this test does not require that task priority assignment follow Rate Mono-
tonic.
4
The test makes no assumptions on how priorities are assigned. How-
ever, the analysis of an application is easier if all tasks have dierent priority
levels.
To see how equation (7.4) is derived, let us assume that task priority levels
are assigned according to Rate Monotonic. The worst case response time of
task i shown by this equation is the sum of two terms:
1. The execution time of task i: C
i
.
2. The time that task i has to wait while higher-priority tasks execute.
3
This operator is called the ceiling operator.
4
Highest priority levels are assigned to the tasks with shortest periods.
Figure 7.4 helps show us how to calculate the second term of the sum.
Assume a task j that has a higher priority level than task i. With Rate
Monotonic, if task j has a priority level greater than i, it means that the
period of j is smaller than the period of i. Then, during the response time
of task i (duration from 0 to r
i
, see Figure 7.4), task j is released
_
r
i
P
j
_
times. Then, the waiting time of task i due to task j is:
_
r
i
P
j
_
C
j
Figure 7.4 Task i worst case response time
Since several tasks may have a higher priority level than task i, the set
hp(i) may contain several tasks and the actual waiting time delay of task i
due to higher priority tasks is:
jhp(i)
_
r
i
P
j
_
C
j
Now lets see how to solve equation (7.4) to determine the worst case re-
sponse time, r
i
, of each task, i, in a program. Because r
i
appears on both
sides of this equation, it is dicult to solve. One technique we can use to
solve equation (7.4) is to repeatedly use an approximate value of r
i
to cal-
culate a better approximation of r
i
. Newtons method, which we used to
calculate square roots on page 29, uses this approach. From equation (7.4),
we derive the following recurrence equation:
w
n+1
i
= C
i
+

jhp(i)
_
w
n
i
P
j
_
C
j
(7.5)
Each evaluation of recurrence equation (7.5) uses an approximation of the
worst case response time for task i, w
n
i
, to compute a better approximation,
w
n+1
i
. We use the following algorithm to compute the nal value:
We compute the rst element of the recurrence equation (7.5) by w
0
i
= C
i
.
Then, we compute w
1
i
, w
2
i
, w
3
i
, ..., w
k
i
until:
Either w
k
i
> P
i
. In this case, the recurrence equation will never con-
verge. Therefore, no task response time can be computed for task i. We
can conclude that task is deadline will be missed.
Or w
k
i
= w
k1
i
. In this case, w
k
i
is the actual worst case response time
for task i. We can then compare w
k
i
with the task deadline. When
convergence exists, it also means that w
k
i
< P
i
.
Let us look at an example of worst case task response time analysis with a
task set composed of three synchronous periodic tasks T
1
, T
2
, and T
3
dened
by the following parameters:
T
1
P
1
= 7 C
1
= 3 D
1
= 7 High
T
2
P
2
= 12 C
2
= 2 D
2
= 12 Medium
T
3
P
3
= 20 C
3
= 5 D
3
= 20 Low
We compute each worst case response time individually:
1. The highest priority task T
1
never has to wait for the processor at its
release times. Its response time is equal to its capacity: r
1
= C
1
= 3.
Note that the set hp(T
1
) is empty.
2. The task T
2
is the middle priority task. Sometimes it has to wait for the
execution of task T
1
: the set hp(T
2
) contains T
1
. We apply equation (7.5)
to compute the following rst elements of the recurrence equation:
w
0
2
= C
2
= 2
w
1
2
= C
2
+
_
w
0
2
P
1
_
C
1
= 2 +
_
2
7
_
3 = 5
w
2
2
= C
2
+
_
w
1
2
P
1
_
C
1
= 2 +
_
5
7
_
3 = 5
We stop at w
2
2
since w
2
2
= w
1
2
. The actual worst case response time of
T
2
is then equal to r
2
= 5.
3. The task T
3
is the lowest-priority task. It is delayed by both T
1
and T
2
:
the set hp(T
3
) contains both T
1
and T
2
, which leads to the following
elements of the recurrence equation:
w
0
3
= C
3
= 5
w
1
3
= C
3
+
_
w
0
3
P
1
_
C
1
+
_
w
0
3
P
2
_
C
2
= 5 +
_
5
7
_
3 +
_
5
12
_
2 = 10
w
2
3
= C
3
+
_
w
1
3
P
1
_
C
1
+
_
w
1
3
P
2
_
C
2
= 5 +
_
10
7
_
3 +
_
10
12
_
2 = 13
w
3
3
= C
3
+
_
w
2
3
P
1
_
C
1
+
_
w
2
3
P
2
_
C
2
= 5 +
_
13
7
_
3 +
_
13
12
_
2 = 15
w
4
3
= C
3
+
_
w
3
3
P
1
_
C
1
+
_
w
3
3
P
2
_
C
2
= 5 +
_
15
7
_
3 +
_
15
12
_
2 = 18
w
5
3
= C
3
+
_
w
4
3
P
1
_
C
1
+
_
w
4
3
P
2
_
C
2
= 5 +
_
18
7
_
3 +
_
18
12
_
2 = 18
This time we stop at w
5
3
since w
5
3
= w
4
3
. The actual worst case response
time of T
3
is then equal to r
3
= 18.
Since i : r
i
D
i
, we have shown that this set of tasks is schedulable.
An example: analysis of a car with embedded software
In this section we look at an example to help clarify the analytic techniques
discussed in the previous sections. Suppose we have a car with an embedded
processor. This processor runs a real-time application which is composed of
the following three synchronous periodic tasks:
1. T
display
, a task which displays the cars speed.
2. T
speed
, a task which reads the cars speed sensor.
3. T
engine
, a task which performs an engine monitoring algorithm.
We extracted the necessary timing requirements from the customers spec-
ication and determined that the deadlines are equal to the task periods.
For the execution environment, we use the VxWorks operating system. This
operating system provides 256 levels of priority, ranging from 0 to 255. The
highest priority level is 0.
The scheduling analysis has to check that the customers requirements
can be met according to the functional parts of the system and the execu-
tion environment chosen for this application. After the implementation of
the functional parts of each task, we made some measurements by running
each task alone several times. These measurements have allowed us to com-
pute an approximation of their WCET. The following table summarizes the
requirements and the capacity test results. Priorities are assigned by Rate
Monotonic.
(milliseconds) (milliseconds) (milliseconds)
T
display
P
display
= 100 C
display
= 20 D
display
= 100 0
T
engine
P
engine
= 500 C
engine
= 150 D
engine
= 500 2
T
speed
P
speed
= 250 C
speed
= 50 D
speed
= 250 1
With these parameters, we can perform analyses with the three dierent
methods presented in the previous section.
Analysis with the processor utilization test The processor utilization factor
is computed as:
U =
n
i=1
C
i
P
i
= 20/100 + 150/500 + 50/250 = 0.7
and the bound as:
Bound = n (2
1
n
1) = 3 (2
1
3
1) = 0.779
Since U Bound, we can be sure that all task deadlines will be met.
Analysis with worst case task response times We use equation (7.5) to cal-
culate the worst case response time for the three tasks in our system. Task
T
display
is the highest priority task. This task is never delayed by another
task. Its worst case response time is equal to its capacity, 20 milliseconds.
Task T
speed
is the middle priority task. It is delayed by the one higher
priority task, T
display
. Its worst case response time is computed by:
w
0
speed
= C
speed
= 50
w
1
speed
= C
speed
+
_
w
0
speed
P
di spl ay
_
C
display
= 50 +
_
50
100
_
20 = 70
w
2
speed
= C
speed
+
_
w
1
speed
P
di spl ay
_
C
display
= 50 +
_
70
100
_
20 = 70
We stopped iterating at w
2
speed
since w
2
speed
= w
1
speed
. The worst case
response time for task T
speed
is 70 milliseconds.
Task T
engine
has the lowest priority level of the three tasks. It is delayed
by both of the other tasks in the application. Its worst case response time
is computed by:
w
0
engine
= C
engine
= 150
w
1
engine
= C
engine
+
_
w
0
eng i ne
P
di spl ay
_
C
display
+
_
w
0
eng i ne
P
speed
_
C
speed
= 150 +
_
150
100
_
20 +
_
150
250
_
50 = 150 + 40 + 50 = 240
w
2
engine
= C
engine
+
_
w
1
eng i ne
P
di spl ay
_
C
display
+
_
w
1
eng i ne
P
speed
_
C
speed
= 150 +
_
240
100
_
20 +
_
240
250
_
50 = 150 + 60 + 50 = 260
w
3
engine
= C
engine
+
_
w
2
eng i ne
P
di spl ay
_
C
display
+
_
w
2
eng i ne
P
speed
_
C
speed
= 150 +
_
260
100
_
20 +
_
260
250
_
50 = 150 + 60 + 100 = 310
w
4
engine
= C
engine
+
_
w
3
eng i ne
P
di spl ay
_
C
display
+
_
w
3
eng i ne
P
speed
_
C
speed
= 150 +
_
310
100
_
20 +
_
310
250
_
50 = 150 + 80 + 100 = 330
w
5
engine
= C
engine
+
_
w
4
eng i ne
P
di spl ay
_
C
display
+
_
w
4
eng i ne
P
speed
_
C
speed
= 150 +
_
330
100
_
20 +
_
330
250
_
50 = 150 + 80 + 100 = 330
We stopped iterating at w
5
engine
since w
5
engine
= w
4
engine
and its worst case
response time is 330 milliseconds.
The worst case response times of this task set are: r
engine
= 330 millisec-
onds, r
display
= 20 milliseconds, and r
speed
= 70 milliseconds. All worst case
response times are shorter than the corresponding deadlines.
Analysis by exhaustive scheduling simulation: scheduling simulation during
the hyper-period We can also check the deadlines of our car application by
determining the scheduling during a hyper-period. We use the interval com-
puted from [0, LCM(P
i
)] for the hyper-period. With our set of tasks, the
interval is [0, 500].
We start by drawing a time line of the length of the hyper-period for each
of our three tasks. On each time line we mark the release times of each task
with vertical bars. Figure 7.5 shows the hyper-period marked with six release
times for T
display
, two release times for T
engine
, and three release times for
T
speed
.
Now we ll in the execution times of each of the tasks. Since T
display
has
the highest priority, it always runs when it is ready. We can ll in its 20
millisecond capacity beginning at each release. The top line of Figure 7.6
shows the results.
Moving on to the second highest priority task, T
speed
, we ll in its 50
millisecond executions. It begins its rst execution after T
display
has relin-
quished the processor. At its second execution, there is no need to wait as
Figure 7.5 Template for analysis with exhaustive simulations
T
display
is not executing at this point in time. The middle line of Figure 7.6
shows the results. The worst case response time for T
speed
is 70 milliseconds.
Lastly we ll in the 150 millisecond capacity of the lowest priority task,
T
engine
. We may only ll in the squares for this task when the other two
tasks are not executing. The bottom line of Figure 7.6 shows the results.
T
engine
does not start running until the other two tasks have completed
their rst release. Then it is preempted twice by T
display
and once by T
speed
.
Despite these interruptions, task T
engine
is able to complete its capacity 330
milliseconds after its release.
Figure 7.6 Analysis with exhaustive simulations
As all deadlines were met within the hyper-period, we are guaranteed that
all deadlines beyond that interval will also be met. Note that the worst case
task response times determined by Figure 7.6 are exactly the same as the
ones computed with equation (7.5).
7.2.2 Earliest Deadline First, a dynamic priority scheduler
Properties and assumptions
We present now an example of dynamic priority scheduler: Earliest Deadline
First (EDF). Earliest Deadline First is a scheduler based on task priorities
that change during the execution of the application. EDF is then a dynamic
priority scheduler. It works in a manner similar to the way many students
determine an order for completing their class assignments. The assignment
whose due date is closest is usually given the highest priority while an as-
signment due in the distant future is given the lowest priority. Assignment
priorities change as time passes, assignments are completed, and more as-
signments are received. Assignments may be periodic (prepare for the weekly
quiz) or aperiodic (on Tuesday, the instructor gives an assignment to com-
plete exercises 7.1 through 7.4 for Thursdays class).
EDF can handle:
Dynamic real-time systems A dynamic real-time system is one in
which the number of tasks may change during execution time. The run-
time creation and destruction of tasks makes it impossible to fully analyze
the schedulability of the application at design time.
Synchronous periodic tasks With synchronous periodic tasks, EDF
is known to be optimal: if EDF is not able to nd a scheduling sequence in
which all task deadlines are met, no other scheduler will be able to nd it.
The processor utilization for EDF-scheduled synchronous periodic tasks
can reach 100 percent with no missed deadlines.
Aperiodic tasks Tasks whose release times are not xed.
EDF has some drawbacks. It is more dicult to implement within an
operating system than xed priority schedulers. But the biggest drawback
of EDF is its behavior when the processor becomes overloaded, a condition
that can occur in dynamic systems. When overloading occurs, it is dicult to
predict which tasks will miss their deadlines. With xed priority scheduling,
we know that the lowest priority tasks will miss their deadlines when the
processor is overloaded. For this reason, EDF is not suitable for critical
real-time systems. However, EDF is very useful for o-line scheduling of
applications with high levels of criticality. We can compute a scheduling
sequence at design time and embed it into the application which can then
be executed without a scheduler in the operating system but with a cyclic
executive (see page 258).
How it works
At each unit of time during the execution of the application, EDF performs
two steps:
1. First, the scheduler computes a dynamic priority for each task. Dynamic
priorities are deadlines that the scheduler will try to meet. The dy-
namic priority of task i at time t is noted D
i
(t) and is computed as
follows:
If i is an aperiodic task, then D
i
(t) = S
i
+ D
i
.
If i is a periodic task, then D
i
(t) = k
i
+ D
i
, where k
i
is the last task
i release time prior to t.
2. Second, after all task dynamic priorities are updated, EDF runs the ready
task with the smallest dynamic priority the task with the closest dead-
line.
Lets look at an example. Here is a set of three synchronous periodic
tasks.
Task Period Capacity Deadline
T
1
P
1
= 8 C
1
= 4 D
1
= 8
T
2
P
2
= 12 C
2
= 3 D
2
= 12
T
3
P
3
= 4 C
3
= 1 D
3
= 4
It is not necessary to compute the dynamic priorities of the tasks at each
time unit. The priority changes occur only at a task release time when
some k
i
changes. Therefore, for our set of tasks, we need only to calculate
the dynamic priorities at times 0, 4, 8, 12, 16 and 20. Table 7.1 shows the
dynamic priorities that EDF computes during the scheduling of the task
set.
t D
1
(t) D
2
(t) D
3
(t)
(k
1
+D
1
) (k
2
+D
2
) (k
3
+D
3
)
0..3 0 + 8 = 8 0 + 12 = 12 0 + 4 = 4
4..7 0 + 8 = 8 0 + 12 = 12 4 + 4 = 8
8..11 8 + 8 = 16 0 + 12 = 12 8 + 4 = 12
12..15 8 + 8 = 16 12 + 12 = 24 12 + 4 = 16
16..19 16 + 8 = 24 12 + 12 = 24 16 + 4 = 20
20..23 16 + 8 = 24 12 + 12 = 24 20 + 4 = 24
Table 7.1 Dynamic priorities handled by Earliest Deadline First
Figure 7.7 shows the scheduling of our three synchronous periodic tasks
with EDF and a preemptive scheduler. We used the dynamic priorities cal-
culated in Table 7.1 to ll in this timing diagram.
Figure 7.7 Scheduling with a preemptive EDF scheduler
At the critical instant, task T
3
has the greatest dynamic priority. After this
task completes its capacity, the second greatest priority task, T
1
, executes
its 4 units of capacity. At time 4, T
3
is released again and then, its dynamic
priority is re-computed: its dynamic priority is 8. Then, T
3
has the greatest
dynamic priority and runs again during its capacity.
At time 6, only one task is ready to run: task T
2
. Task T
2
runs during 2
units of time and at time 8, T
1
and T
3
are released again with new dynamic
priorities of 16 and 12. At this time T
2
and T
3
have the same priority level
and the scheduler can choose any of them for the next unit of time. Running
task T
2
at time 8 avoids requiring the scheduler doing a context switch.
The remainder of the schedule illustrated in Figure 7.7 is derived in the
same manner. We have seen that at some times, EDF leads to the scheduling
of tasks with the same dynamic priority. This is also the case at the end
of the hyper-period: at t = 20, all three tasks of our example have the
same dynamic priority. At this time, we could run either T
2
or T
3
or T
1
.
Each such choice between equal priority tasks leads to dierent scheduling
sequences. The actual choice is implementation-dened: it depends on how
the scheduler is actually implemented inside the operating system. This lack
of predictability is one of the reasons EDF is less suitable for critical real-
time applications.
Figure 7.8 shows the same task set, but scheduled with a non-preemptive
EDF scheduler. This scheduling sequence changes at time 16 where task T
2
cannot be preempted by task T
3
due to the non-preemptive scheduler.
Figure 7.8 Scheduling with a non-preemptive EDF scheduler
Checking deadlines
Even if EDF is less predictable than xed priority schedulers, a designer
can use methods similar to those for xed priority schedulers to check task
deadlines at design time. The deadlines of a set of synchronous periodic
tasks can be checked by exhaustive simulations, by processor utilization
factor feasibility tests, or by worst case response time feasibility tests.
To perform exhaustive simulations with EDF, we must compute a schedul-
ing sequence during the hyper-period. To determine the hyper-period with
EDF, we use the same equations as with xed priority scheduling/Rate
Monotonic equation (7.1) or (7.2) depending on the rst release time of
the tasks. For our sample set of tasks, the hyper-period is 24 time units.
Figure 7.7 shows that each of our three tasks run their full capacity for each
release time in the hyper-period. Therefore, this task set is schedulable with
EDF. Rate Monotonic priority assignment and xed priority scheduling fail
to schedule this particular set of tasks (see Exercises 7.15 and 7.16).
Deadlines can also be checked with processor utilization factor tests. Equa-
tion (7.6) presents an example of such a test. This test is a sucient and
necessary condition and demonstrates the optimality of EDF. We can meet
all task deadlines even if the bound on the processor utilization factor reaches
100 percent. This is another illustration which shows that EDF eciency is
better than xed priority scheduling/Rate Monotonic eciency.
_
U 1
with U =

n
i=1
C
i
P
i
(7.6)
For our example set of tasks, the processor utilization factor is computed
as:
U =
n
i=1
C
i
P
i
= 4/8 + 3/12 + 1/4 = 1
A processor utilization factor not greater than 1.0 conrms our earlier anal-
ysis by exhaustive simulation.
Finally, feasibility tests based on the worst case response time were pro-
posed by Spuri (1996). Since EDF is a dynamic scheduler, worst case re-
sponse time feasibility tests are more complex and are outside the scope of
this chapter. You can read more about feasibility tests for EDF and xed
priority scheduling in George and Spuri (1996).
7.2.3 EDF versus xed priority scheduling
In the previous sections, we presented a xed and a dynamic priority sched-
uler.
Fixed priority scheduling is well suited for critical and static real-time
embedded systems. EDF is better suited to less critical systems.
From an implementation point of view, xed priority scheduling is simple
to implement in a real-time operating system. Most real-time operating
systems include such a scheduler. EDF is more dicult to implement so
it is rarely implemented in real-time operating systems.
Fixed priority scheduling with Rate Monotonic priority assignment is used
to easily schedule periodic tasks. EDF can easily schedule both periodic
and aperiodic tasks.
Fixed priority scheduling is more predictable than EDF, especially in the
case of over-loading. Even in the absences of over-loading the random
choice made when two EDF tasks have the same dynamic priority intro-
duces a lack of predictability.
Fixed priority scheduling with Rate Monotonic priority assignment e-
ciency (69%) is lower than EDF eciency (100%).
Table 7.2 summarizes these two schedulers. Of course, the real picture is
a bit more complicated than this summary.
Both EDF and xed priority scheduling have been adapted in dier-
ent contexts to increase their usability, their exibility, or their eciency.
For example, we previously stated that xed priority scheduling with Rate
Monotonic priority assignment has a limited eciency: the processor uti-
lization factor should not be greater than 69% to be sure that all task
Fixed priority scheduling EDF
Applications critical, static dynamic, less critical
RTOS
a
easy more dicult
implementation
Tasks periodic (Rate Monotonic) aperiodic and periodic
Eciency up to 69% (Rate Monotonic up to 100%
only)
Predictability high less than xed priority
if U > 1
Table 7.2 A simple comparison of xed priority scheduling and EDF
a
Real-Time Operating System.
deadlines are met. In fact, in some systems, task deadlines can be met even
when this bound is exceeded. This is the case of a harmonic task set for
which a processor utilization factor reaching 1 is possible with no missed
deadlines.
The behavior of EDF is non-deterministic during a transient processor
over-load. However, an adaption of EDF, called D-over, has been developed
to take care of processor over-loads (Koren and Shasha, 1992).
Another adaption is related to the scheduling of aperiodic tasks with
xed priority scheduling and Rate Monotonic priority assignment. Several
approaches have been proposed to handle aperiodic tasks with xed pri-
ority scheduling (Sprunt et al., 1989). The polling server is one of these
approaches. Basically, a polling server is a periodic task dened by a period
and a capacity. When aperiodic tasks are released in the system, they are
stored in a queue. At each periodic release time of the polling server, it runs
aperiodic tasks which are waiting for the processor in the queue. The polling
server runs aperiodic tasks for the duration of its capacity. If the aperiodic
task queue is empty at the polling servers release times, the server does
nothing. It waits for its next periodic release time. This mechanism allows
the processor to run aperiodic tasks as soon as possible but without de-
laying periodic tasks that are critical. A polling server can be included in
a feasibility test, such as the processor utilization factor test, as a normal
periodic task. The system is checked assuming the worst case aperiodic task
arrivals when the polling server runs aperiodic tasks during all its capacity
at all its release times.
For further reading, Buttazzo (2003) presents a more detailed comparison
of Rate Monotonic and EDF.
7.3 Dependent tasks
In the previous sections, we made an unrealistic assumption: all tasks in
the application are independent. Most real applications contain dependent
tasks.
When two tasks share a resource, this data is usually accessed through
a synchronization construct such as a protected object or semaphore (see
Chapter 4). Both provide a pre-protocol to assert a desire to access the
shared resource and a post-protocol to indicate that the shared resource is
available. These protocols are encapsulated within a protected type. The
programmer using semaphores must explicitly invoke the protocols to pro-
tect shared data. We will use the semaphore in our discussions in this section
so that the protocols are completely visible. The same principles apply to
protected objects. A task wanting to access shared data has to wait when
the semaphore is locked by another task. This shared resource waiting time
may increase the worst case response time of the waiting task.
Precedence constraints are a second type of dependency. These constraints
are raised when tasks exchange messages as in a rendezvous (see Chapter
5). A task receiving a message may have to wait until its message actually
arrives. Similarly, a task wanting to send a message may have to wait for the
receiver task to accept the message. These waiting times may also change
the worst case response times of tasks.
The basic analysis methods presented in the previous sections do not deal
with these additional waiting times. The next two sections describe what
we need to add to the basic analysis methods to handle the delays resulting
from shared resources and precedence constraints.
7.3.1 Shared resource problems
Figure 7.9 shows a set of three tasks, two of which share a resource. This
resource is protected by a semaphore called mutex. In the gure, P(mutex)
depicts the semaphore locking and V (mutex) the semaphore unlocking. P
and V come from the original Dutch words chosen by Dijkstra. In Chapter
4, we used the names Wait and Signal for these operations.
Tasks T
1
and T
3
share the resource. These tasks are scheduled with a
preemptive xed priority scheduler. Task T
3
is the highest priority task and
T
1
is the lowest priority task. T
2
is a medium priority level task that does
not use the shared resource protected by the semaphore mutex.
Figure 7.9 shows the scheduling sequence of this task set. This scheduling
leads to a priority inversion. A priority inversion is a scheduling sequence
Figure 7.9 A priority inversion
in which a lower priority task blocks a higher priority task. In this gure, a
priority inversion occurs between task T
3
and task T
2
as follows:
1. At time 0, task T
1
is released. T
1
locks the semaphore at time 1.
2. Task T
3
is released at time 2 and immediately preempts the lower priority
task, T
1
. T
1
s preemption occurs before it has released the semaphore.
3. T
3
becomes blocked when it requests the semaphore at time 3.
4. Task T
1
resumes its execution, continuing its use of the shared resource
protected by semaphore mutex.
5. At time 4, T
1
is preempted as T
2
is released. Task T
1
s second preemption
occurs before it has released the semaphore.
6. At this point the medium priority task T
2
blocks the high priority task
T
3
through the low priority task T
1
this is a priority inversion.
Task T
2
delays task T
3
even though these two tasks are independent of
each other. The problem results from the medium priority task preempting
a low priority task that has locked a resource that a high priority task
requires. We must accept the fact that while it is using the shared resource,
low priority task T
1
blocks high priority task T
3
. We saw the consequences of
unprotected resource sharing in Chapter 4. But this is not the case between
T
2
and T
3
they do not share a resource.
We need to determine how long a task can be blocked while waiting to
access a shared resource. We represent the worst case shared waiting time
of task i by B
i
. This delay must be taken into account by feasibility tests
such as equation (7.4).
The problem is made worse when we introduce additional tasks with pri-
ority levels between our low priority task T
1
and our high priority task T
3
.
These tasks can eectively prevent the low priority task from releasing the
resource. The high priority task could easily miss its deadline.
While we cannot eliminate priority inversion, it is possible to limit the
amount of time a task will be blocked by a lower priority task that shares
the resource. If we know the maximum value of B
i
, we can determine whether
or not task i will meet its deadlines.
Priority inheritance protocols provide the means to put an upper
bound on B
i
. These protocols increase the priority of the low priority task
to a value above the medium priority tasks. Then the low priority task
can nish its use of the shared resource and release it to the high priority
task. Various priority inheritance protocols have been proposed for both
xed priority schedulers and dynamic priority schedulers. They include the
Priority Ceiling Protocol PCP (Sha et al., 1990), the Priority Inheritance
Protocol PIP (Sha et al., 1990), and the Stack Based Resource Control
SRP (Baker, 1991). In the next section we will look at PIP and PCP.
7.3.2 Shared resource protocols
PIP is the simplest inheritance protocol. With PIP, a task which blocks
a high priority task due to a shared resource sees its priority increased to
the priority level of the blocked task. With such a mechanism, B
i
can be
computed as the sum of the critical section durations of the tasks which
have a priority lower than the priority of task i.
Figure 7.10 presents a new scheduling sequence of the task set of Figure
7.9 but with PIP. At time 3, when the high priority task T
3
attempts to
lock the semaphore mutex, the low priority task T
1
sees its priority level
increased up to the priority level of the high priority task T
3
. This priority
change prevents the medium priority task T
2
from preempting T
1
when T
2
is released at time 4. T
1
signals that it is nished with the shared resource
at time 5 allowing the high priority task T
3
to access it before the medium
priority task T
2
ever ran. Of course, when T
1
is nished with the shared
resource, its priority level returns to its initial value.
Our example shows that PIP is a very simple protocol. However, it has a
major drawback: PIP cannot be used with more than one shared resource
as it leads to deadlock. So while PIP provides a simple model to explain
priority inheritance, it is not used in practice. Instead, PCP is widely used
in real-time operating systems to prevent unbounded priority inversions and
task deadlocks.
Figure 7.10 A scheduling sequence with PIP
There are several versions of PCP. We will look at one called Immediate
Ceiling Priority Protocol ICPP. ICPP works as follows:
Each task has a static and a dynamic priority. The static priority is as-
signed according to rules such as Rate Monotonic or Deadline Monotonic.
Each shared resource has a priority. This priority is called a ceiling priority
and its value is equal to the maximum static priority of all the tasks which
use the shared resource.
The scheduler always selects the ready task with the highest dynamic
priority. The dynamic priority is equal to the maximum of the tasks static
priority and the ceiling priorities of any resources the task has locked.
Figure 7.11 shows our task set scheduled with ICPP. The ceiling priority
of the resource protected by the semaphore is equal to the static priority
assigned to our high priority task T
3
. When task T
1
rst locks the semaphore
at time 1, its dynamic priority is increased to the ceiling priority of the
shared resource. As T
1
is now running with the highest priority, it very
quickly completes its access to the shared resource and releases it at time 2.
At that point, the priority of task T
1
returns to its low static value and the
scheduler runs T
3
.
With ICPP, the priority inheritance is applied sooner than with PIP. This
allows the task T
1
to quickly leave the critical section. With ICPP, B
i
can be
computed more accurately than with PIP. B
i
is the largest critical section
of the tasks sharing the same set of resources.
Figure 7.11 A scheduling sequence with ICPP
7.3.3 Feasibility tests extended with shared resources
With known values of B
i
, we can perform deadline verications with two of
the feasibility tests presented in Section 7.2.1: tests on processor utilization
factor and tests on worst case response time.
The processor utilization factor test (Klein et al., 1994) extended with
shared resource blocking time, with a preemptive xed priority scheduler
and Rate Monotonic priority assignment, is:
i, 1 i n :
i1
k=1
C
k
P
k
+
C
i
+B
i
P
i
i (2
1
i
1) (7.7)
The same feasibility test with a preemptive EDF scheduler instead is:
i, 1 i n :
i1
k=1
C
k
P
k
+
C
i
+B
i
P
i
1 (7.8)
Tests 7.7 and 7.8 assume that tasks are ordered according to their priority
level in a decreasing manner: task i 1 has a lower priority level than
task i.
Furthermore, worst case response times r
i
, that take into account blocking
time B
i
with a preemptive xed priority scheduler, can be computed as
follows (Klein et al., 1994):
r
i
= C
i
+B
i
+

jhp(i)
_
r
i
P
j
_
C
j
(7.9)
with hp(i) the set of tasks which have a lower priority level than task i.
Equation (7.9) can be solved by the recurrence equation:
w
n+1
i
= C
i
+B
i
+

jhp(i)
_
w
n
i
P
j
_
C
j
7.3.4 Precedence constraints
There are various kinds of precedence constraints. In this section we focus on
a precedence constraint that delays the release of a task until the completion
of another task. For example, a task i waiting to receive a message wont be
released until after the execution of a task j which sends the message. To
compute a worst case response time of tasks i and j, we can apply a feasibility
test based on equation (7.4) adapted to take into account this precedence
relationship (Audsley et al., 1993; Tindell and Clark, 1994). This feasibility
test introduces a new parameter called jitter (noted J
i
). The jitter J
i
of
task i is an upper bound on the delay that task i may suer between the
time it is supposed to be released and the time it is actually released.
Tindell and Clark (1994) initially used the jitter parameter to model var-
ious latencies within an operating system. Modeling these latencies allows
the designer to include them in feasibility tests to ensure that the analysis
is consistent with the real-time application behavior.
Lets look at a simple example before we directly address the delays due
to precedence constraints. Suppose a periodic task i has a period of 15 ms.
It should be released at t = 15, 30, 45, ... However, measurements indicate
that the rst release of this task is at 21 ms!
What is responsible for this 6 ms delay in the release of task i? In most op-
erating systems, periodic tasks are released by a timer. The timer is usually
an interrupt handler that is triggered by a clock device. On each interrupt,
the timer updates the system clock, checks task statuses, and re-schedules
them. The timer can be seen as a periodic task that is dened by a period
and a capacity:
The period denes the accuracy of the system clock. For example, in the
case of a Linux system with an Intel architecture, the clock period is about
10 ms.
5
As any program, the interrupt handler has a worst case execution time.
5
Some processors, such as Intel Pentium, have registers to store the system clock. These
registers allow users to read the system clock with a higher resolution (e.g. nanosecond with
Pentium processors). However, it does not mean that the system is able to wake up tasks
with the same accuracy: timer periods are usually longer in order to reduce system overhead.
Let us assume P
timer
= 10 ms and C
timer
= 1 ms. Figure 7.12 shows the
1 ms execution times of the timer task when the system clock interrupts
at 0, 10, and 20 ms. This gure also shows why our periodic task that was
supposed to be released at t = 15 was delayed 6 ms. At t = 10, the timer
task checks the status of all tasks waiting on the timer. Task i is not ready
to be released at this time. The next timer interrupt does not occur until
t = 20. At this time, the timer detects that task i must be released. Since
the timer capacity is 1 ms, task i will actually be released at t = 21 ms.
Figure 7.12 Task release time jitter
Therefore, the nature of the operating system timer guarantees that
Tasks will be not released before the theoretical release time.
But tasks may be released after the theoretical release time.
To compute the worst case response time of task i that takes into account
this timer lateness, the jitter of task i is set to J
i
= 6 ms and the task worst
case response times are computed as follows:
_
r
i
D
i
r
i
= w
i
+J
i
(7.10)
with
w
i
= C
i
+

jhp(i)
_
w
i
+J
j
P
j
_
C
j
Equation (7.10) can be used to model any lateness in a real-time system.
In particular, we can use this equation to compute the worst case response
time of tasks that have precedence constraints: if a task i must be released
after the completion time of task j, the worst case response time of i can be
computed with J
i
= r
j
.
This approach is called the holistic analysis approach and can be used to
compute end to end worst case response times (Tindell and Clark, 1994).
In the context of the holistic analysis, tasks are organized into sequences
of tasks. A sequence of tasks is composed of several tasks that have to run
sequentially a precedence constraint exists between each pair of successive
tasks in the sequence. Often, we also assume that tasks are assigned to
dierent processors. In this case, the deadline we want to check is not a
deadline that is local to a given scheduler. Instead, we expect to check that
the lateness dened by the release time of the rst task in the sequence and
the completion time of the last task in the sequence is not greater than some
global deadline.
10 i : J
i
:= 0, r
i
:= 0, r
i
:= 0;
20 i : Compute worst case response time (r
i
);
30 while(i : r
i
= r
i
) {
40 i : J
i
:= max(J
i
, j with j i : r
j
);
50 i : r
i
:= r
i
;
60 i : Compute worst case response time (r
i
);
}
Figure 7.13 Holistic analysis
To check this global deadline with an end to end worst case response time,
the task scheduling of several processors may be investigated simultaneously.
Figure 7.13 presents an algorithm for this analysis. In line 40, we update the
jitter of tasks i with worst case response times of tasks j that have to be
run before tasks i. The worst case response time is then computed with
these modied jitters in line 60. Lines 40 to 60 are run up to convergence
of worst case response times. In Figure 7.13, the symbol expresses that
a precedence constraint exists between two tasks: j i means that task i
cannot be released before the completion time of task j.
Summary
A task is dened by a set of parameters which specify its temporal be-
havior.
Tasks can be classied as critical, urgent, independent or dependent, and
periodic or aperiodic.
Critical functions of real-time systems are modeled by periodic tasks. Non-
critical functions are modeled by aperiodic tasks.
Real-time schedulers usually provide algebraic analysis methods which
allow the designer to check task temporal constraints without comput-
ing the scheduling sequences. These algebraic analysis methods are called
feasibility tests.
Most of the schedulers implemented in real-time operating systems are
xed priority schedulers.
Fixed priority scheduling is well suited for critical and static real-time em-
bedded applications. Rate Monotonic is an optimal rule to assign priorities
in the context of xed priority schedulers.
Earliest Deadline First is a dynamic scheduler. It is optimal and less suit-
able for critical real-time embedded applications.
Two types of task dependencies must be taken into account: shared re-
sources and precedence constraints of tasks.
Exercises
7.1 Dene the terms context, preemption, and context switch.
7.2 When is a task
1. Both critical and urgent?
2. Critical but not urgent?
3. Urgent but not critical?
7.3 What distinguishes a dependent task from an independent task?
7.4 Describe two forms of task dependency.
7.5 Dene the terms activation time, release time, periodic task, sporadic
task, and aperiodic task.
7.6 What distinguishes a xed priority scheduler from a dynamic priority
scheduler?
7.7 How are task priorities assigned dierently when using Deadline Mono-
tonic than when using Rate Monotonic?
7.8 Explain why there is no need to use protected objects or semaphores to
provide mutually exclusive access to resources shared by tasks sched-
uled by a cyclic executive.
7.9 What distinguishes a preemptive scheduler from a non-preemptive
scheduler?
7.10 Dene the terms optimal scheduler and valid schedule.
7.11 What distinguishes a static real-time system from a dynamic real-time
system?
7.12 What properties must a set of tasks possess in order to be a set of
synchronous periodic tasks?
Exercises 287
7.13 Dene the terms deadlines on request and critical instant.
7.14 What does the processor utilization factor express?
7.15 Practice with scheduling and analysis with xed priority scheduling
and Rate Monotonic priority assignment. Given the following set of
synchronous periodic tasks:
Task Initial Period Capacity Deadline
release
T
1
S
1
= 0 P
1
= 8 C
1
= 4 D
1
= 8
T
2
S
2
= 0 P
2
= 12 C
2
= 3 D
2
= 12
T
3
S
3
= 0 P
3
= 4 C
3
= 1 D
3
= 4
1. Calculate the processor utilization factor and the utilization bound.
2. What do these calculations tell us about our ability to schedule this
task set with xed priority scheduling and Rate Monotonic priority
assignment?
7.16 Using the task set from the previous exercise:
1. What is the hyper-period?
2. Using preemptive xed priority scheduling with Rate Monotonic pri-
ority assignment, draw a scheduling sequence (as in Figure 7.2) of
this task set to demonstrate that a deadline is missed.
7.17 Practice with scheduling and analysis with xed priority scheduling
and Rate Monotonic priority assignment. Given the following set of
synchronous periodic tasks:
release
T
1
S
1
= 0 P
1
= 29 C
1
= 7 D
1
= 29
T
2
S
2
= 0 P
2
= 5 C
2
= 1 D
2
= 5
T
3
S
3
= 0 P
3
= 10 C
3
= 2 D
3
= 10
1. We schedule this task set according to a preemptive xed priority
scheduling and a Rate Monotonic priority assignment. Apply the
processor utilization factor test. Do the tasks meet their deadlines?
2. Draw the scheduling sequence of this task set (as in Figure 7.2)
during the rst 30 units of time.
3. Re-draw the scheduling sequence of this task set during the rst 30
units of time with a non-preemptive xed priority scheduler and
with Rate Monotonic. Compare the results with the drawing you
made for the previous question.
7.18 Practice with scheduling and analysis with Rate Monotonic and xed
priority scheduling. Given the following harmonic set of synchronous
periodic tasks:
release
T
1
S
1
= 0 P
1
= 30 C
1
= 6 D
1
= 30
T
2
S
2
= 0 P
2
= 5 C
2
= 3 D
2
= 5
T
3
S
3
= 0 P
3
= 10 C
3
= 2 D
3
= 10
1. Why is this task set harmonic?
2. We schedule this task set according to a preemptive xed priority
scheduler and Rate Monotonic. Apply the processor utilization fac-
tor test. Do the tasks meet their deadlines?
3. Draw the scheduling sequence of this task set (as in Figure 7.2)
during the rst 30 units of time.
4. Compute the worst case response time of each task with the Joseph
and Pandia method (equations (7.4) and (7.5)). You should nd
worst case response times that are consistent with the response times
in the picture you drew for the rst part of this exercise.
7.19 Practice with scheduling and analysis with Earliest Deadline First.
Given the following set of synchronous periodic tasks:
release
T
1
S
1
= 0 P
1
= 10 C
1
= 6 D
1
= 10
T
2
S
2
= 0 P
2
= 30 C
2
= 9 D
2
= 30
1. We schedule this task set according to a preemptive Earliest Dead-
line First scheduler. Apply the processor utilization factor test. Do
the tasks meet their deadlines?
2. Compute the hyper-period of this task set. How many idle units of
time should we have during this hyper-period?
3. Draw the scheduling sequence (as in Figure 7.7) of this task set
during the hyper-period. (Hint: ll in a table of dynamic priorities
like Table 7.1.) Is the number of idle units of time consistent with
your answer to part 2?
4. Now assume a non-preemptive Earliest Deadline First scheduler.
Re-draw the scheduling sequence of this task set during the hyper-
period and compare this scheduling with the scheduling sequence of
Exercises 289
part 3. Compare the behaviors of the preemptive and non-preemptive
schedulers for this task set.
7.20 Practice with scheduling and analysis with Earliest Deadline First.
Given the following set of synchronous periodic tasks:
release
T
1
S
1
= 0 P
1
= 12 C
1
= 5 D
1
= 12
T
2
S
2
= 0 P
2
= 6 C
2
= 2 D
2
= 6
T
3
S
3
= 0 P
3
= 24 C
3
= 5 D
3
= 24
1. We schedule this task set according to a preemptive Earliest Dead-
line First scheduler. Apply the processor utilization factor test. Do
the tasks meet their deadlines?
2. Compute the hyper-period of this task set. How many idle units of
time should we have during this hyper-period?
3. Draw the scheduling sequence (as in Figure 7.7) of this task set
during the hyper-period. (Hint: ll in a table of dynamic priorities
like Table 7.1.) Is the number of idle units of time consistent with
your answer to part 2?
4. Now assume a non-preemptive Earliest Deadline First scheduler.
Re-draw the scheduling sequence of this task set during the hyper-
period and compare this scheduling with the scheduling sequence of
part 3. Compare the behaviors of the preemptive and non-preemptive
schedulers for this task set.
5. Now assume that some aperiodic tasks are released: tasks TA
1
and
TA
2
. TA
1
has a capacity of 1 unit of time, is released at time 7,
and has to meet a deadline at time 9. TA
2
has a capacity of 3 units
of time, is released at time 12, and has to meet a deadline at time
21. We assume that the deadlines of aperiodic tasks dened above
are the dynamic priorities that the EDF must handle to schedule
the task set (e.g. D
i
(t)). Draw the scheduling sequence of this new
task set for the rst 30 units of time. Can we meet all the deadlines
under the preemptive EDF scheduler?
7.21 Practice with xed priority scheduling and Rate Monotonic with ape-
riodic tasks. Given the following set of synchronous periodic tasks:
release
T
1
S
1
= 0 P
1
= 15 C
1
= 4 D
1
= 15
T
2
S
2
= 0 P
2
= 7 C
2
= 1 D
2
= 7
These periodic tasks are scheduled with a preemptive xed priority
scheduling and Rate Monotonic. We expect to schedule aperiodic tasks
together with the periodic task set. To analyze the schedule, we dene
a polling server with a period of 5 units of time and a capacity of 1
unit of time.
1. Check the schedulability of this set of three periodic tasks.
2. Now consider the arrival of two aperiodic tasks: tasks TA
1
and TA
2
.
TA
1
has a capacity of 1 unit of time, is released at time 7, and has
to meet a deadline at time 9. TA
2
has a capacity of 3 units of time,
is released at time 12, and has to meet a deadline at time 21. Draw
the scheduling sequence of this new task set.
7.22 In this exercise, you will investigate the schedulability of a set of tasks
that share a block of memory. Given the following set of periodic tasks:
release
T
1
S
1
= 0 P
1
= 6 C
1
= 2 D
1
= 6
T
2
S
2
= 0 P
2
= 8 C
2
= 2 D
2
= 8
T
3
S
3
= 0 P
3
= 12 C
3
= 5 D
3
= 12
These three tasks are scheduled with a preemptive xed priority
scheduler and Rate Monotonic. T
1
and T
3
make use of a block of mem-
ory. This block of memory is protected by a semaphore to enforce a
critical section.
T
1
requires the block of memory during the second half of its capacity
while T
3
needs the block of memory during all its capacity.
1. First, we assume that no inheritance protocol is activated with the
semaphore. Draw the scheduling of this task set during its hyper-
period. In the scheduling sequence, nd when the semaphore is al-
located and released by tasks T
1
and T
3
. Can you see on the graph
at which time a priority inversion occurs?
2. Now we assume that the PIP protocol is active during semaphore
allocations and releases. Draw the scheduling sequence of this task
set during its hyper-period. In the scheduling sequence, nd when
Exercises 291
the semaphore is allocated and released. Also check that no priority
inversion occurs.
3. Compute worst case blocking times B
1
, B
2
, and B
3
.
7.23 In the previous exercise, you investigated the use of PIP to put an
upper bound on the length of time a high priority task has to wait for
a shared resource. Because PIP is dicult to implement, PCP protocols
are more commonly used. In this exercise, we study the ICPP, a kind
of PCP. Given the following set of periodic tasks:
release
T
1
S
1
= 0 P
1
= 31 C
1
= 8 D
1
= 31
T
2
S
2
= 2 P
2
= 30 C
2
= 8 D
2
= 30
We schedule this task set with a preemptive xed priority scheduler
and Rate Monotonic.
T
1
and T
2
require access to two shared resources called R
1
and R
2
that are controlled by the two semaphores mutex1 and mutex2.
T
1
needs R
1
from the 2nd to the 8th units of time of its capacity.
T
1
needs R
2
from the 4th to the 8th units of time of its capacity.
T
2
needs R
1
from the 6th to the 8th units of time of its capacity.
T
2
needs R
2
from the 2nd to the 8th units of time of its capacity.
1. First, we assume that PIP is activated with the semaphores. Draw
the scheduling sequence of this task set during the rst 30 units
of time. In the scheduling sequence, nd when the semaphores are
allocated and released by the tasks T
1
and T
2
. Describe what you
see in the scheduling sequence.
2. Second, we assume that ICPP is activated for these semaphores.
Draw the scheduling sequence of this task set during the rst 30
units of time. On the scheduling sequence, nd when the semaphores
are allocated and released by the tasks T
1
and T
2
. Compare the
scheduling sequences of questions 1 and 2.
7.24 This exercise summarizes the dierent topics presented in this chap-
ter. You will investigate performances of an application responsible for
displaying data to the driver of a car. The application is composed of
5 tasks:
Task SENSOR 1 reads a speed sensor every 10 ms.
Task SENSOR 2 reads the temperature inside the car every 10 ms.
Task SENSOR 3 reads the GPS location of the car every 40 ms.
Task DISPLAY 1 computes every 12 ms a summary of the data pro-
duced by SENSOR 1, SENSOR 2, and SENSOR 3 and displays
the results on a rst screen.
When the driver requests it, task DISPLAY 2 displays, on a second
screen, the road map centered around the current location of the car.
This screen is refreshed every 6 ms.
We have implemented this set of tasks, and, after some measure-
ments, we have noticed that:
Execution time of tasks SENSOR 2 and DISPLAY 1 is bounded
by 2 ms.
Task SENSOR 3 needs a processor time ranging from 2 to 4 ms.
Execution times of tasks SENSOR 1 and DISPLAY 2 never ex-
ceeded 1 ms.
We also assume that all tasks have the same rst release time. The
engineers would like to check that all tasks nish their current work
before being released to do the next one. They have selected an op-
erating system that provides 32 priority levels ranging from 0 to 31.
Priority level 31 is the highest priority. The scheduler is a preemptive
xed priority scheduler. This system does not allow us to assign the
same priority level to several tasks.
1. The engineers would like you to help them with the priority assign-
ment of each task.
Explain the common criteria that people use to assign priorities
to tasks.
Assign a priority for each task of this system. Explain your choice.
2. From your priority assignment, and without drawing the schedul-
ing sequence, compute the worst case response time for tasks
SENSOR 1, SENSOR 2, and SENSOR 3.
3. In practice, tasks SENSOR 1, SENSOR 2, and SENSOR 3 share
a block of memory through the semaphore mutex. SENSOR 1 and
SENSOR 2 need the mutex during all their capacity. SENSOR 3
needs the mutex during the two rst units of time of its capacity.
The mutex uses ICPP.
Explain why the worst case response times of part 2 are incorrect
with the use of this mutex.
4. Draw the scheduling sequence of this system up to time 25. Show
when each shared resource is allocated or/and released.
Exercises 293
5. In order to decrease the response time of the system, we run the
task set on an architecture with two processors, a and b. The task
parameters are now dened by:
Task Processor Capacity Period
DISPLAY 1 b 4 6
SENSOR 3 b 2 20
DISPLAY 2 a 2 3
SENSOR 1 a 2 5
SENSOR 2 a 2 5
These tasks stay scheduled with a preemptive xed priority sched-
uler. Priorities are assigned according to Rate Monotonic. We will
not take the shared resources into account for this question. You
may assume that all tasks are independent. Show that at least
one task cannot meet its deadline.
6. In the previous question, the engineers assigned tasks to proces-
sors randomly. Each task may be run on either processor a or on
processor b. However, running a given task on a or on b changes
the task worst case execution time: processor b is twice as fast as
processor a.
Assign each task to processor a or b in order to meet all task dead-
lines. Explain how you made this assignment and how you have
checked deadlines. You may again assume that all tasks are
independent.
8
Real-time programming with Ada
In Chapter 7, we presented an overview of real-time scheduling theory. Those
discussions were independent of any programming language. This chapter
explains how to write real-time applications in Ada that are compliant with
that scheduling theory. A compliant Ada program can be analyzed thereby
increasing the applications reliability.
Ada practitioners have two international standards available for producing
compliant Ada programs: Ada 2005 and POSIX 1003.1b. In order to apply
real-time scheduling theory with these standards, we need some means to:
1. Implement periodic tasks. This implementation requires a way to rep-
resent time, a way to enforce periodic task release times, and a way to
assign priorities to both tasks and shared resources.
2. Activate priority inheritance protocols for the shared resources.
3. And of course, select and apply a scheduler such as those presented in
Chapter 7 (e.g. xed priority scheduler or Earliest Deadline First).
The Ada 2005 and POSIX 1003.1b standards provide the means to create
compliant programs through pragmas and specic packages. Real-time spe-
cic pragmas and packages for Ada 2005 are dened in Annex D of the Ada
Reference Manual. The Ada binding POSIX 1003.5 provides the packages
that allow us to create compliant real-time Ada programs using the POSIX
standard.
The rst six sections of this chapter discuss and use the packages and
pragmas of Annex D. Section 8.1 shows how to express timing constraints of
tasks with an Ada package called Ada.Real Time. Section 8.2 explains how
to implement periodic tasks. Periodic task release times are enforced with
the delay until statement introduced in Chapter 5. We also show how to
assign priorities to tasks and to protected objects with the priority pragma.
Section 8.3 uses the concepts of the rst two sections to implement the car
application introduced and analyzed in Chapter 7. Section 8.4 explains how
to deal with priority inversion. Section 8.5 is devoted to Adas scheduling
model and explains how we can select a particular scheduler for a given
application. Finally, Section 8.6 focuses on Ravenscar, a set of restrictions
of Ada features that allows us to easily check real-time scheduling theory
compliance at compile time.
The remainder of this chapter is devoted to POSIX 1003.1b. Section 8.7
presents the POSIX 1003.1b scheduling model and the POSIX application
programming interface (API) for Ada. The POSIX 1003.1b Ada API pro-
vides a simple means for implementing Ada applications that run under
an operating system which does not provide an Ada 2005 standard compli-
ant run-time. We will talk more about run-time systems in Chapter 9. In
Section 8.8, well revisit the car application and implement it with POSIX
processes rather than Ada tasks.
Finally, in Section 8.9 well compare the Ada tasking and POSIX ap-
proaches for developing real-time applications. For a more comprehensive
treatment of both the POSIX C and the Ada 2005 application programming
interfaces see Gallmeister (1995), Burns and Wellings (2007), and Burns and
Wellings (2009).
8.1 Expressing time
To implement periodic tasks with Ada, we need some means to express the
timing parameters of these tasks. The package Ada.Real Time provides the
necessary resources. Ada.Real Time is similar to Ada.Calendar but is more
suited for real-time applications. Ada.Real Time provides a documented,
monotonic, high-resolution clock. Monotonic time does not jump forward or
backward as wall clock time does for leap seconds or changes due to daylight
savings time. Here is the specication of this package.
package Ada . Real Ti me i s
type Time i s pr i vat e ;
Ti me Fi r s t : constant Time ;
Ti me Last : constant Time ;
Ti me Uni t : constant := i mpl ement at i on de f i ne d r e a l number ;
type Ti me Span i s pr i vat e ;
Ti me Span Fi r s t : constant Ti me Span ;
Ti me Span Last : constant Ti me Span ;
Ti me Span Uni t : constant Ti me Span ;
Ti ck : constant Ti me Span ;
296 Real-time programming with Ada
f uncti on To Dur at i on (TS : Ti me Span ) r etur n Dur at i on ;
f uncti on To Ti me Span (D : Dur at i on ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on Cl ock r etur n Time ;
f uncti on + ( Le f t : Time ; Ri ght : Ti me Span ) r etur n Time ;
f uncti on + ( Le f t : Ti me Span ; Ri ght : Time ) r etur n Time ;
f uncti on ( Le f t : Time ; Ri ght : Ti me Span ) r etur n Time ;
f uncti on ( Le f t : Time ; Ri ght : Time ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on < ( Lef t , Ri ght : Time ) r etur n Bool ean ;
f uncti on <= ( Lef t , Ri ght : Time ) r etur n Bool ean ;
f uncti on > ( Lef t , Ri ght : Time ) r etur n Bool ean ;
f uncti on >= ( Lef t , Ri ght : Time ) r etur n Bool ean ;
f uncti on + ( Lef t , Ri ght : Ti me Span ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on ( Lef t , Ri ght : Ti me Span ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on ( Ri ght : Ti me Span ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on ( Le f t : Ti me Span ; Ri ght : I n t e g e r )
r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on ( Le f t : I n t e g e r ; Ri ght : Ti me Span )
f uncti on / ( Lef t , Ri ght : Ti me Span ) r etur n I n t e g e r ;
f uncti on / ( Le f t : Ti me Span ; Ri ght : I n t e g e r )
. . .
f uncti on Nanoseconds (NS : I n t e g e r ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on Mi cr os econds (US : I n t e g e r ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on Mi l l i s e c o n d s (MS : I n t e g e r ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on Seconds ( S : I n t e g e r ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
f uncti on Mi nut es (M : I n t e g e r ) r etur n Ti me Span ;
. . .
pr i vat e
. . . not s p e c i f i e d by t he l anguage
end Ada . Real Ti me ;
Package Ada.Real Time denes the two time related types: Time and
Time Span. Lets look at the denitions of these two types provided in sec-
tion D.8 of the Ada Reference Manual.
1. Type Time implements an absolute time. Time begins at an arbitrary
starting point called the epoch that is the same for all values of Time.
As the exact starting point is not important for the analysis of real-time
applications, Ada does not dene the epoch. It might be the time of
system initialization or some time standard (e.g. 1 January 1970 00:00:00
UT). The range of type Time shall be sucient to represent real ranges up
to 50 years from the start of our programs execution. Package Ada.Real
Time provides several constants of type Time.
Time First and Time Last are the smallest and largest values of the
Time type, respectively.
Time Unit is the smallest amount of real-time representable by the
Time type. It is implementation-dened and shall be less than or equal
to 20 microseconds.
2. Type Time Span represents the length of a duration of time. Package
Ada.Real Time provides several constants of type Time Span.
Time Span First and Time Span Last are the smallest and largest val-
ues of the Time Span type, respectively. Time Span First shall be no
greater than 3600 seconds, and Time Span Last shall be no less than
3600 seconds.
Tick is a constant of Time Span that represents the average length
duration in which the clock value does not change. Tick shall be no
greater than 1 ms.
Time Span Unit is the dierence between two successive values of the
Time type. It is also the smallest positive value of type Time Span.
In addition to these types and constants, package Ada.Real Time provides
various subprograms for obtaining and manipulating time-related values.
Function Clock is called to determine the current time. It returns the
amount of time that has passed since the epoch. The functions To Duration,
To Time Span, Nanoseconds, Microseconds, Milliseconds, Seconds, and
Minutes allow us to convert timing values to and from Time, Time Span,
Duration, and Integer variables. As we will show in Section 8.2, we use
these functions to assign periods to our tasks.
Finally, package Ada.Real Time provides a variety of arithmetic and re-
lational operators that allow us to write expressions containing values of
Time Span, Time, and Integer types.
Besides dening types and subprograms, package Ada.Real Time explic-
itly states the timing performances that Ada run-time system implementers
must document. As the clock hardware on various platforms diers, such
documentation is critical to analyzing the timing requirements of our ap-
plication on a particular target. Section D.8 of the Ada Reference Manual
requires that an implementation shall document:
1. The values of Time First, Time Last, Time Span First, Time Span
Last, Time Span Unit, and Tick.
2. The properties of the underlying time base used for the clock and for type
Time. These properties include the range of values supported and any
relevant aspects of the underlying hardware or operating system facilities
used.
3. The upper bound on the real-time duration of a clock tick.
4. The upper bound on the drift rate of Clock with respect to real-time.
5. The upper bound on the size of a clock jump. A clock jump is the dier-
ence between two successive distinct values of the clock (as observed by
calling the Clock function).
6. The upper bound on the execution time of a call to the Clock function.
7. and more . . .
Some of these documentation requirements allow us to perform schedula-
bility verications, a feature available for very few programming languages.
These documentation requirements help practitioners to write Ada applica-
tions that are compliant with real-time scheduling theory. This is the case
for the second item, which is mandatory to evaluate worst case response
time of tasks.
8.2 Implementing periodic tasks
Now, let us see how to implement periodic tasks with Ada. The scheduling
models discussed in Chapter 7 require that the periodic release times of our
periodic tasks be deterministic. The release time is the time at which a task
begins to work on its activity. A periodic task is released periodically. The
scheduling models also require that each task be assigned a priority. In this
section, we look at implementing both of these requirements in Ada.
8.2.1 Implementing periodic release times
Periodic release times can be implemented with the delay statement. In
Section 5.2.4, we showed that the delay statement makes it possible to
block a task for a relative duration of time (e.g. delay seven seconds) or
until an absolute time (e.g. delay until 15:07).
A task can be blocked for a relative delay with the delay expr statement,
where expr is the relative delay. This statement blocks a task for at least
expr seconds of time. The task will not be released before this amount of
time but it can be released after this amount of time.
A task can also be blocked for an absolute delay with the delay until
expr statement, where expr is the time at which the task can be released.
The delay until statement blocks a task at least up to the time expr is
reached. A task will not be released before time expr but can be released
after this time.
The Ada Reference Manual does not require any bound on the lateness
of a tasks release time. But again, the Ada Reference Manual provides the
information needed to make verications with real-time scheduling theory. It
requires the documentation of metrics on the implementation of delay and
delay until statements. One of the required metrics is the upper bound
on the lateness of a delay statement. We can then use this upper bound as
a jitter parameter (see page 283) in our calculation of worst case response
times. Documentation of metrics is related to the implementation of Ada
run-time, which is discussed in Section 9.3.1.
Lets look at an example of a simple periodic task.
wi th Ada . Real Ti me ; use Ada . Real Ti me ;
wi th Text I O ; use Text I O ;
procedure A Per i odi c Task Demo i s
The f o l l o wi n g pr oc e dur e c o nt a i ns a j ob t hat
we want t o e xe c ut e p e r i o d i c a l l y
procedure Run Job Of The Task i s
begi n
Put Li ne ( Pe r i o d i c t as k i s r e l e a s e d and e x e c ut e s i t s j ob ) ;
end Run Job Of The Task ;
task A Pe r i odi c Tas k ; De f i ne a t as k
The body of our p e r i o d i c t as k
task body A Pe r i odi c Tas k i s
Next Ti me : Ada . Real Ti me . Time := Cl ock ;
Per i od : constant Ti me Span := Mi l l i s e c o n d s ( 250) ;
begi n
l oop
The t as k i s r e l e a s e d : i t r uns i t s j ob
Run Job Of The Task ;
Det er mi ne t he next r e l e a s e t i me
Next Ti me := Next Ti me + Per i od ;
Wai t f o r t he next r e l e a s e t i me
del ay unt i l Next Ti me ;
end l oop ;
end A Pe r i odi c Tas k ;
begi n
nul l ;
end A Per i odi c Task Demo ;
In Chapter 7, we characterized a synchronous periodic task with a period
and a capacity. The period of this task is 250 ms. At each release time the
task runs the procedure Run Job Of The Task. The capacity of this example
is the worst case execution time (WCET) of the procedure Run Job Of The
Task.
Periodic release times of the task in this example are implemented with
the delay until statement. We prefer the absolute delay to the relative
delay because the latter suers from cumulative drift. Figure 8.1 illustrates
the concepts of cumulative and local drift.
Figure 8.1a shows the release times (heavy vertical bars) of a periodic
task that uses the relative delay 0.250; statement to periodically release
it. The rst release is at time 0. The second release is at 250 +
1
ms where
1
is the release time jitter. The third release is 250 +
2
ms after the second
release at 500 +
1
+
2
ms. The fourth release is at 750 +
1
+
2
+
3
ms. You can see that each successive release is further from the regular 250
ms intervals. The drift is a result of the accumulation of jitters.
Figure 8.1b shows the release times (heavy vertical bars) of a periodic task
that uses the absolute delay until Next Time; statement to periodically
release it. The rst release is at time 0. The second release is at 250 +
1
ms.
The third release is at 500 +
2
ms. The fourth release is at 750 +
3
ms.
While the jitter causes some local drift from the regular 250 ms intervals,
the jitter does not accumulate over the lifetime of the periodic task.
8.2.2 The Ada priority model
Another important property of a periodic task is its priority level. Adas
priority model is based on two values. Each task has a base priority and an
active priority.
The tasks base priority is the priority that is assigned to the task prior
to the execution of the application. The tasks active priority is the prior-
ity that is actually handled by the operating system (or the Ada run-time
system) to schedule the set of ready tasks. A base priority is a xed priority
while the active priority is a dynamic one. Dierent ways exist to assign
xed/base priorities to tasks. In Chapter 7, we described one of the most
famous xed priority assignment rules Rate Monotonic. In that chapter
we also discussed shared resource protocols such as ICPP that allow a tasks
priority to change as a result of priority inheritance. Active priorities rep-
resent those changing priority levels. At any time, the active priority of a
= release time jitter
0
250 +
4
250 +
2
250 500 750 1000 1250
250 +
1
250 +
3
250 +
5
a) Cumulative drift of relative delay
0
250 500 750 1000 1250
1
b) Local drift of absolute delay
2

3

4

5
Figure 8.1 A comparison of the drift in release times for using relative and
absolute delays
task is the maximum of its base priority and all the priorities the task is
inheriting at that instant. Priority inheritance may occur:
During the execution of protected operations, if ICCP is activated. The
task inherits the priority of the protected object. See section D.3 of the
Ada Reference Manual. We will look at ICCP in Section 8.4.
During a rendezvous. A task which accepts an entry call inherits the
priority of the task making the entry call. See sections 9.5.3 and D.1 of
the Ada Reference Manual.
During task activation. During activation, a task inherits the active pri-
ority of its parent. See section 9.2 of the Ada Reference Manual.
Ada types related to priority are dened in the System package. Here are
the relevant parts of this package for a particular target:
package System i s
. . .
Pr i o r i t y r e l a t e d De c l a r a t i o n s ( Re f e r e nc e Manual D. 1 )
Ma x Pr i or i t y : constant Po s i t i v e := 30;
Ma x I n t e r r u p t Pr i o r i t y : constant Po s i t i v e := 31;
subtype An y Pr i o r i t y i s I n t e g e r range 0 . . 31;
subtype Pr i o r i t y i s An y Pr i o r i t y range 0 . . 30;
subtype I n t e r r u p t P r i o r i t y i s An y Pr i o r i t y range 31 . . 31;
De f a u l t Pr i o r i t y : constant Pr i o r i t y := 15;
. . .
end System ;
Priority levels can be assigned to both tasks and interrupt handlers.
System.Interrupt Priority denes priority levels for interrupt handlers.
The range of System.Interrupt Priority shall include at least one value.
We assigned an interrupt priority to our interrupt handler in our analog
to digital device driver (page 158). System.Priority denes priority levels
that are available for tasks. System.Priority must provide at least 30 pri-
ority levels but the actual number of available priority levels depends on the
operating system or run-time system. Having more levels is better for real-
time scheduling analysis. Most of the feasibility tests presented in Chapter
7 are easier to use when each task has a unique priority level.
Two pragmas are available to assign priority levels to interrupt handlers
and base priority levels to tasks.
The pragma dedicated to interrupt handlers is:
pragma I n t e r r u p t P r i o r i t y [ ( e x p r e s s i o n ) ] ;
The expression in this pragma is optional. When not given, the priority
value assigned to the interrupt handler is Interrupt PriorityLast. We
do not discuss interrupt handlers further in this chapter. You can review
Chapter 4 for further details.
The second pragma, the Priority pragma, is used to assign base priorities
to tasks and ceiling priorities to protected objects.
pragma Pr i o r i t y ( e x p r e s s i o n ) ;
Here expression represents the priority level to be assigned. We can place
pragma Priority immediately within a task denition, a protected object or
protected type denition, or the declarative part of a subprogram body. The
value of the priority expression must be in the range of System.Priority.
A priority pragma can also be assigned to the main procedure. If you do
not use this pragma to assign a priority to a task, it is assigned a priority
equal to the priority of the task that created it. Finally, if no priorities
are assigned, each task is assigned the default priority value dened by the
constant System.Default Priority.
Here is an example that assigns priority level 10 to the periodic task within
our example program on page 299. Notice that we must use the long form of
the task declaration that we previously used only when our task had entries.
8.3 Ada implementation of the car application 303
task A Pe r i odi c Tas k i s
pragma Pr i o r i t y ( 1 0 ) ;
end A Pe r i odi c Tas k ;
8.3 Ada implementation of the car application
Lets use what we have learned to implement the car application introduced
and analyzed in Chapter 7 (see page 268). This application has three tasks.
Rather than write three dierent tasks, we will make use of Adas generic
facilities. While we cannot dene a generic task, we can dene a generic
package that includes a task type. Then, we can instantiate three separate
instances for our three tasks. Here is the specication of our generic package:
wi th System ;
gener i c
wi th procedure Run ; The j ob of t he p e r i o d i c t as k
package Ge ne r i c Pe r i o di c Ta s k i s
Two d i s c r i mi n a n t s c h a r a c t e r i z e t h i s p e r i o d i c t as k
task type Pe r i odi c Ta s k
( Ta s k Pr i o r i t y : System . Pr i o r i t y ;
Pe r i o d I n Mi l l i s e c o n d s : Nat ur al ) i s
pragma Pr i o r i t y ( Ta s k Pr i o r i t y ) ;
end Pe r i odi c Ta s k ;
end Ge ne r i c Pe r i o di c Ta s k ;
This generic package has a single formal parameter, Run, that is a parame-
terless procedure. We will supply an actual procedure that our periodic task
will call each time it is released.
The task type Periodic Task has two discriminants: Task Priority and
Period In Milliseconds. Notice that the priority pragma associated with
this task type uses the value of the rst discriminant to set the priority
of the task. When we create an actual task from this type, we will specify
its priority through the rst discriminant and its period through the second
discriminant. We use the discriminant Period In Milliseconds in the delay
logic of the task body which is in the package body below.
wi th Ada . Real Ti me ; use Ada . Real Ti me ;
package body Ge ne r i c Pe r i o di c Ta s k i s
task body Pe r i odi c Ta s k i s
Next Ti me : Ada . Real Ti me . Time := Cl ock ;
Per i od : constant Ti me Span :=
Mi l l i s e c o n d s ( Pe r i o d I n Mi l l i s e c o n d s ) ;
begi n
l oop
Run ; Ca l l t he pr oc e dur e wi t h t he code f o r t h i s j ob
wai t u n t i l t he next pe r i od
Next Ti me := Next Ti me + Per i od ;
del ay unt i l Next Ti me ;
end l oop ;
end Pe r i odi c Ta s k ;
end Ge ne r i c Pe r i o di c Ta s k ;
Now lets see how to use this generic periodic task package to implement
the car application. Here are the relevant characteristics with priority levels
determined by Rate Monotonic assignment for each of the three tasks:
Task Period Priority
(ms)
T
display
P
display
= 100 12
T
engine
P
engine
= 500 10
T
speed
P
speed
= 250 11
We will create one instance of our generic task type for each of our three
tasks using the priorities and periods from this table. Here is the complete
program:
wi th Ge ne r i c Pe r i o di c Ta s k ;
procedure Car Syst em i s
The f o l l o wi n g t hr e e pa r a me t e r l e s s pr oc e dur e s ar e s t ubs f o r
t he a c t ua l code t hat r uns i n t he c ar
procedure Di s pl ay Spe e d i s
begi n
Put Li ne ( Tdi s pl a y d i s p l a y s t he s peed of t he c ar ) ;
end Di s pl ay Spe e d ;
procedure Read Speed i s
begi n
Put Li ne ( Tspeed r e ads s peed s e ns or ) ;
end Read Speed ;
procedure Moni t or Engi ne i s
begi n
Put Li ne ( Tengi ne per f or ms e ngi ne moni t or i ng a l gor i t hm ) ;
end Moni t or Engi ne ;
I n s t a n t i a t e a p e r i o d i c t as k package f rom t he g e n e r i c package
f o r each of our t hr e e r un pr oc e dur e s
package P1 i s new Ge ne r i c Pe r i o di c Ta s k ( Run => Di s pl ay Spe e d ) ;
package P2 i s new Ge ne r i c Pe r i o di c Ta s k ( Run => Read Speed ) ;
package P3 i s new Ge ne r i c Pe r i o di c Ta s k ( Run => Moni t or Engi ne ) ;
Our t hr e e t a s k s
Tdi s pl a y : P1 . Pe r i odi c Ta s k ( Ta s k Pr i o r i t y => 12 ,
Pe r i o d I n Mi l l i s e c o n d s => 100) ;
Tspeed : P2 . Pe r i odi c Ta s k ( Ta s k Pr i o r i t y => 11 ,
Tengi ne : P3 . Pe r i odi c Ta s k ( Ta s k Pr i o r i t y => 10 ,
pragma Pr i o r i t y ( 2 0 ) ; Pr i o r i t y of mai n subpr ogr am
begi n
Put Li ne ( Tasks w i l l s t a r t a f t e r t he mai n subprogram compl et es ! ) ;
end Car Syst em ;
We dened stubs for the three jobs each of our tasks must perform. Each
stub simply displays a message. Following the denition of these stubs, we
instantiate three dierent packages, one for each of our tasks. We pass the
appropriate job to run for each of our tasks. Next are the declarations of
our three tasks. We include the values of the priority and period discrimi-
nants in the declarations that create the three tasks.
We also choose to assign priority level 20 to the environment task, the
task that executes the main procedure of this program. This higher priority
level ensures that the three tasks will not start running before the main
procedure has nished its initialization. This approach makes our program
compliant with the critical instant assumption (see page 261). The pragma
Partition Elaboration Policy (see section 5.7 of the Ada Reference Man-
ual) can also be used to defer task activations to implement a critical
instant.
8.4 Handling shared resources
As we discussed in Chapter 4, protected objects are the preferred construct
for encapsulating resources shared among tasks. In Chapter 7, we showed
that in order to perform a schedulability analysis, specic locking protocols
are needed with shared objects. In Section 7.3.2, we discussed priority in-
heritance protocols. These protocols require us to assign priorities to both
tasks and shared resources. We discussed the use of pragma Priority for
tasks in the last section. The same pragma can be used to assign a priority
to a protected object. We simply place the pragma in the declaration of our
protected type or protected object. Below is the declaration of the protected
bounded buer type used in the producer-consumer demonstration program
on page 136. We have used the priority pragma to assign a priority of 15 to
all objects of this type.
protected type Bounded Buf f er ( Max Si ze : Po s i t i v e ) i s
d e l e t e a l l of t he i t ems i n t he b u f f e r
entry Put ( I tem : i n Po s i t i v e ) ;
add a v a l ue t o t he b u f f e r
entry Take ( I tem : out Po s i t i v e ) ;
remove a v a l ue f rom t he b u f f e r
pr i vat e
Buf f e r : I nt e ge r Que ue . Queue Type ( Max Si ze ) ;
8.4.1 Locking policies
Each protected object also has a locking policy. Protected object priorities
are properties which are related to the protected object locking policy. The
locking policy species how the protected object can be accessed and the
relationships between task priorities and protected object priorities. If a
protected object declaration does not contain a priority pragma, then a
default priority is specied by the assigned locking policy.
We specify a given locking policy with the following pragma:
pragma Lo c k i ng Po l i c y ( po l i c y to a c t i v a t e ) ;
where policy-to-activate is the protected object locking policy. Ada com-
piler and run-time implementers are allowed to dene any locking policies
but must implement at least the Immediate Ceiling Priority Protocol (ICPP)
described in Section 7.3.2. ICPP is identied by the policy name Ceiling
Locking. To activate ICPP during protected object access, we must add the
following pragma to the application:
pragma Lo c k i ng Po l i c y ( Ce i l i n g L o c k i n g ) ;
The Ada Reference Manual describes exactly how Ceiling Locking
works:
Each protected object priority level is called a ceiling priority. If no
ceiling priority has been assigned to a protected object, then it has a
default priority of System.PriorityLast.
The ceiling priority of a protected object must be equal to the maximum
active priority of all the tasks which may call the protected object. The
exception Program Error is raised when a task attempts to access a pro-
tected object whose ceiling priority is less than the tasks active priority.
When a task gains access to a protected object and if its active priority
is lower than the ceiling priority, the task inherits the ceiling priority of
the protected object the tasks active priority is increased to reach
the ceiling priority. Thus the active priority of a task at a given time is
equal to the maximum of its base priority and the ceiling priorities of any
protected objects the task has locked.
You should notice that this specication of Ceiling Locking is similar
to the description we gave in Section 7.3.2 for ICPP.
8.4.2 Queuing policies
Section D.4 of the Real-Time Systems Annex denes a second important
pragma for protected objects.
pragma Que ui ng Pol i c y ( p o l i c y i d e n t i f i e r ) ;
Two language-dened policy identiers exist: FIFO Queuing and
Priority Queuing. A compiler vendor may supply additional policies. FIFO
Queuing is the default when no Queuing Policy pragma is specied. Each
queuing policy governs:
The order in which tasks are queued for entry service.
The order in which dierent entry queues are considered for servicing.
FIFO Queuing orders entry callers according to the time the entry calls
are made. All of our examples of entry queues in Chapters 4 and 5 were
based on FIFO Queuing. With Priority Queuing, entry callers are ordered
in the queues according to their active priority.
In Chapter 4 we said that when two or more open entry queues in a pro-
tected object have waiting tasks, the language does not specify which entry
queue is selected; the selection is arbitrary. This non-deterministic behavior
is dened by the default FIFO Queuing policy. The Priority Queuing pol-
icy provides a deterministic selection the entry queue with the highest
priority task is selected. Should more than one entry queue contain tasks
with the highest priority, the selection is based on the textual position of the
entry declaration. Each entry has priority over the entries declared after it.
In Chapter 5 we said that when there are tasks waiting on more than
one alternative of a selective accept statement, the language does not spec-
ify which accept alternative is selected for a rendezvous; the selection is
arbitrary. Again, this non-deterministic behavior is dened by the default
FIFO Queuing policy. The Priority Queuing policy provides a determinis-
tic select statement the accept alternative whose entry queue contains
the highest priority task is selected. Should there be more than one open
accept alternative with tasks of equal priority waiting, the selection is based
on the textual position of the accept alternative within the selective accept
statement. Each accept alternative has priority over the accept alternatives
that follow it. If we were to use Priority Queuing in our beverage vending
machine software, task Make Beverage on page 172 would rendezvous with
a task requesting coee before those with equal priority requesting tea or
cocoa.
8.5 The Ada scheduling model
In the previous sections, we explained how to implement and parameterize
tasks and protected objects so our application is compliant with real-time
scheduling theory. In this section we look at the model that Ada uses to
schedule our tasks. We see now how such applications are scheduled by an
Ada compliant run-time.
8.5.1 Conceptual design of an Ada scheduler
Figure 8.2 illustrates how tasks are organized by the Ada run-time system.
Each processor has several ready queues. Each queue is devoted to a single
priority level and stores ready tasks that have the same active priority level.
Each queue has a tail and a head. In the example shown in Figure 8.2, the
queue associated with active priority 8 contains two tasks that are ready,
the queue of active priority 7 contains four ready tasks, and the queue of
active priority PriorityFirst contains one ready task.
Each queue has an associated dispatching policy. The dispatching policy
species when tasks are inserted and deleted from the ready queue and how
the ready tasks are ordered in the queue. The dispatching policy denes
the rules for selecting which ready task the processor must run and how
task preemption is handled. Recall that preemption is where the scheduler
chooses to stop the running task and replace it with another ready task.
Figure 8.2 Adas scheduling model
With the Ada scheduling model, preemption may only occur at specic
instants called task dispatching times. Each dispatching policy species
what operations can be or must be done at these task dispatching times.
The scheduling model of Ada can be seen as a two-level scheduling. At
any time, the scheduler:
1. Selects the highest priority queue that is not empty.
2. Using the queues dispatching policy, selects the next task to run from
that queue.
8.5.2 Task dispatching policies
Dispatching is the process of giving the processor to a ready task. As dis-
patching is dependent on the states of the various tasks in the applica-
tion, you may nd it useful to review the basic states a task goes through
during its execution, shown in Figure 3.2 on page 112. Ada provides sev-
eral dierent dispatching policies. A dispatching policy is specied by the
Task Dispatching Policy pragma. The most important dispatching pol-
icy is FIFO Within Priorities and is specied by including the following
pragma in the application:
pragma Ta s k Di s pa t c hi ng Pol i c y ( FI FO Wi t h i n Pr i o r i t i e s ) ;
The dispatching policy FIFO Within Priorities species the following
scheduling rules:
The scheduler is preemptive. When there is a ready task with an active
priority higher than the running task, the scheduler will preempt the run-
ning task.
The tasks in the ready queue are in rst in rst out (FIFO) order. When
the running task blocks itself or is preempted, the scheduler will dispatch
the task at the head of the ready queue with the highest active priority.
When a task changes state from blocked to ready, it is inserted at the tail
of the ready queue for its active priority.
Should the active priority of a task in one of the ready queues change,
that task is moved to the tail of the queue for its new active priority.
The dispatching policy FIFO Within Priorities is well suited for critical
applications. If all the tasks have dierent priority levels, we can easily apply
the xed priority scheduling feasibility tests described in Section 7.2.1. Be-
cause of the widespread use of the xed priority scheduling feasibility tests,
this policy is perhaps the most commonly used dispatching policy for real-
time systems. However, FIFO Within Priorities may not be suitable for
all applications. Ada provides other dispatching policies that can be useful
for less critical applications. The Ada 2005 standard denes three additional
dispatching policies:
Round Robin Within Priorities is a preemptive dispatching policy that
allows us to assign a time quantum to each priority level. The scheduler
preempts a running task when it has exhausted its quantum of time and
inserts it at the tail of the ready queue. The ready queues are FIFO. When
the running task blocks itself or is preempted, the scheduler will dispatch
the task at the head of the ready queue with the highest priority. Round
robin scheduling is popular in time sharing environments.
Non Preemptive FIFO Within Priorities is a scheduling policy without
preemption. The running task must voluntarily relinquish the processor by
executing some blocking statement such as a delay statement, an accept
statement, a select statement, or an entry call. The ready queues are
FIFO. When the running task blocks itself, the scheduler will dispatch
the task at the head of the ready queue with the highest priority.
EDF Across Priorities is a preemptive dispatching policy that imple-
ments the Earliest Deadline First scheduler described in Section 7.2.2. The
tasks in the ready queues are ordered by their deadlines. The task at the
head of each queue has the shortest deadline. The package
Ada.Dispatching.EDF provides operations for setting and querying task
deadlines. It also provides the procedure Delay Until And Set Deadline
for the implementation of periodic tasks that reset their deadlines at the
beginning of each iteration. As we mentioned in Section 7.2.3, EDF is
less predictable than xed priority scheduling during overload conditions.
However, it can eectively utilize 100% of the processor compared to only
about 69% for xed priority scheduling with Rate Monotonic priority as-
signment.
We can specify dierent dispatching policies for dierent priority queues.
This approach allows an application to run its tasks according to several
policies at the same time. We use pragma Priority Specific Dispatching
in place of pragma Task Dispatching Policy to assign a scheduling policy
to each priority level. Here is an example that divides our ready queues into
three dierent groups, each with its own scheduling policy.
pragma Pr i o r i t y S p e c i f i c Di s p a t c h i n g
( FI FO Wi t h i n Pr i o r i t i e s , 3 , 31) ;
( EDF Ac r o s s Pr i o r i t i e s , 2 , 2 ) ;
( Round Robi n Wi t hi n Pr i or i t i e s , 0 , 1 ) ;
With this set of pragmas, we assign FIFO preemptive xed priority schedul-
ing to the highest levels of priority from level 3 to 31. These priority levels
are devoted to high critical tasks. The other priority levels are devoted to
EDF (priority level 2) and round robin schedulers (priority levels 0 and 1).
Figure 8.3 illustrates the assignment of scheduling policies to priority queues
specied by these three pragmas.
In this design, priority levels ranging from 0 to 2 are intended for tasks
that are less critical. Since they are hosted by the lowest priority levels, they
can not disturb high priority/critical tasks and worst case response times of
these high priority/critical tasks can always be computed with the methods
described in Section 7.2.1. These mechanisms provide a natural and easy
means to run both critical and non-critical tasks together.
Of course, for high critical applications, the picture must be simpler so we
can use the highly predictable xed priority scheduling approach to schedule
all of our tasks. For such applications we use the following two pragmas that
specify our scheduler satisfy the conditions for xed priority scheduling and
ICPP:
Figure 8.3 Example of an application using several dierent dispatching
policies
8.6 Ravenscar
The richness of the Ada language provides numerous features that may
not be compliant with the analysis methods available in current real-time
scheduling theory. For example, in the previous sections, we have shown
that Ada allows a program to assign a dierent dispatching protocol to
each priority level. Use of such features may lead to the development of
an application that cannot be analyzed with the feasibility tests such as
the worst case response time feasibility test for xed priority scheduling
presented in Chapter 7.
We must ensure that our application meets all the assumptions of the
feasibility tests we use. To meet these requirements, we must be sure not
to use an Ada feature that violates some feasibility test assumption. Fortu-
nately, Ada provides a mechanism which performs this check automatically:
the Ravenscar prole.
Ravenscar is a prole which denes a subset of the Ada language that is
compliant with xed priority scheduling feasibility tests.
1
Aprole is a set of
restrictions a program must meet. Restrictions are expressed with pragmas
that are checked at compile time and enforced at execution time. We use
the following pragma to activate all of the restrictions in the Ravenscar
prole:
pragma p r o f i l e ( Ravens car ) ;
1
The Ravenscar prole is described in section D.13.1 of the Ada Reference Manual.
8.6 Ravenscar 313
This one pragma is equivalent to the following collection of pragmas:
pragma De t e c t Bl oc ki ng ;
pragma Re s t r i c t i o n s (
No Abor t St at ement s ,
No Dynami c Attachment ,
No Dy na mi c Pr i or i t i e s ,
No I mp l i c i t He a p Al l o c a t i o n s ,
No Loc al Pr ot e c t e d Obj e c t s ,
No Local Ti mi ng Event s ,
No Pr ot e c t e d Ty pe Al l oc at or s ,
No Re l at i v e De l ay ,
No Requeue Statements ,
No Sel ect St at ement s ,
No Spe c i f i c Te r mi na t i on Ha ndl e r s ,
No Tas k Al l oc at or s ,
No Tas k Hi er ar chy ,
No Task Ter mi nat i on ,
Si mpl e Ba r r i e r s ,
Max Ent r y Queue Lengt h => 1 ,
Ma x Pr ot e c t e d Ent r i e s => 1 ,
Max Tas k Ent r i es => 0 ,
No Dependence => Ada . As ynchr onous Tas k Cont r ol ,
No Dependence => Ada . Cal endar ,
No Dependence => Ada . Execut i on Ti me . Group Budget ,
No Dependence => Ada . Execut i on Ti me . Ti mers ,
No Dependence => Ada . Ta s k At t r i but e s ) ;
Together, these restrictions help make it possible to perform a static anal-
ysis of an Ada program. Some of these restrictions are directly related to the
scheduling analysis with xed priority scheduling feasibility tests presented
in Chapter 7. In particular:
1. Restrictions enforced by the pragmas Task Dispatching Policy (FIFO
Within Priorities) and No Dynamic Priorities require that all tasks
are scheduled by preemptive, xed priority scheduling.
2. Restrictions enforced by the pragma Locking Policy (Ceiling Locking)
ensure that protected objects are shared between tasks according to the
ICPP protocol. This pragma makes it possible to give an upper bound
on the time each task waits to access protected objects.
3. Restrictions enforced by No Task Hierarchy and No Task Allocators
forbid dynamic task allocations and allow task declarations only at the
library level. These constraints help to produce a critical instant, an in-
stant in which all tasks are started at the same time. The critical instant
is a major assumption of most of the feasibility tests (see Section 7.3).
4. Restriction No Relative Delay disables the use of the relative delay
statement to implement periodic release times. As we showed in Figure
8.1, the use of the relative delay to implement periodic task releases yields
a cumulative drift away from the desired intervals.
5. Finally, the Ravenscar prole includes a number of restrictions that forbid
non-deterministic temporal behaviors. These restrictions are necessary
for determining the capacity (WCET) of each task. This is the case of
the restrictions No Task Allocators, No Protected Type Allocators,
and No Implicit Heap Allocation that forbid dynamic memory alloca-
tion, and also the restrictions No Requeue Statements and No Select
Statement that prevent the use of overly complex (and non-deterministic)
synchronization mechanisms.
These pragmas do not cover all xed priority scheduling feasibility test
assumptions. The Ravenscar prole does not specify how priorities are as-
signed to each task. The use of equation (7.3) to calculate the processor
utilization factor requires that priorities must be assigned according to Rate
Monotonic. However, such priority assignment is not required to use equation
(7.4) to calculate worst case response times. Furthermore, both equations
(7.3) and (7.4) assume periodic tasks, a property also not addressed by the
Ravenscar prole.
These feasibility tests also require that we know the number of tasks in
the application. Again, this information is not specied by the Ravenscar
prole. We can, however, include the additional restriction Max Tasks in our
program to bound the number of tasks.
So while the Ravenscar prole does not provide checks for all the necessary
restrictions, it is an excellent rst step to ensure that a program is compliant
with real-time scheduling theory assumptions. We still need to follow good
software engineering principles that complement the tools provided by Ada.
Besides its schedulability analysis support, the Ravenscar prole also pro-
vides very signicant size and speed improvements, both of which are im-
portant to real-time and embedded applications (Dobing, 1999; Shen and
Baker, 1999).
8.7 POSIX 1003.1b and its Ada binding
In the previous sections of this chapter, we described how to use features in
Adas Real-Time Systems Annex to implement applications that are com-
pliant with real-time scheduling theory. Since annexes are optional, some
Ada compilers and run-times may not provide support for this annex. For-
tunately, another standard is available for Ada practitioners POSIX.
POSIX is a standardized application programming interface (API) to an
operating system similar to Unix (Vahalia, 1996). POSIX helps program-
mers port their Unix programs from one Unix operating system to another.
Many programmers assume that only C programs may use the POSIX API.
However, POSIX also denes a standard API for Ada programs. The POSIX
standard is published by ISO and IEEE. Table 8.1 lists the chapters in the
standard relevant to this discussion. Each chapter covers a family of Unix
operating system facilities. Chapter 1003.1 and chapter 1003.2 are the most
well known chapters. Chapter 1003.1 denes an operating system API that
provides the usual Unix services such as fork and exec. Chapter 1003.2
denes programs or commands that Unix shells should provide.
Chapter Content
POSIX 1003.1 System Application Program Interface
POSIX 1003.2 Shell and utilities
POSIX 1003.1b Real-time extensions
POSIX 1003.1c Threads
POSIX 1003.5 Ada POSIX binding
Table 8.1 Some chapters of the POSIX 1003 standard
In this book, we are most concerned with chapters 1003.1b, 1003.1c and
1003.5. Chapters 1003.1b and 1003.1c standardize concurrency and real-time
features for C programs and chapter 1003.5 provides the Ada binding for
the other chapters (including 1003.1b and 1003.1c).
Each chapter provides a set of services. A service may be mandatory or
optional. Some of the services provided in chapter 1003.1b are:
POSIX PRIORITY SCHEDULING provides xed priority scheduling resources.
POSIX REALTIME SIGNALS is related to Unix signals which cannot be lost.
POSIX ASYNCHRONOUS IO provides subprograms to perform asynchronous
input and output.
POSIX TIMERS provides watchdog timer services. Well use these timers
to implement periodic task releases.
POSIX SEMAPHORES contains several usual synchronization tools.
Implementations of chapter 1003.1b are available for most real-time oper-
ating systems including Lynx/OS
TM
, VxWorks
TM
, Solaris
TM
, and QNX
TM
.
Unfortunately, most of the services in chapter 1003.1b are designated as
optional a major weakness of this POSIX chapter. However, POSIX is
a exible standard and POSIX programs (both C and Ada) are able to
discover at run-time if the services they need are provided by the under-
lying operating system. In addition, POSIX compliant programs are able
to adapt themselves to the underlying operating system capabilities. For
example, when a POSIX program starts, it can check how many priority
levels the operating system provides and could then change its priority level
assignments (see Section 8.7.2). Still, the large number of services not des-
ignated as manditory may encourage the development of programs that are
not portable.
There is a major dierence between the Ada standard with its Ravenscar
prole and the POSIX 1003 standard with its real-time extensions. Ada
checks at compile time whether the application is compatible with services
and resources of the underlying operating system. POSIX gives hints to the
application so that it might adapt itself to the features and resources that
are actually available. Another important dierence for Ada programmers
is related to the concurrency abstraction. POSIX relies on system processes
rather than on Ada tasks. Rather than declaring tasks, the POSIX Ada
programmer must use the more primitive fork mechanism to create the
processes for their program.
8.7.1 Scheduling model
POSIX uses preemptive xed priority scheduling that is quite similar to
Adas. Figure 8.4 illustrates the POSIX scheduling model. It is composed of
several queues that store ready processes with each queue devoted to a given
priority level. This model is identical to that of Ada depicted in Figure 8.2.
A POSIX compliant system must provide at least 32 priority levels. At any
time, the running process is chosen from among the processes of the highest
non-empty priority level queue.
POSIX dispatching is also similar to Adas. When a given priority queue
is selected, the choice of the process to run is performed according to a
policy. In a POSIX compliant operating system, we usually at least nd the
following three policies:
1. SCHED FIFO. This policy is quite similar to the FIFO Within Priorities
scheduling policy of Ada. But instead of dispatching Ada tasks we dis-
patch Unix processes. With this policy, ready processes in a given priority
level get the processor according to their order in the FIFO queue. The
process at the head of the queue runs rst and keeps the processor until it
executes some statement that blocks it, explicitly releases the processor,
or nishes.
Figure 8.4 POSIX 1003.1b scheduling model
2. SCHED RR. This policy provides a round-robin mechanism inside a priority
level. It can be seen as a SCHED FIFO policy but with a time quantum and
some extra rules on queue management. A time quantum is a maximum
duration that a process can run on the processor before being preempted
by another process of the same queue. When the quantum is exhausted,
the preempted process is moved from the head to the tail of the queue
and the new process at the head of the queue is dispatched.
3. SCHED OTHER. The behavior of this policy is not dened in the POSIX
standard. It is implementation-dened. Sometimes, this policy provides
a time-sharing scheduler. This policy is used by Linux for all processes
with a priority level of 0. These processes are put in a SCHED OTHER
queue. With Linux, the process in the SCHED OTHER queue that has waited
longest for the processor is dispatched rst.
Dierent operating systems can implement the POSIX scheduling pol-
icy dierently. For example, some operating systems allow each individual
process to specify the policy under which it is scheduled, while others do
not.
In VxWorks 5.3, the quantum can be initialized by programmers with
the kernelTimeSlice operation. By default, the quantum is equal to zero
and all VxWorks tasks are SCHED FIFO tasks. If a programmer changes the
quantum with kernelTimeSlice, then all tasks in the application become
SCHED RR tasks. In contrast to VxWorks, Solaris allows us to specify a given
policy for each Solaris process (Mauro and Dougall, 2001).
As we mentioned earlier, Linux also implements POSIX 1003. Priority
level 0 is devoted to SCHED OTHER processes. Processes which have a priority
level between 1 and 99 can be scheduled either with SCHED FIFO or SCHED
RR.
Due to all these implementation dierences, an Ada POSIX compliant
application is generally not as portable as an Ada compliant application.
The portability issue is exacerbated when the operating system also im-
plements POSIX 1003.1c the POSIX chapter related to threads. Pro-
cesses and threads are distinguished by their address spaces each pro-
cess has its own address space while threads share an address space. De-
pending on the operating system, POSIX threads may be implemented
either as kernel threads or as user-level threads (Anderson et al., 1992;
Mauro and Dougall, 2001). This may also change the scheduling of the
application.
Programmers must carefully check how POSIX (process or thread) schedul-
ing is actually implemented in order to analyze the schedulability of their
applications.
8.7.2 POSIX Application Programming Interface
Using the Ada binding POSIX 1003.5, Ada programmers can write and run
POSIX 1003 applications. In this section we will look at two package spec-
ications that are a small part of Florist, a POSIX 1003.5 implementation
written by Baker and Oh (1997) for the GNAT compiler (see Chapter 9).
Implementing periodic POSIX processes
Package POSIX.Timers provides the Ada bindings for the POSIX 1003 ser-
vice POSIX TIMERS. Here is a portion of that package.
wi th POSIX. Si g n a l s ;
package POSIX. Ti mer s i s
type Cl ock I D i s pr i vat e ;
type Ti mer I D i s pr i vat e ;
Cl oc k Re al t i me : constant Cl ock I D ;
procedure S e t I n i t i a l
( St at e : i n out Ti mer St at e ;
I n i t i a l : i n POSIX. Ti mespec ) ;
procedure S e t I n t e r v a l
( St at e : i n out Ti mer St at e ;
I n t e r v a l : i n POSIX. Ti mespec ) ;
f uncti on Ge t I n t e r v a l
( St at e : i n Ti mer St at e )
r etur n POSIX. Ti mespec ;
procedure Set Ti me
( Cl ock : i n Cl ock I D ;
Val ue : i n POSIX. Ti mespec ) ;
f uncti on Get Ti me
( Cl ock : i n Cl ock I D := Cl oc k Re al t i me )
f uncti on Cr eat e Ti mer
( Cl ock : i n Cl ock I D ;
Event : i n POSIX. Si g n a l s . Si gna l Ev e nt )
r etur n Ti mer I D ;
procedure Arm Ti mer
( Ti mer : i n Ti mer I D ;
Opt i ons : i n Ti mer Opt i ons ;
New State : i n Ti mer St at e ) ;
. . .
pr i vat e
. . .
end POSIX. Ti mer s ;
Like package Ada.Real Time, package POSIX.Timers provides subpro-
grams to handle time. This POSIX package allows Ada programmers to
activate timers. Timers are used to implement periodic releases by waking
up a process after a delay (Harbour et al., 1997). Lets look at an example.
The following program demonstrates how to use a timer to implement a
periodic process with a period of one second.
wi th POSIX; use POSIX;
wi th POSIX. Si g n a l s ; use POSIX. Si g n a l s ;
wi th POSIX. Ti mer s ; use POSIX. Ti mer s ;
procedure Pos i x Ti mer Exampl e i s
The j ob c a r r i e d out by t he p e r i o d i c pr oc e s s
procedure Run Pe r i odi c Job Of The Pr oc e s s i s
begi n
Put Li ne ( Pe r i o d i c t as k i s r e l e a s e d and e x e c ut e s i t s j ob ) ;
end Run Pe r i odi c Job Of The Pr oc e s s ;
I n f o : POSIX. Si g n a l s . S i g n a l I n f o ;
Wai t ed Set : POSIX. Si g n a l s . Si g n a l Se t ;
Event : POSIX. Si g n a l s . Si gna l Ev e nt ;
Ti mer i d : POSIX. Ti mer s . Ti mer I d ;
Ti mer data : POSIX. Ti mer s . Ti mer St at e ;
Opt i ons : POSIX. Ti mer s . Ti mer Opt i ons ;
Nanos econd Per i od : Nanoseconds := 0;
Second Per i od : Seconds := 1;
Per i od : POSIX. Ti mespec ;
begi n
Set up s i g n a l management
POSIX. Si g n a l s . Se t Si g n a l
( Event => Event ,
Si g => POSIX. Si g n a l s . SIGUSR1 ) ;
POSIX. Si g n a l s . S e t No t i f i c a t i o n
( Event => Event ,
Not i f y => POSIX. Si g n a l s . S i g n a l No t i f i c a t i o n ) ;
POSIX. Si g n a l s . De l e t e Al l S i g n a l s ( Wai t ed Set ) ;
POSIX. Si g n a l s . Add Si gnal
( Set => Wai t ed Set ,
Si g => POSIX. Si g n a l s . SIGUSR1 ) ;
Cr eat e and i n i t i a l i z e t he t i me r t o t he pe r i od of t he pr oc e s s
Ti mer i d := POSIX. Ti mer s . Cr eat e Ti mer
( Cl ock => POSIX. Ti mer s . Cl ock Real t i me ,
Event => Event ) ;
Per i od := POSIX. To Ti mespec ( S => Second Per i od ,
NS => Nanos econd Per i od ) ;
POSIX. Ti mer s . S e t I n i t i a l
( St at e => Ti merdata ,
I n i t i a l => Per i od ) ;
POSIX. Ti mer s . S e t I n t e r v a l
I n t e r v a l => Per i od ) ;
POSIX. Ti mer s . Arm Ti mer
( Ti mer => Ti mer i d ,
Opt i ons => Opti ons ,
New State => Ti mer data ) ;
The p e r i o d i c pr oc e s s
l oop
Bl ock u n t i l t he s i g n a l i s r e c e i v e d
I n f o := POSIX. Si g n a l s . Awa i t Si gna l ( Wai t ed Set ) ;
Car r y out t he j ob of t he p e r i o d i c pr oc e s s
Run Pe r i odi c Job Of The Pr oc e s s ;
end l oop ;
end Pos i x Ti mer Exampl e ;
The rst part of this program issues calls to various procedures in package
POSIX.Signals to set up the POSIX signal SIGUSR1 we have decided to
use for our timer. Then the program calls the function Create Timer to
dene a POSIX timer. The calls to Set Initial and Set Interval set up
the timer so it will periodically raise the Unix signal SIGUSR1. We raise this
signal once per second. POSIX timer delays can be expressed in seconds and
nanoseconds. Of course, the actual precision will depend on the underlying
operating systems clock. The POSIX timer is then activated by the call to
procedure ARM Timer.
The loop at the end of this example program implements our periodic
process. The process calls function Await Signal which blocks it until the
timer sends a SIGUSR1 signal to the process. The process then runs its job
and starts the loop again.
Compare this example to program A Periodic Task Demo on page 299
which uses only Ada constructs to execute a periodic job. POSIX requires a
large number of variables and API calls to accomplish the same
thing.
POSIX scheduling
Now lets look at how we can control scheduling policies in POSIX compliant
Ada programs. Our second Florist package, POSIX.Process Scheduling,
allows programmers to customize the scheduling of their processes. Here is
a portion of that package.
wi th POSIX. Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ;
package POSIX. Pr oc e s s Sc he dul i ng i s
subtype S c h e d u l i n g Pr i o r i t y i s I n t e g e r ;
type Sc he dul i ng Par ame t e r s i s pr i vat e ;
f uncti on Ge t Pr i o r i t y ( Par amet er s : i n Sc he dul i ng Par ame t e r s )
r etur n S c h e d u l i n g Pr i o r i t y ;
procedure S e t Pr i o r i t y
( Par amet er s : i n out Sc he dul i ng Par ame t e r s ;
Pr i o r i t y : i n S c h e d u l i n g Pr i o r i t y ) ;
type Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y i s new I n t e g e r ;
Sched FI FO : constant Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y := . . . ;
Sched RR : constant Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y := . . . ;
Sched Ot her : constant Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y := . . . ;
procedure Se t Sc he dul i ng Pa r a me t e r s
( Pr oc e s s : i n POSI X Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Pr oc e s s I D ;
Par amet er s : i n Sc he dul i ng Par ame t e r s ) ;
f uncti on Ge t Sc he dul i ng Par ame t e r s
( Pr oc e s s : i n POSI X Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Pr oc e s s I D )
r etur n Sc he dul i ng Par ame t e r s ;
procedure Se t Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y
( Pr oc e s s : i n POSI X Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Pr oc e s s I D ;
New Pol i cy : i n Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y ;
Par amet er s : i n Sc he dul i ng Par ame t e r s ) ;
f uncti on Ge t Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y
r etur n Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y ;
f uncti on Get Maxi mum Pr i or i t y ( Po l i c y : i n Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y )
f uncti on Get Mi ni mum Pr i or i t y ( Po l i c y : i n Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y )
f uncti on Ge t Round Robi n I nt e r v a l
. . .
pr i vat e
. . .
end POSIX. Pr oc e s s Sc he dul i ng ;
This package contains subprograms to handle priority and policy. Func-
tions Get Priority, Get Scheduling Parameters, and Get Scheduling
Policy read the current priority and scheduling policy of a given pro-
cess. Processes are identied by unique numbers whose type is dened in
the package POSIX.Process Identification. In the same way, procedures
Set Priority, Set Scheduling Parameters, and Set Scheduling Policy
change the priority and scheduling policy of a process.
Package POSIX.Process Scheduling also denes subprograms that per-
mit an application to adapt itself to the underlying operating system. Func-
tions Get Maximum Priority, Get Minimum Priority, and Get Round
Robin Interval may be called to obtain the maximum priority level, the
minimum priority level, and the quantum that will be applied to SCHED RR
processes.
The following program demonstrates how the operations in package
Posix.Process Scheduling can be used to query and change process schedul-
ing characteristics. It rst displays the priority level and the policy of the
current process. Then it changes the process so that it is scheduled under
the SCHED FIFO policy with a priority level of 10.
wi th POSIX. Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ; use POSIX. Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ;
wi th POSIX. Pr oc e s s Sc he dul i ng ; use POSIX. Pr oc e s s Sc he dul i ng ;
procedure Pos i x Sc he dul i ng Ex ampl e i s
procedure Di s p l a y Po l i c y ( Po l i c y : i n Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y ) i s
begi n
i f Po l i c y = SCHED RR then
Put ( /SCHED RR ) ;
e l s i f Po l i c y = SCHED OTHER then
Put ( /SCHED OTHER ) ;
e l s i f Po l i c y = SCHED FIFO then
Put ( /SCHED FIFO ) ;
el s e
Put ( /unknown p o l i c y ) ;
end i f ;
end Di s p l a y Po l i c y ;
Pi d : Pr oc e s s I D ;
Sched : Sc he dul i ng Par ame t e r s ;
begi n
Read c u r r e n t pr oc e s s uni que i d e n t i f i c a t o r
Pi d:= Ge t Pr o c e s s I d ;
Di s pl a y t he d e f a u l t p r i o r i t y and s c he dul i ng par amet er s
of a pr oc e s s i n t he c ur r e nt o pe r a t i ng syst em
Sched := Ge t Sc he dul i ng Par ame t e r s ( Pi d ) ;
Put ( De f aul t p r i o r i t y / p o l i c y on t h i s POSIX ope r a t i ng syst em : ) ;
Put ( Ge t Pr i o r i t y ( Sched ) ) ;
Di s p l a y Po l i c y ( Po l i c y => Ge t Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y ( Pi d ) ) ;
New Li ne ;
Change both p r i o r i t y and p o l i c y
Appl y SCHED FIFO wi t h a p r i o r i t y l e v e l of 10
S e t Pr i o r i t y ( Par amet er s => Sched ,
Pr i o r i t y => 10) ;
Se t Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y ( Pr oc e s s => Pi d ,
New Pol i cy => SCHED FIFO ,
Par amet er s => Sched ) ;
Se t Sc he dul i ng Pa r a me t e r s ( Pr oc e s s => Pi d ,
Di s pl a y t he updated p r i o r i t y and s c he dul i ng par amet er s
Put ( Updated p r i o r i t y / p o l i c y : ) ;
Put ( Ge t Pr i o r i t y ( Sched ) ) ;
Di s p l a y Po l i c y ( Po l i c y => Ge t Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y ( Pi d ) ) ;
New Li ne ;
end Pos i x Sc he dul i ng Ex ampl e ;
Handling shared resources
We have now seen how to implement a periodic process and how to run it
with a given priority under a particular scheduling policy. Package
POSIX.Semaphores provides semaphores that can be used to implement
shared resources. We can use these semaphores to provide communication
and synchronization between processes. If the threads extension is sup-
ported, semaphores may also be used with threads.
Section 4.7.1 provided a brief description of the semaphore and how it
might be implemented as a protected object. In Section 7.3 we used the
semaphore in our descriptions of protocols for accessing shared resources.
POSIX semaphores provide the necessary tools for implementing the Priority
Ceiling Protocol (PCP).
POSIX mutexes and condition variables provide a second means of
controlling access to resources shared by threads. They are more ecient
than semaphores and thus recommended when using POSIX threads. See
Gallmeister (1995) for more information on sharing resources with POSIX.
8.8 POSIX implementation of the car application
As our nal POSIX example, we return to our car application of Chapter
7. On page 304 we presented an Ada solution based on periodic tasks. Now
well write an equivalent program using periodic POSIX processes. We use
the same task characteristics listed on page 304.
We take a similar approach to our earlier solution of using a generic unit
as a pattern for our three dierent periodic jobs. Rather than use a generic
package containing a task type, our POSIX implementation is based on a
generic procedure that implements a periodic process. Here is its specica-
tion:
wi th POSIX;
gener i c
wi th procedure Run ;
Pr i o r i t y Pa r a me t e r : S c h e d u l i n g Pr i o r i t y ;
Pol i c y Par ame t e r : Sc h e d u l i n g Po l i c y ;
Nanos econd Per i od : POSIX. Nanoseconds ;
Second Per i od : POSIX. Seconds ;
procedure Ge ne r i c Pe r i odi c POSI X Pr oc e s s ;
Thi s pr oc e dur e c o nt a i ns an i n f i n i t e l oop t hat c a l l s
pr oc e dur e Run ( t he j ob of t he pr oc e s s ) once e v e r y pe r i od
This specication includes ve parameters. Parameter Run is the proce-
dure that contains the code we want executed periodically. The remaining
four parameters specify the process priority, the scheduling policy, and the
period. The period is expressed in seconds and nanoseconds.
The body of our generic procedure uses the constructs for periodic release
and scheduling priority and policy developed in our previous two examples.
wi th POSIX. Si g n a l s ; use POSIX. Si g n a l s ;
wi th POSIX. Ti mer s ; use POSIX. Ti mer s ;
wi th POSIX. Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ; use POSIX. Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ;
procedure Ge ne r i c Pe r i odi c POSI X Pr oc e s s i s
I n f o : POSIX. Si g n a l s . S i g n a l I n f o ;
Wai t ed Set : POSIX. Si g n a l s . Si g n a l Se t ;
Event : POSIX. Si g n a l s . Si gna l Ev e nt ;
Ti mer i d : POSIX. Ti mer s . Ti mer I d ;
Ti mer data : POSIX. Ti mer s . Ti mer St at e ;
Opt i ons : POSIX. Ti mer s . Ti mer Opt i ons ;
Per i od : POSIX. Ti mespec ;
begi n
Set up s i g n a l management
POSIX. Si g n a l s . Se t Si g n a l ( Event => Event ,
Si g => SIGUSR1 ) ;
POSIX. Si g n a l s . S e t No t i f i c a t i o n
( Event => Event ,
Not i f y => POSIX. Si g n a l s . S i g n a l No t i f i c a t i o n ) ;
POSIX. Si g n a l s . De l e t e Al l S i g n a l s ( Wai t ed Set ) ;
POSIX. Si g n a l s . Add Si gnal ( Set => Wai t ed Set ,
SIG => SIGUSR1 ) ;
Cr eat e and i n i t i a l i z e t he t i me r t o t he pe r i od
Ti mer i d := POSIX. Ti mer s . Cr eat e Ti mer
( Cl ock => POSIX. Ti mer s . Cl ock Real t i me ,
Event => Event ) ;
Per i od := POSIX. To Ti mespec ( S => Second Per i od ,
NS => Nanos econd Per i od ) ;
POSIX. Ti mer s . S e t I n i t i a l
I n i t i a l => Per i od ) ;
POSIX. Ti mer s . S e t I n t e r v a l
I n t e r v a l => Per i od ) ;
POSIX. Ti mer s . Arm Ti mer
( Ti mer i d , Opti ons , Ti mer data ) ;
Change p r i o r i t y and p o l i c y
Pi d := Ge t Pr o c e s s I d ;
Pr i o r i t y => Pr i o r i t y Pa r a me t e r ) ;
New Pol i cy => Pol i c y Par ame t e r ,
The p e r i o d i c pr oc e s s
l oop
Run ; Ca l l t he pr oc e dur e wi t h t he code f o r t h i s j ob
I n f o := POSIX. Si g n a l s . Awa i t Si gna l ( Wai t ed Set ) ;
end l oop ;
end Ge ne r i c Pe r i odi c POSI X Pr oc e s s ;
Finally, here is the program that makes use of the generic procedure to
create and run three POSIX processes.
wi th POSIX. Pr oc e s s Sc he dul i ng ;
use POSIX. Pr oc e s s Sc he dul i ng ;
wi th POSIX. Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ;
use POSIX. Pr o c e s s I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ;
wi th POSIX. Un s a f e Pr o c e s s Pr i mi t i v e s ;
wi th Ge n e r i c Pe r i o d i c Po s i x Pr o c e s s ;
procedure Pos i x Car Exampl e i s
The f o l l o wi n g t hr e e pa r a me t e r l e s s pr oc e dur e s ar e s t ubs f o r
t he a c t ua l code t hat r uns i n t he c ar
procedure Read Speed i s
begi n
Put Li ne ( Tspeed r e ads s peed s e ns or ) ;
end Read Speed ;
procedure Moni t or Engi ne i s
begi n
Put Li ne ( Tengi ne per f or ms e ngi ne moni t or i ng a l gor i t hm ) ;
end Moni t or Engi ne ;
procedure Di s pl ay Spe e d i s
begi n
Put Li ne ( Tdi s pl a y d i s p l a y s t he s peed of t he c ar ) ;
end Di s pl ay Spe e d ;
I n s t a n t i a t e an i n f i n i t e l oop pr oc e dur e
f o r each of our t hr e e p r o c e s s e s
procedure Tdi s pl a y i s new Ge ne r i c Pe r i odi c POSI X Pr oc e s s
( Run => Di s pl ay Speed ,
Pr i o r i t y Pa r a me t e r => 12 ,
Pol i c y Par ame t e r => SCHED FIFO ,
Nanos econd Per i od => 1 000 000 ,
Second Per i od => 0 ) ;
procedure Tspeed i s new Ge ne r i c Pe r i odi c POSI X Pr oc e s s
( Run => Read Speed ,
procedure Tengi ne i s new Ge ne r i c Pe r i odi c POSI X Pr oc e s s
( Run => Moni t or Engi ne ,
begi n
Pr i o r i t y f o r envi r onment pr oc e dur e
( f o r mai n POSIX pr oc e s s )
Pi d := Ge t Pr o c e s s I d ;
Pr i o r i t y => 20) ;
New Pol i cy => SCHED FIFO ,
The mai n pr oc e s s c r e a t e s a new c h i l d pr oc e s s
Pi d := POSIX. Un s a f e Pr o c e s s Pr i mi t i v e s . For k ;
i f Pi d = Nul l Pr o c e s s I D then t he c h i l d pr oc e s s ?
Tengi ne ; Execut e t he e ngi ne pr oc e s s
el s e
The mai n pr oc e s s c r e a t e s a second c h i l d
Pi d := POSIX. Un s a f e Pr o c e s s Pr i mi t i v e s . For k ;
Tdi s pl a y ; Execut e t he d i s p l a y pr oc e s s
el s e
The mai n pr oc e s s c r e a t e s a t h i r d c h i l d
Pi d:= POSIX. Un s a f e Pr o c e s s Pr i mi t i v e s . For k ;
Tspeed ; Execut e t he s peed pr oc e s s
end i f ;
end i f ;
end i f ;
Al l c h i l d p r o c e s s e s s t a r t t o work a f t e r t he
hi ghe r p r i o r i t y mai n pr oc e s s compl et es !
Put Li ne ( Pr oc e s s e s w i l l s t a r t a f t e r &
t he mai n pr oc e s s compl et es ! ) ;
end Pos i x Car Exampl e ;
Creating POSIX processes is more complex than creating Ada tasks. The
rst set of statements in this program assigns high priority level to the
process. Then, a call to the POSIX function Fork is performed. This function
creates a new child process. The child process executes the same code as its
parent beginning with the statement that follows the call to function Fork.
So after the child process is created, the child and its parent both execute
the if statement that tests the value of variable Pid. This if statement allows
a process to determine if it is the child or the parent. In the child process,
function Fork returns a value of Null Process ID. In the parent process,
function Fork returns the process ID of its child a value not equal to
Null Process ID. The child process then calls procedure Tengine while the
main process makes a second call to function Fork. The same logic is used to
dierentiate between the second child and its parent. The second child calls
procedure Tdisplay while the main process makes a third call to function
Fork. The logic is repeated with the third child calling procedure Tspeed
while the main process displays a message and nishes.
Each process run is one of the three instantiated procedures implementing
a periodic task with a given priority and scheduling policy. Similar to the
Ada tasking implementation, we choose to assign priority level 20 to the
main process. This higher priority level ensures that the three processes
will not start running before the main process has completed. Again, this
approach makes our program compliant with the critical instant assumption.
8.9 Ada tasks versus POSIX processes
Both Ada and POSIX provide compliance with real-time scheduling theory.
In this section, we briey compare these two approaches to writing real-time
applications.
POSIX has two major advantages. It is supported by a large number of
real-time operating systems. And, as it is language-independent, it allows us
to combine processes written in dierent languages. Unfortunately, writing
real-time applications with POSIX has some drawbacks. POSIX schedul-
ing was intended for process or thread scheduling and we saw that POSIX
scheduling may be implemented dierently in several operating systems. As
we saw in our car application, we must do far more work to write a periodic
POSIX process than we do for an Ada task. The Ada compiler is responsible
8.9 Ada tasks versus POSIX processes 329
for expanding our tasks into the API calls we have to make ourselves when
using POSIX (see Section 9.1 for more information on expansion).
Both POSIX and Ada are intended to write portable programs. But since
many of the necessary POSIX constructs are optional, we expect that Ada
achieves a higher level of portability.
The relationship between Ada tasks and POSIX processes is implemen-
tation-dened. So it is best to not mix Ada tasks or protected objects with
POSIX processes and threads. With all of the negative aspects of POSIX,
we might question if Ada programmers should use the POSIX Ada binding
to write their real-time applications. The answer is yes, if no Ada 2005
compliant run-time and compiler is available for the underlying hardware
and run-time system.
In Chapter 9, we discuss run-time systems and some tools that are avail-
able to write and verify concurrent real-time Ada applications.
Summary
Two standards are available for programmers to write real-time Ada ap-
plications that can be compliant with the real-time scheduling theory:
Ada 2005 and POSIX 1003.1b.
With Ada:
Periodic task release times must be implemented with the delay until
statement.
A task has a base priority and an active priority.
Base priorities of tasks and priorities of protected objects are dened
with the Priority pragma.
Scheduling of tasks is specied by dispatching policies. Ada provides
several dispatching policies.
The real-time scheduling theory compliance of an Ada program can be
enforced by the Ravenscar prole.
With POSIX:
The scheduling model is similar to Ada.
POSIX timers may be used to implement periodic task release times.
POSIX is exible: it allows an Ada program to adapt itself to the un-
derlying operating system.
We do not handle tasks but processes or threads.
The portability level of an Ada program written with POSIX may be less
than an Ada program written with Ada 2005.
Exercises
8.1 Contrast type Time in package Ada.Calendar to type Time in package
Ada.Real Time.
8.2 List what mechanisms enforce real-time scheduling compliance.
8.3 Explain the dierence between cumulative drift and local drift with
respect to periodic tasks.
8.4 Why should we use the delay until statement instead of the delay
statement?
8.5 Write an Ada program that displays the following values dened in the
package System (see page 301) on your computer.
Max Priority
Max Interrupt Priority
The lowest value of subtype Any Priority
The highest value of subtype Any Priority
The lowest value of subtype Priority
The highest value of subtype Priority
The lowest value of subtype Interrupt Priority
The highest value of subtype Interrupt Priority
8.6 What pragmas must we include in an Ada program to be compliant
with xed priority scheduling and ICPP?
8.7 What is the major advantage of using the Ravenscar prole? Describe
at least one disadvantage of using this prole.
8.8 In this exercise you will practice with POSIX 1003 scheduling poli-
cies. We assume a Linux operating system that implements the POSIX
1003 standard with a scheduling model with 100 priority levels (from
0 to 99, with 99 being the highest priority). Priority level 0 is devoted
to time-sharing processes. All processes that have a 0 priority level
are scheduled according to the SCHED OTHER policy. The Linux SCHED
OTHER policy schedules tasks according to how long it has been since
they last had the processor. The process dispatched rst from the queue
at priority level 0 is the one that has waited the longest for the proces-
sor. This waiting time is not just their waiting time in the ready queue
for priority 0. It includes the time that the process may have been
blocked for a resource or for input or output. Processes which have a
priority level between 1 and 99 are scheduled either with SCHED FIFO
or SCHED RR. Of course, the processes in priority queues 1 through 99
are dispatched before any processes in the lower priority queue 0. We
assume a quantum of one unit of time for the SCHED RR policy. The
scheduling is preemptive.
Exercises 331
Given the following process characteristics:
Name Capacity Release time Priority Policy
other1 8 0 0 SCHED OTHER
rr1 5 2 3 SCHED RR
rr2 5 2 3 SCHED RR
fo1 3 4 5 SCHED FIFO
Fill in Figure 8.5 of the schedule from time 0 to 25 by darkening in
the squares where a particular process is running on the processor.
other1
rr1
rr2
fifo1
fifo2
fifo3
5 2 0
Figure 8.5 Drawing to ll
8.9 What are advantages and disavantages of using Ada tasks or POSIX
1003.b processes to implement real-time applications?
8.10 In this exercise you will practice with POSIX 1003 scheduling policies.
We assume a system composed of two periodic processes T
1
and T
2
dened with S
1
= 0, S
2
= 2, C
1
= 1, C
2
= 2, P
1
= 8, and P
2
= 7.
We also assume that the process deadlines are equal to their periods
( i : D
i
= P
i
).
The operating system is a POSIX 1003.1b operating system with
32 priority levels (priority levels ranging from 0 to 31). Priority level
31 is the highest priority level. This operating system provides POSIX
1003.1b SCHED FIFO, SCHED RR, and SCHED OTHER policies. In the case
of the SCHED RR, the quantum is about one unit of time. SCHED OTHER
implements a time-sharing scheduling. The scheduling is preemptive.
1. Check the schedulability of the periodic process set.
2. Besides T
1
and T
2
, the processor owns a set of aperiodic processes
dened as follows:
Name Capacity Release time Priority Policy
other1 5 0 0 SCHED OTHER
rr1 3 3 7 SCHED RR
rr2 3 4 7 SCHED RR
3. Assign a priority level to processes T
1
and T
2
which allows these peri-
odic processes to meet their deadlines and which is compliant to the
operating system properties (related to POSIX 1003.1b scheduling
model). Explain your choice.
4. Draw the scheduling of all processes (both periodic and aperiodic
processes) from time 0 to time 30.
8.11 In the implementation of the Generic Periodic Task package on pages
303 and 304, each synchronous periodic task computes its own rst re-
lease time by a local call to the Clock subprogram. When the number
of tasks is large, the resulting scheduling of this set of synchronous peri-
odic tasks may be dierent from the one we can expect. Why? Propose
an adaptation of this package to solve this problem.
9
Tools for building and verifying
real-time applications
In the previous chapters, we introduced both Ada concurrency features
(tasks, protected objects, and rendezvous) and advanced features to sup-
port real-time constructs (notion of priority, protocols to bound priority
inversion, and task dispatching policies). Our Ada applications do not run
alone. They execute within a run-time conguration. A run-time cong-
uration consists of the processor that executes our application and the
environment in which that application operates. This environment includes
memory systems, input/output devices, and operating systems.
An important early design goal of Ada was to provide a compilation sys-
tem that can create from one Ada program dierent executables that run
in an equivalent way within a wide variety of run-time congurations. With
little or no modications to the Ada code, the same program should run on a
variety of platforms from small embedded platforms, such as those based
on 8-bit micro-controllers and PDAs, to single processor microcomputers,
multi-core processors, and multiprocessor systems. The run-time congu-
ration may include no operating system; may include an RTOS (real-time
operating system) like VxWorks
TM
, LynxOS
TM
, ORK+, MaRTE OS, and
RTEMS; or may include a complete general purpose operating system such
as Linux, Windows
TM
, and Mac OS
TM
.
In this chapter, we detail how Ada concurrency constructs are supported
by the Ada run-time environment. We rst introduce a generic architecture
for mapping Ada constructs onto an operating system. Then, we exam-
ine three dierent run-times for the open-source Ada compiler GNAT. The
run-time environment plays a large role in the timing and scheduling of
tasks. In our nal section, we discuss how to validate the schedule of our
application.
334 Tools for building and verifying real-time applications
9.1 Ada run-times to implement real-time applications
A run-time or run-time system (RTS) is a collection of code designed to
support the execution of an application. A run-time system provides services
for common operations (such as input and output) and the implementation
of complex programming language features (such as the automatic managing
of controlled types, exceptions, and tasking). The run-time system provides
an abstraction that hides the complexity and variability of services oered by
dierent operating systems. When we compile our application, the compiler
inserts calls to run-time system functions and procedures that implement
services and language features for a particular run-time conguration.
In this section, we discuss how the run-time system supports Ada con-
structs in a portable way. Let us imagine that we want to write an imple-
mentation of the Ada run-time system. Well begin this thought experiment
with some questions to help us see how to build it.
Question 1: How are Ada features handled?
The Ada compiler translates our Ada program into machine language that
is later run on the target computer. This translation is a complex process
that usually involves many intermediate steps. Each step translates abstract
constructs into one or more simpler steps. Even a seemingly elementary
construct like an assignment statement may map to a number of dierent
machine language instructions to carry out the mathematical operations
and conditional logic to handle potential range violations. Such translation
of abstract to concrete is common in other domains. In Section 1.1.2 we
developed several sets of actions for cooks in a kitchen. The human cooks
will later rene these steps into simpler actions (taking an object, using it,
cleaning it, taking another one, etc.).
In Chapter 3 we introduced the task life cycle. Translating a task decla-
ration and body into machine language is a complex process. The compiler
will create the necessary code to implement the task. This code will include
calls to functions and procedures in the run-time system to carry out the
creation, activation, execution, and nalization of the task.
Consider this simple piece of Ada code:
procedure Si mpl e Tas k i s
task A Task ;
task body A Task i s
begi n
nul l ;
end A Task ;
begi n
nul l ;
end Si mpl e Tas k ;
The GNAT Ada compiler allows us to view the intermediate steps of the
compilation process. The compiler can produce a pseudo-source listing of
the expanded code.
1
Here is a portion of the expanded code generated by
the GNAT compiler for procedure Simple Task:
A pseudo s our c e l i s t i n g of expanded code pr oduced
by t he Ada c ompi l e r
wi th syst em . s y s t e m par ame t e r s ;
wi th syst em . s y s t e m t a s k i n g ;
wi th syst em . s y s t e m t a s k i n f o ;
wi th ada . a d a r e a l t i me ;
. . .
procedure s i mp l e t a s k i s
procedure s i mp l e t a s k c l e a n i s
begi n
. . .
r etur n ;
end s i mp l e t a s k c l e a n ;
begi n
s y s t e m s o f t l i n k s e n t e r ma s t e r . a l l ;
c ha i n : al i as ed s y s t e m t a s k i n g a c t i v a t i o n c h a i n ;
. . .
task type s i mpl e t a s k a t a s k TK ;
. . .
type s i mpl e t as k a t as kTKV i s l i mi t ed record
t a s k i d : s y s t e m t a s k i n g t a s k i d ;
end record ;
. . .
procedure s i mpl e t as k a t as kTKB ( t a s k : access
s i mpl e t as k a t as kTKV ) i s
begi n
. . .
at end
s i mp l e t a s k a t a s k TK c l e a n ;
end s i mpl e t as k a t as kTKB ;
a taskTKE := t r ue ;
$ s y s t e m t a s k i n g s t a g e s a c t i v a t e t a s k s
( chai n unc he c ke d ac c e s s ) ;
nul l ;
r etur n ;
at end
s i mp l e t a s k c l e a n ;
end s i mp l e t a s k ;
This listing is only a small portion of the pseudo-source code that is gen-
erated. The purpose of the code generated is to perform each of the actions
1
By using the -gnatDG compilation ag.
discussed when we introduced the life cycle of a task in Chapter 3. This ex-
panded code has dependencies on the Ada and System package hierarchies.
The latter is dedicated to implementation-specic source code to support
Ada constructs and provides a major portion of the run-time system.
Similar code is generated to support protected objects, rendezvous, con-
trolled types, to add range checks on arrays or arithmetic operations, point-
ers, etc.
Question 2: Do I need to use the operating system scheduling services?
As we have seen in the previous section, the compiler expands source code
into simpler elements a task is expanded into a number of data structures
and subprogram calls. The operating system may provide some support for
task creation, management, and termination. In Section 3.5, we mentioned
that the Ada run-time relies on the operating system concurrency mecha-
nisms, but did not justify this choice. You may wonder at rst if this support
from the operating system is needed. Ada has specic semantics such as the
priority range of tasks, the numerical value of the highest priority level,
and support of scheduling policies that may be dierent from the target
operating system. Why cant the Ada run-time system simply provide these
semantics directly?
We will use an example to illustrate why the Ada run-time system cannot
always provide our task scheduling. Imagine the following run-time system
design. Each Ada task is managed as a specic data structure maintained
by the Ada run-time system. Each task is scheduled by the Ada run-
time system it is given processor time whenever required (e.g. upon a
timing event). The run-time system maintains its own ready queues and
entry queues. To support context switching between tasks, all we need is a
way to store the current tasks context (typically the current value of all the
processor registers) and load the context of the next task in the ready queue.
Now consider the following application:
procedure Pr oc e s s Bl oc k i ng i s
task He l l o ;
task body He l l o i s
begi n
l oop
Put Li ne ( He l l o ) ;
del ay 0 . 5 ;
end l oop ;
end He l l o ;
task Wai t ;
task body Wai t i s
C : Char ac t e r ;
begi n
Get (C) ;
Put Li ne ( Got & C) ;
end Wai t ;
begi n
nul l ;
end Pr oc e s s Bl oc k i ng ;
This program has two simple tasks: Hello periodically displays a string.
Wait waits for the user to enter a character and hit the return key. What
happens when we run this program? We expect the string Hello to be
displayed periodically and whenever a character is entered, the text Got
and the character is displayed.
Now, let us imagine we compile this code with our Ada run-time system
we just described. Each task is replaced by a procedure that is executed
from time to time. Suppose when we execute the program that the run-time
system rst schedules task Hello. This task displays its greeting and then
executes its delay statement. The run-time system saves the context of task
Hello, nds task Wait in its ready queue, and loads its context. Task Wait
executes a call to procedure Get. Input is handled by the operating system.
The operating system will halt our program until the user enters a charac-
ter. When the program is blocked, its run-time system cannot execute and
schedule another ready task. The whole program seems stuck until the user
inputs some data. Only when the user enters a character will our program be
unblocked and the character displayed. As the program is no longer blocked,
our run-time system can handle the completion of task Wait and schedule
the next execution of task Hello.
This is not the behavior we expected of our program. We expected task
Hello to continuously display its message while task Wait waited for input.
The problem is that the operating system sees our program as a single
process that it schedules to run or not. The operating system is not aware
of the run-time system code within the program that provides scheduling of
the Ada tasks.
2
When running a concurrent Ada program under a general or real-time
operating system,we must make our tasks visible to the operating system
2
For more details, see Anderson et al. (1992).
and allow it to schedule them. We can, however, run a concurrent Ada
program on a target without an operating system what are called bare
board systems. In this case, the tasking semantics must be included in the
run-time system.
Question 3: How are portability issues handled?
The Ada language denes uniform semantics for all its constructs, including
concurrency. In some cases, the target operating system may not support
all the concurrency features available in Ada. Ada is a modular language. In
Section 8.6, we briey introduced the restriction mechanism that allows
us to reduce the constructs allowed.
These restrictions allow us to indicate that a specic Ada run-time support
needs only a subset of the available concurrency mechanisms. Furthermore,
some elements of the language are designated as being optional. For example,
a compiler vendor need not supply or support Annex D, which is necessary
to build real-time applications. Since concurrency constructs are part of the
language, the Ada compiler can detect the use of unsupported features, and
reject programs that cannot be executed on the target system.
We sometimes need to know the limits of some types such as priority
ranges or the precision of time-related types. The Ada standard requires that
all of this information be dened in the two packages System and Standard.
Here are some excerpts from these two packages.
package System i s
Excer pt f rom t he System package , f o r Mac OS X t a r g e t
Ma x I n t e r r u p t Pr i o r i t y : constant Po s i t i v e := 63;
Ma x Pr i or i t y : constant Po s i t i v e := Ma x I n t e r r u p t Pr i o r i t y 1;
subtype An y Pr i o r i t y i s I n t e g e r range 0 . . Ma x I n t e r r u p t Pr i o r i t y ;
subtype Pr i o r i t y i s An y Pr i o r i t y range 0 . . Ma x Pr i or i t y ;
subtype I n t e r r u p t P r i o r i t y i s An y Pr i o r i t y
range Pr i o r i t y Las t + 1 . . Ma x I n t e r r u p t Pr i o r i t y ;
De f a u l t Pr i o r i t y : constant Pr i o r i t y :=
( Pr i o r i t y Las t Pr i o r i t y F i r s t ) / 2;
end System ;
package St andar d i s
Excer pt f rom t he St andar d package , as shown f o r Mac OS X
type Dur at i on i s del t a 0. 000000001
range ((2 63 1) 0. 000000001) . .
+((2 63 1) 0. 000000001) ;
f or Dur at i on Smal l use 0. 000000001;
end St andar d ;
These types dene some implementation limits as bounds on Ada types.
By carefully using all this information, it is possible to write Ada programs
that remain portable across dierent implementations of the Ada run-time
system. Should we exceed the capabilities of a particular run-time congu-
ration, the Ada compiler will inform us.
Question 4: How do I write an Ada run-time?
From our answers to the previous questions, we come to the conclusion that
the Ada run-time system is based on two levels of facilities:
1. A set of low-level routines and data structures that support the seman-
tics of Ada constructs. The Ada compiler will map each element (task,
protected object, etc.) to a set of statements that will use these routines
and data structures.
2. A library supporting concurrency, provided with the target operating sys-
tems to support the concepts of threads (independent ows of execution),
locks (to protect data against concurrent access), and semaphores.
Writing the expander inside a compiler is a large challenge. We need to
understand precisely how the Ada source code is represented internally, and
how to map it onto elementary low-level routines. A typical approach taken
when writing a compiler is to isolate run-time conguration specic elements
so as to maximize code reusability when porting the compiler to new run-
time congurations. In addition, the low-level routines must rely on the
operating system library for mapping tasks or protected objects onto lower-
level mechanisms.
A good compiler design clearly separates the expansion phase from the
run-time system. Figure 9.1 illustrates such a design. Application code and
the code derived through expansion interact with a generic Ada run-time.
This generic run-time system provides services to build all constructs. The
generic run-time interacts with a target-specic library that hides all imple-
mentation details necessary to interact either with the concurrency library
or directly with the operating system.
9.2 Some variants of the GNAT run-time
In this section, we explore dierent implementations of the GNAT run-time.
GNAT is an Ada compiler, initially started as a project at the New York
Figure 9.1 Layered design of an Ada program
University (see Schonberg and Banner, 1994, for the seminal work on the
project). This compiler is now fully integrated in the GCC
3
collection of
compilers, and supported by AdaCore.
4
We selected this compiler for our
discussions because it is fully open source. We can analyze the source code
of both the compiler and the run-time system.
Before we begin our discussion of GNAT run-times, let us mention that
Ada and its real-time features are implemented and supported by numerous
vendors. Aonix provides the ObjectAda compiler and support for the Raven-
scar prole through its RAVEN
TM
line of run-time systems and compilers.
IBM Rationals Apex Ada gives you a choice of three run-time systems:
Wind River Tornado
TM
, LynxOS
TM
, and their own Rational Exec. Green
Hills Softwares Ada has three dierent versions of their Integrity
TM
RTOS.
Irvine Compiler Corporations Ada supports a variety of bare machine and
RTOS environments. In addition to the three open source GNAT run-times
that we discuss, AdaCore provides a variety of commercial run-time systems
for embedded, real-time, and safety-critical applications.
9.2.1 Architecture of the GNAT run-time
The GNAT compiler targets a wide variety of operating systems, from bare
board systems (without target operating systems) to large servers. GNAT
supports more than 60 run-time congurations.
3
A free software compiler, part of the GNU project, see http://gcc.gnu.org.
4
See http://www.adacore.com.
To reduce portability cost and enhance maintainability, the architecture of
the GNAT run-time follows the elements we outlined in Section 9.1. The run-
time is made of two layers (see Giering and Baker, 1994, for some historical
background on the design):
GNARL: the GNU Ada Run-time Library is the upper layer. The
higher level Ada constructs are expanded into calls to GNARL. Once
expanded, the code of GNARL is treated as regular Ada code.
GNULL: GNU Low-Level interfaces is the lower layer. It holds the
portability layer that provides the interface to the host operating system.
On a bare board system, GNULL provides all the necessary low level
support of Ada semantics.
The combination of these two layers provides:
1. Support of Ada semantics: GNARL completes the host operating system
constructs so as to support full Ada semantics precisely. Whenever pos-
sible, GNARL supports the Real-Time Systems Annex (see Chapter 8).
2. Separation of concerns: dening the run-time as a set of Ada packages
called by the compiler allows one to separate compiler techniques from
run-time concerns, easing the implementation of the run-time systems
on a new operating system. It also allows incremental implementation
one may rst implement a basic run-time, without concurrency, and then
extend it to support a restricted tasking prole then full tasking capabil-
ities.
3. Portability: an initial requirement of GNAT was that it was to be written
in Ada as much as possible. This requirement was meant to provide a
proof of concept of the compiler it should be able to compile itself.
5
A second reason for this requirement was that all Ada checks are made
on the Ada run-time itself. Target-specic code is isolated in the GNULL
and kept as small as possible.
4. Eciency: the run-time should be as ecient as possible and tailorable
whenever possible. The run-time should avoid dependency on complex
code patterns to ease analysis, required to meet the requirements of com-
plex, critical applications.
In the following sections, we discuss three GNAT Ada run-times. We se-
lected these particular run-times for two reasons. First, they are all part of
open source projects so we can inspect the source code. Second, they illus-
trate the complete range of run-time system support of Ada
constructs.
5
This process is known as bootstrapping.
1. ORK+, a bare board Ravenscar run-time for mission-critical space sys-
tems based on the LEON2 processor.
2. MaRTE OS, a full Ada run-time and a companion RTOS that supports
advanced scheduling algorithms for bare board x86 targets.
3. RTEMS, a full Ada run-time, based on a C RT-POSIX RTOS that sup-
ports a wide variety of processors and advanced tools like NFS or HTTP
server, and a shell.
The distinction between bare boards and regular operating systems is
thin. Usually, a bare board provides the minimum resources to schedule
tasks. An RTOS adds some drivers and libraries but runs only one appli-
cation. A full-edged operating system like Linux allows us to run multiple
programs. An RTOS is usually divided up into a core scheduler and addi-
tional services, hence a bare board system and libraries. A complete oper-
ating system like Linux boots up as a bare board, and then launches one
particular service (called init) that allows it to spawn multiple processes.
9.2.2 ORK+, a bare board run-time
The Open Ravenscar Real-Time Kernel (ORK+)
6
is an open-source real-
time kernel. ORK is an Ada run-time of reduced size and complexity used
to develop high-integrity real-time applications in a subset of the Ada 2005
language compatible with the Ravenscar prole. ORK was originally de-
veloped under contract with the European Space Agency (ESA). It was
based on Ada 95 and targeted to the ERC32 processor. The current version,
ORK+, supports the Ada 2005 standard and the LEON2 processor.
The ERC32 and the LEON2 processors are two derivatives of the SPARC
family of processors chosen by the European Space Agency. ESA selected
this platform for its on-board mission systems. Because these systems oper-
ate outside of the Earths atmosphere, these processors have been strength-
ened to resist radiation. The SPARC architecture permits the addition of
mechanisms to recover from errors in memory induced by ionizing or elec-
tromagnetic perturbations.
ORK+ (see de la Puente et al., 2000) is integrated as the lower-level in-
terface of the GNAT run-time. The kernel and a modied run-time library
are packaged together with the compiler and other tools into a comprehen-
sive package. Hence, one can generate a full binary, ready to deploy, in one
compilation step. The binary can be executed on either a real platform or a
simulator.
6
See http://polaris.dit.upm.es/~ork/.
ORK+ implements only the elements required to support the Ravenscar
prole on a monoprocessor system. The Ravenscar prole greatly reduces
the set of available Ada constructs (see Section 8.6 for a detailed descrip-
tion). The benets are twofold. First, it allows for deterministic concurrency.
Second, it allows for an ecient implementation. The GNULL of ORK+ has
only 2,000 SLOC
7
fully written in Ada, plus some assembly code for low-level
code such as context switch procedures. This reduced kernel is amenable to
the thorough code analysis and inspection required to ensure quality of the
code. The small size also makes it easier to make the necessary timing mea-
surements of capacity required to perform the scheduling analyses discussed
in Chapter 7.
This small size is a result of limiting the kernel to a small set of operations.
Tasks are created only at elaboration time; they cannot terminate. Further-
more, there is no rendezvous allowed. All communications are performed
through protected objects, and they all follow the simple-to-implement Pri-
ority Ceiling Protocol (PCP) that we discussed in Chapter 7.
In addition, ORK+ provides drivers to support serial communications and
the SpaceWire spacecraft communication network (ESTEC, 2003) derived
from the Firewire protocol.
Lets look at a small example for the ORK+ run-time. The rst le,
named gnat.adc, congures the compiler to enforce all compile-time checks
required by the Ravenscar prole. This le contains the single line:
pragma Pr o f i l e ( Ravens car ) ;
Our program contains a single task that periodically outputs the string
ping!. To comply with the Ravenscar No Task Hierarchy restriction, all
tasks must be dened in a separate package they cannot be nested within
the main subprogram. Here is the specication and body of the package that
contains our periodic task.
package Task 1 i s
task Task 1 i s
end Task 1 ;
end Task 1 ;
wi th Ada . Real Ti me ; use type Ada . Real Ti me . Time ;
wi th System . IO ;
package body Task 1 i s
task body Task 1 i s
St ar t Ti me : Ada . Real Ti me . Time := Ada . Real Ti me . Cl ock ;
7
SLOC: source lines of code, i.e. only code statements, no blank lines or comments are counted.
begi n
l oop
System . IO . Put Li ne ( pi ng ! ) ;
St ar t Ti me := St ar t Ti me
+ Ada . Real Ti me . Mi l l i s e c o n d s ( 500) ;
del ay unt i l St ar t Ti me ;
end l oop ;
end Task 1 ;
end Task 1 ;
Here is our main subprogram:
wi th Task 1 ;
wi th Ada . Real Ti me ;
procedure Simple ORK i s
begi n
Suspend t he envi r onment t as k f o r e v e r
del ay unt i l Ada . Real Ti me . Ti me Last ;
end Simple ORK ;
The main subprogram Simple ORK delays itself forever. The task dened
in our package provides all of the functionality of this program.
GNAT Pro High Integrity
TM
is a commercially supported run-time for
GNAT, derived from the original ORK+ and supported by AdaCore. It is
being used by the Ocean & Land Colour Instrument (OLCI) project. This
project is currently being developed by Thales Alenia Space and GMV,
under contract of the European Space Agency, for the Sentinel-3 mission.
Sentinel 3 is a scientic observation mission that will routinely monitor ocean
and land surfaces.
Within the OLCI project, the Instrument Control Module (ICM) soft-
ware is a critical component responsible for interfacing with the Satellite
Management Unit the central satellite control computer. The ICM also
controls the rest of the instrument units. The Ada run-time for this critical
software must be qualied to space standard ECCS-E-40B level B on the
target processor. In the context of space systems, qualication requires the
testing of every possible execution path in the system. Such exhaustive path
testing of a run-time system is only possible in small run-times like ORK+
and GNAT Pro High Integrity
TM
.
9.2.3 MaRTE OS, a minimum POSIX run-time
MaRTE OS (Rivas and Harbour, 2001) is a Hard Real-Time Operating Sys-
tem for embedded applications that follows the Minimal Real-Time POSIX
subset.
8
Unlike ORK+ which supports only Ada, MaRTE OS provides sup-
port for mixed language applications written in Ada, C, C++, or Java. It also
provides libraries for POSIX mechanisms (threads, mutexes, condvars) and
a deterministic memory allocator. It fully supports the Ada 2005 Real-Time
Annex and includes a wide range of schedulers, including application-dened
scheduling and EDF.
MaRTE OS acts as a particular instance of GNULL. It is an x86 kernel
written in Ada with more than 16,000 SLOC. This code is also exported
as C functions to allow the construction of mixed language applications.
Compared to ORK+, MaRTE OS provides a wider range of drivers: se-
rial communication and various network protocols (Ethernet, CAN, RT-EP,
etc.). In addition, the PolyORB middleware has been adapted to run on
MaRTE OS and take advantage of its drivers.
MaRTE served as the test bench for the new scheduling features of Ada
2005 application-driven scheduling and EDF. Both of these schedulers
rely on a dedicated API to control the dispatching parameters associated
with each task.
The package Ada.Dispatching.EDF provides the API to control the dead-
line associated with each task.
wi th Ada . Real Ti me ;
wi th Ada . Ta s k I d e n t i f i c a t i o n ;
package Ada . Di s pat c hi ng . EDF i s
pragma Pr e e l a bo r a t e ;
subtype De adl i ne i s Ada . Real Ti me . Time ;
De f a ul t De a dl i ne : constant De adl i ne := Ada . Real Ti me . Ti me Last ;
procedure Se t De a dl i ne
(D : De adl i ne ;
T : Ada . Ta s k I d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Tas k I d :=
Ada . Ta s k I d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Cur r ent Tas k ) ;
procedure De l a y Unt i l And Se t De a dl i ne
( De l ay Unt i l Ti me : Ada . Real Ti me . Time ;
De a d l i n e Of f s e t : Ada . Real Ti me . Ti me Span ) ;
f uncti on Ge t De adl i ne
(T : Ada . Ta s k I d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Tas k I d :=
Ada . Ta s k I d e n t i f i c a t i o n . Cur r ent Tas k )
r etur n De adl i ne ;
end Ada . Di s pat c hi ng . EDF;
To select the EDF dispatching protocol, simply congure the run-time by
specifying the task dispatching policy with
8
See http://marte.unican.es/.
pragma Ta s k Di s pa t c hi ng Pol i c y ( EDF Ac r o s s Pr i o r i t i e s ) ;
Using EDF or any API-based dispatching policy requires a good under-
standing of the policy itself and its interaction with the run-time system.
While EDF was dened in 1973 by Liu and Layland (1973), the complexity
needed to implement it in a run-time took considerably longer. It was rst
integrated into Ada in 2005.
9.2.4 RTEMS, a complete POSIX run-time
RTEMS is the Real-Time Operating System for Multiprocessor Systems.
9
It is a full featured RTOS that supports a variety of open API and interface
standards including the Real-Time Executive Interface Denition (RTEID)
and the Open Real-Time Kernel Interface Denition (ORKID). RTEMS
includes support for POSIX threads and real-time extensions. It also includes
a TCP/IP protocol stack, several networking clients and servers (web server
or remote le systems), and a small shell to load/unload application code.
RTEMS supports multiple languages including C, C++, and Ada. RTEMS
is written in C. It targets around a dozen CPU platforms.
The POSIX interface of RTEMS serves as the basis of the GNULL part of
the Ada run-time. However, RTEMS is more complicated to congure than
the previous run-times. It relies on a series of C macros to congure part
of its internals. Here are some examples of these macros. The full source is
available on our web site.
/ c o n f i g u r a t i o n i nf o r ma t i o n /
#d e f i n e CONFIGURE TEST NEEDS CONSOLE DRIVER
#d e f i n e CONFIGURE TEST NEEDS CLOCK DRIVER
#d e f i n e CONFIGURE MICROSECONDS PER TICK
RTEMS MILLISECONDS TO MICROSECONDS( 1)
#d e f i n e CONFIGURE POSIX INIT THREAD TABLE
#d e f i n e CONFIGURE MAXIMUM SEMAPHORES 10
#d e f i n e CONFIGURE GNAT RTEMS
#d e f i n e CONFIGURE INIT
Some of these declarations dene dierent macros used to activate parts
of the RTEMS libraries. Others congure the number of RTEMS tasks and
semaphores used to support Ada tasks and protected objects. These macros
9
See http://www.rtems.org.
are preprocessed before compiling the code. Since Ada does not provide a
preprocessing mechanism, we must write some C code to write Ada code!
Writing some C code to tailor the RTOS for our Ada application is common
for RTOSs written in C.
RTEMS is being used in a large variety of projects written in both Ada
and C.
10
The Avenger Air Defense System is one project that uses Ada.
9.3 Validating scheduling of a system
In the previous chapters, we discussed the Ada constructs that support con-
currency and the extensions for real-time systems. In this chapter, we have
presented dierent run-time architectures that support these constructs.
Meeting deadlines is a requirement for real-time applications. In Chapter 7
we discussed real-time scheduling theory and dierent methods to determine
whether or not scheduling constraints can be met. In Chapter 8 we showed
how to write Ada code compliant with this theory.
In this section we complete the discussion by showing how we can ensure
that our application will meet all of its deadlines. We need to tie together
the impact of the run-time on scheduling (such as latency, jitter, and over-
head), information on the application code, and an appropriate analytical
framework.
9.3.1 Impact of the Ada run-time
The Ada standard goes well beyond the denition of the language. It also
denes how to tailor the language to meet specic needs through restrictions
and dedicated run-times.
Annex M.1 of the Ada Reference Manual, titled Specic Documentation
Requirements, denes the key elements that make up a run-time congura-
tion. In particular, this annex includes metrics associated with aspects of the
run-time such as interrupt handlers, package Task Attributes, procedure
Set Priority, setting the priority of a protected object, aborts, package
Real Time, delay statements, entry-less protected objects, execution time,
and timing events.
These metrics are measured on particular test benches. Obviously, they
depend on the architecture of the run-time, the processor being used, the
release of the compiler, and the compilation options used. For example,
Vardanega et al. (2005) have provided a full analysis of one version of the
10
See http://rtems.org/wiki/index.php/RTEMSApplications for more details.
ORK+ run-time to evaluate how the number of tasks or protected objects
impact each of the parameters dened in Annex M.1 and derive analytical
formulas to compute each metric based on these run-time elements.
Compiler vendors may provide direct support to compute these metrics,
but this is not a mandatory obligation: computing metrics is a costly process
that implies using a dedicated test bench. This is done only when this is
required for a specic contract or project.
9.3.2 From source code to analyzable systems
Of course the user-provided source code itself plays the major role in evalu-
ating scheduling. Concurrency entities animate user code and the code itself
takes time to execute. The complexity of the source code (measured by such
metrics as Big-O notation, cyclomatic complexity, etc.) provides some gen-
eral measure of eciency and understandability of our code. It is the role
of the software designer to clearly evaluate the algorithms and their impact
on the execution time of the system.
Another point is to correctly use Ada constructs so as to minimize uncer-
tainty. The careful use of patterns is important. By using regular patterns for
periodic and sporadic tasks and protected objects, the code becomes aligned
with the analytical framework we introduced for xed priority scheduling.
Reusing the same set of patterns allows an easy mapping from Ada code
to task sets. In Chapter 8 we presented a generic package that provides a
pattern for periodic tasks that we used to create the three tasks of our car
application.
It is important to be able to compute an upper bound on the time taken by
each function so we can calculate the capacity of each task. These capacities
are needed to evaluate the various feasibility tests described in Chapter 7. We
will discuss the determination of worst case execution times in Section 9.3.4.
9.3.3 Applying scheduling analysis
In Chapter 7 we discussed a number of techniques for determining whether
or not all the tasks in an application could meet their deadlines. As these
analyses were algorithmic in nature, it should not be a surprise that tools
exist to support the work we did manually in that chapter. Using a model
of our application, scheduling analysis tools allow us to run the various
feasibility tests.
In some cases the system might be too complex for such tools. For exam-
ple, most tools cannot directly handle interactions with the environment.
In such situations, it is important to explore other possible approaches to
scheduling analyses such as model checking or simulation. There are formal
methods with dierent schedulability analysis approaches based on Petri
Nets, timed automata, or process algebra. These formal languages lead to
the development of various simulators or model-checkers that can be used
for schedulability analysis. TIMES (Fersman et al., 2006), VESTA (Clarke
et al., 1995; Philippou and Sokolsky, 2007), and various Petri Net tools
(Berthomieu and Vernadat, 2006; Hamez et al., 2006; Wells, 2006) are ex-
amples of them. There is no one-size-ts-all analysis technique. A real-time
multimedia system requires simulation because of the uncertainty of the run-
time environment, whereas a critical system in a spacecraft will probably
require an analytical framework that provides a denitive yes/no answer.
MAST
11
(Harbour et al., 2001, University of Cantabria) and Cheddar
12
(Singho et al., 2004, University of Brest) are two open source scheduling
analysis tools. There are also some commercial tools such as Rapid-RMA
from Tri-Pacic (2003) and TimeWiz from TimeSys (2002). All of these tools
implement state-of-the-art analysis techniques to compute:
Processors/tasks: worst/best/average response time, number of context
switches/preemptions, missed deadlines, etc.
Shared resources: worst/best/average shared resource blocking time, pri-
ority inversion, and deadlock, etc.
Buers: maximum/average message waiting time and maximum/average
number of messages, etc.
Note that each tool implements only a subset of these analyses, so you
have to select the tool that matches your requirements.
In Chapter 7 we presented a number of ways to compute the schedulability
of a set of tasks. Before starting any computations, we must be careful to
ensure that the hypothesis of the underlying theory holds. Furthermore, the
computation itself is rather tedious, often requiring many steps. Software
engineering tools help us by (1) requiring us to determine the scheduling
parameters of each task in order to model it in the tool and (2) computing
the results.
Modeling is usually the rst step in building a complete application. Its
importance is often underestimated by software engineers. By carefully mod-
eling your system, you have a clearer view of what you intend to build. This
modeling process is supported at dierent levels by each tool.
11
See http://mast.unican.es/.
12
See http://beru.univ-brest.fr/~singhoff/cheddar/.
There are many modeling tools available today for designers of real-time
systems. Some of them provide Ada support. Modeling tools usually provide
a means to graphically design the architecture of a real-time system. These
tools may interact with other software engineering tools by model exchange
to generate source code of the system, to produce documentations, or to
perform various analyses (including schedulability analysis).
Modeling activities assume the use of a language that is able to model
real-time features: we should be able to design a model of a real-time sys-
tem composed of tasks, shared resources, and any other components of
a real-time system, with all parameters presented in Chapter 7. Exam-
ples of real-time system modeling languages are various UML proles such
as MARTE
13
(Frederic et al., 2006; OMG, 2007), the SAE AADL stan-
dard (SAE, 2009), HOOD-HRT (Burns and Wellings, 1994), EAST-ADL
(Debruyne et al., 2005), or PPOOA (Fernandez and Marmol, 2008). Some
of these languages are proprietary; others are international standards. Mod-
eling languages are the link between modeling tools, source code generators,
analysis tools, and many others. Use of standardized modeling languages
may increase tool interoperability.
Stood (Dissaux, 2004) from Ellidiss Technologies, Rational Rhapsody
(Chadburn, 2010) from IBM, and Artisan Studio from Atego (2009) are
modeling tools available for Ada practitioners. Stood supports both AADL,
HOOD-HRT, and UML. The others are mostly UML oriented.
Cheddar allows you to model your Ada tasks and some communication
aspects to evaluate its schedulability. Cheddar is composed of a graphical
editor and a library of processing modules written in Ada. The designer uses
the editor to model their real-time systems. Cheddar has its own modeling
language. A real-time system is modeled by a set of tasks, processors, shared
resources, buers, and address spaces. The modeling features of Cheddar
are limited to real-time scheduling. Designers need to use separate modeling
tools to perform the other aspects of the modeling activity. Cheddar has been
directly coupled with Stood using the AADL language to link the two. This
coupling allows real-time systems designers to easily apply schedulability
analysis of the models they prepared with Stood.
The Cheddar library implements many feasibility tests and classical real-
time scheduling algorithms (all the feasibility tests and algorithms presented
in Chapter 7). This library also oers a domain specic language together
with an interpreter and a compiler. This language is used for the design and
analysis of schedulers that are not implemented into the library.
13
Do not confuse MARTE (Modeling and Analysis of Real-Time and Embedded systems) with
the MaRTE OS discussed in Section 9.2.3.
In Section 7.2.1 we presented the example of a car application with three
periodic tasks. Given the period, capacity, and deadline of each of these
tasks, we performed a set of computations to conclude that the system is
actually schedulable. Lets use Cheddar to carry out these computations
for us. Figure 9.2 shows the window for entering the scheduling parameters
that we dened in Chapter 7. These parameters include priority, capacity,
deadline, period, start time, and jitter. Cheddar will use the parameters to
model each task.
Figure 9.2 Characterizing the parameters of a task with Cheddar
Figure 9.3 shows the results of running the feasibility tests detailed in
Chapter 7. The results of both the processor utilization factor and worst case
response time feasibility tests are displayed. The feasibility tests provide a
quick answer based on the recursive computation developed in Chapter 7.
The result is a yes or no and provides a theoretical upper-bound value for
the response time.
Figure 9.4 shows a simulation of the car application over the hyper-period
of the tasks. Only a portion of the hyper-period is visible in this gure.
As there is no interaction between tasks and no external source of events
Figure 9.3 Output of the Cheddar tool: feasibility tests
(for example the input of a driver) in this simple model, the simulation and
feasibility tests return the same results.
This simulation performs a step-by-step execution of the system as we
did manually to ll in Figure 7.6 on page 271. At each simulated instant,
the simulator computes the task to be dispatched based on the priority and
running state information of each task. This simulation allows us to see
accurately how the system behaves. It tells us how many context switches
occur and, if there are shared resources, when mutexes (locks) are seized.
This information provides a good estimation of the resource usage in the
system. We can feedback the overhead incurred by the context switches to
the processor utilization calculations and rene the priority ceiling value of
the shared resources.
While schedulability analysis tools may provide easy answers, one should
be careful when using them they all require accurate modeling to avoid
misinterpretations of the actual behavior of the application. Poor modeling
can lead to false, non-representative, results. Real-time scheduling theory
Figure 9.4 Output of the Cheddar tool: simulation
is not always easy to apply (Singho et al., 2009). Remember that each
feasibility test requires that the target real-time system fullls several as-
sumptions (e.g. critical instant, requests on deadlines, etc.). Thus, it may
be dicult to choose the relevant feasibility test. The current generation of
modeling languages and their software engineering tools provide very limited
support for the automatic application of real-time scheduling theory. Still,
schedulability analysis tools play an increasing role in software engineering
and are used for increasingly more complex designs.
9.3.4 Computation of the worst case execution time (WCET)
All of the techniques discussed in Chapter 7 for determining whether or not
a set of tasks will meet their deadlines required an estimate of the capacity
of each task. The capacity of a periodic task is the amount of execution
time required for one iteration. Although the actual amount of time a task
requires for a particular iteration can vary, we always use the worst case
execution time in our scheduling analysis to ensure that deadlines are met
even in the worst cases.
There are two basic approaches for determining WCET:
Measurement techniques typically involve inserting measurement code
into the tasks, running them, and recording the time.
Static Analysis techniques are based on models of the processor on
which we run our application. Essentially, we use the model to determine
the amount of time required to execute each machine language instruction.
We then sum the times for the instructions in our task.
Both approaches require tedious and error-prone work. Tools do exist to
help compute WCET (see Wilhelm et al., 2008, for details). RapiTime
TM
is a tool for analyzing the WCET of Ada programs. It provides a hybrid
approach combining measurement and static analysis.
Both measurement and static analysis techniques require us to determine
the longest path of execution in each task. Once we have determined that
path we can instrument our code or calculate the time from our processor
model. Obviously, these paths must exist, but it may not be easy to nd
them. Tools may help analyze source code or assembly code to nd worst
case scenarios. Such determinations require a good understanding of Ada
semantics. Some constructs such as pointers to subprograms, unbounded
loops, run-time checks, exceptions, etc. complicate the longest path deter-
mination. We may decide to forbid such constructs to simplify our work.
In physics, the term observer eect (or Heisenberg eect) refers to changes
that the act of observation will make on the thing being observed. It is
possible that adding measurement code to our tasks may aect the time it
takes the code to execute.
Static analysis requires a good understanding of how source code is ex-
ecuted. We need to know how the Ada code is translated into machine
instructions for both simple constructs (like assignment, decision, and loop
statements) and abstract ones (like tasks and protected objects). We usually
require cooperation from the Ada compiler to obtain such information.
Modern processors present many challenges to static analysis of WCET.
Patterson and Hennessy (2008) discuss the architecture of processors in
depth. The common use of complex memory architectures is a major prob-
lem in modeling a processor. By providing multiple levels of dierent speed
memories, cache memory provides faster average access to data and instruc-
tions. Dierent processors use dierent heuristics to locate items in the mem-
ory hierarchy. Since the location of data and instructions depends on past
execution, all these heuristics have one property in common the intro-
duction of non-determinism. A study by Bernat et al. (2008) showed that
cache memory heuristics introduce a large dispersion (around 20%) around
a mean value. For hard real-time systems where determinism is crucial, it is
usually advised to disable cache, or use it conservatively.
Furthermore, processors use dierent mechanisms to predict the next
instruction to execute. Again, this introduces variability in the execution
time. Hence, it is dicult to create a faithful model of the processor necessary
to statically compute how much time each statement actually consumes.
The determination of WCET is complex, requiring the mastering of many
algorithmic, architectural, and software engineering techniques. But it is a
price we must pay to make sure that our planes, rockets, and trains never
miss their deadlines. From its beginnings, Ada was designed to allow such
analysis in as easy a way as possible.
Summary
The role of the Ada compiler is to map constructs from simple arrays
to tasks and protected objects onto elementary code (machine language)
that is run on the target processor.
The Ada compiler relies on a run-time system library to support some
of the more complex constructs such as tasking. It maps such constructs
onto calls to this library.
A well designed run-time library maximizes portability to ease maintain-
ability. The design should separate target-independent code from operat-
ing system and target-specic code.
We introduced some elements of the GNAT run-time. The GNAT run-time
separates concerns to maximize portability on a wide variety of platforms.
GNARL provides the target-independent portions of the run-time system
while GNULL provides the target-specic support.
We introduced three dierent run-times supported by GNAT. The mech-
anism to support other operating systems is similar isolate in GNULL
the operating system specic code.
By limiting the use of certain Ada constructs, the size and complexity of
the run-time system can be reduced.
ORK+ is an Ada Ravenscar run-time for SPARC platforms. Thanks to
the restrictions imposed by the Ravenscar prole, its architecture has been
highly optimized to reduce resource consumption, but also to enhance
analysis.
MaRTE OS is an Ada run-time for x86 platforms. It supports the Mini-
mum POSIX Prole, and thus provides a range of scheduling algorithms,
including EDF and application-dened scheduling.
RTEMS is a C RTOS that supports a large variety of CPUs. RTEMS
is highly congurable. However, the need to write a C adaptation layer
to congure the required components makes the construction of an Ada
program more complex.
A knowledge of the architecture of the Ada run-time and the supporting
operating system is often necessary to perform scheduling analysis of the
system. The Ada Reference Manual denes the set of metrics to perform
such analysis. These metrics are usually not provided with the compiler,
but tool vendors may provide support to compute them for a particular
platform.
By using stringent coding rules, you may align your source code to the
formal task set required to perform scheduling analysis, or some other
modeling approach to check that your system meets all its real-time dead-
lines.
Dierent tools support a wide variety of techniques, from analytical frame-
works to partial analysis of all states through simulation, to complete anal-
ysis of all states through model checking. The selection of one method or
another depends on the complexity of your system, and the applicability
domain of each tool.
The determination of worst case execution time is an important step in the
analysis of the schedulability of a set of tasks. WCET may be determined
by measurement or static analysis.
Exercises
9.1 Locate the Mac OS denition for type Duration in package Standard
on page 338. This denition uses the attribute denition clause Small.
Look up this attribute denition clause in the Ada Reference Manual
and discuss its use in the denition of type Duration.
9.2 Explain why it is recommended to use xed-point types for Duration.
9.3 In some cases, like RTEMS, the Ada run-time uses the POSIX concur-
rency library instead of an available lower-level one. The latter may be
faster or use less resources. Explain why it is still reasonable for the
Ada run-time to use the less ecient POSIX library.
9.4 Download the GNAT compiler. The tool gnatls allows you to locate
the path to the run-time library using the -v ag. Locate these les,
and review the corresponding Ada code. Pay attention to the children
of System; they host the denition of protected objects, tasks, etc.
Try to isolate GNARL and GNULL elements.
Exercises 357
9.5 We claimed that the support of the Priority Ceiling Protocol is trivial
in the context of the Ravenscar prole for the ORK+ run-time. Explain
why.
9.6 What are the restrictions to support the Ada Real-Time Annex on a
GNU/Linux system? You may check the GNAT Reference Manual for
more details.
9.7 Download Cheddar or MAST and model the examples and exercises
from Chapter 7. What additional information would you need to per-
form more accurate analyses? Can you obtain any of that information
from the Ada Reference Manual?
9.8 Install ORK+ or MaRTE OS and implement an example that you
analyzed in the previous exercise.
9.9 Read the documentation for ORK+ or MaRTE OS. Evaluate the com-
plexity of implementing a xed priority scheduling with Rate Mono-
tonic priority assignment or an Earliest Deadline First-based system.
9.10 Explain why using pointers to function makes the WCET analysis more
complex. Explain why limiting run-time checks is often desirable for
WCET analysis.
References
Amdahl, G. M. 1967. Validity of the single processor approach to achieving large
scale computing capabilities. Pages 483485 of: AFIPS 67 (Spring): Proceed-
ings of the April 1820, 1967, Spring Joint Computer Conference. ACM.
Anderson, T. E., Bershad, B. N., Lazowska, E. D., and Levy, H. M. 1992. Scheduler
activations: eective kernel support for the user-level management of paral-
lelism. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems (TOCS), 10(1), 5379.
Atego. 2009. Artisan Studio Architect Enterprise Edition. White paper.
Audsley, A. N., Burns, A., Richardson, M., and Tindell, K. 1993. Applying new
scheduling theory to static priority pre-emptive scheduling. Software Engi-
neering Journal, 9(5), 284292.
Baker, T. P. 1991. Stack-based scheduling for realtime processes. Journal of Real
Time Systems, 3(1), 6799.
Baker, T. P., and Cirinei, M. 2006. A necessary and sometimes sucient condition
for the feasibility of sets of sporadic hard-deadline tasks. Pages 178190 of:
Proceedings of the 27th IEEE International Real-Time Systems Symposium.
IEEE.
Baker, T. P., and Oh, D.-I. 1997.Ada bindings for C interfaces: lessons learned from
the orist implementation. Pages 1322 of: Hardy, K., and Briggs, J. S. (eds),
Ada-Europe. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1251. Springer.
Barnes, J. 2003. High Integrity Software, The SPARK Approach to Safety and Se-
curity. Pearson Education Limited.
Barnes, J. 2006. Programming in Ada 2005. Pearson Education Limited.
Ben-Ari, M. 1982. Principles of Concurrent Programming. Prentice Hall Interna-
tional.
Ben-Ari, M. 2009. Ada for Software Engineers. 2nd edn. Springer-Verlag.
Bernat, G., Colin, A., Esteves, J., Garcia, G., Moreno, C., Holsti, N., Vardanega,
T., and Hernek, M. 2008. Considerations on the LEON cache eects on the
timing analysis of onboard applications. In: Proceedings of the Data Systems
In Aerospace Conference (DASIA08). ESA Publications.
Berthomieu, B., and Vernadat, F. 2006. Time petri nets analysis with TINA. In
Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on The Quantitative Evaluation
of Systems (QEST 2006), IEEE Computer Society. IEEE.
Blaha, M. R., and Rumbaugh, J. R. 2004. Object-Oriented Modeling and Design
with UML. 2nd edn. Pearson Prentice Hall.
360 References
Blair, M., Obenski, S., and Bridickas, P. 1992. Patriot Missile Defense: Soft-
ware Problem Led to System Failure at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. Tech. report
GAO/IMTEC-92-26. United States General Accounting Oce.
Briand, L. P., and Roy, D. M. 1999.Meeting Deadlines in Hard Real-Time Systems,
The Rate Monotonic Approach. IEEE Computer Society.
Burns, A., and Wellings, A. J. 1994. HRT-HOOD: a design method for hard real-
time systems. Real Time Systems Journal, 6(1), 73114.
Burns, A., and Wellings, A. 1998.Concurrency in Ada.Cambridge University Press.
Burns, A., and Wellings, A. 2007. Concurrent and Real-Time Programming in Ada.
Cambridge University Press.
Burns, A., and Wellings, A. 2009. Real-time Systems and Programming Languages.
4th ed. Addison Wesley.
Buttazzo, G. 2003. Rate monotonic vs. EDF: Judgment day. In Proceedings of 3rd
ACM International Conference on Embedded Software. ACM
Carey, R. W., Van Arsdall, P. J., and Woodru, J. P. 2003. The national ignition
facility: early operational experience with a large Ada control system. Ada
Letters, 23(1), 11.
Carlow, G. D. 1984. Architecture of the Space Shuttle Primary Avionics Software
System. Communications of the ACM, 27(9).
Chadburn, F. 2010. Exploiting UML2 code generation with IBM Rational Rhapsody
in Ada. White paper.
Clarke, D., Lee, I., and Xie, H. 1995. VERSA: a tool for the specication and anal-
ysis of resource-bound real-time systems. Journal of Computer and Software
Engineering, 3(2).
Cohen, N. 1996. Ada as a Second Language. McGraw-Hill Series in Computer Sci-
ence. McGraw-Hill.
Cottet, F., Delacroix, J., Kaiser, C., and Mammeri, Z. 2002. Scheduling in Real
Time Systems. John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
Coulouris, G., Dollimore, J., and Kindberg, T. 2005. Distributed Systems: Concepts
and Design. 4th edn. Addison-Wesley.
Dale, N., and McCormick, J. 2007. Ada Plus Data Structures: An Object-Oriented
Approach. 2nd edn. Jones and Bartlett.
Dale, N., Weems, C., and McCormick, J. 2000. Programming and Problem Solving
with Ada 95. 2nd edn. Jones and Bartlett.
de la Puente, J. A., Ruiz, J. F., and Zamorano, J. 2000. An open Ravenscar real-
time kernel for GNAT. In: Proceedings of the Reliable Software Technologies.
Ada-Europe 2000. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1845. Springer Verlag.
Debruyne, V., Simonot-Lion, F., and Trinquet, Y. 2005. EAST-ADL an architec-
ture description language. Pages 181195 of: Book on Architecture Descrip-
tion Languages, IFIP International Federation for Information Processing.
Springer Verlag.
DeRemer, F., and Kron, H. 1975. Programming-in-the-large versus programming-
in-the-small. Pages 114121 of: Proceedings of the International Conference on
Reliable Software. ACM.
Dijkstra, E. 1968. Cooperating sequential processes. Pages 43112 of: Genuys, F.
(ed), Programming Languages. Academic Press. Reprinted from the original
Technological University, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, September 1965.
Dissaux, P. 2004. Using the AADL for mission critical software development. 2nd
European Congress ERTS, EMBEDDED REAL TIME SOFTWARE.
References 361
Dobing, B. 1999. The Ravenscar prole: experience report. ACM SIGAda Ada Let-
ters, 19(2), 2832.
Douglass, B. P. 1998. Real-Time UML: Developing Ecient Objects for Embedded
Systems. 2nd edn. Addison Wesley Longman.
Du, R., Hugues, J., Pautet, L., Quinot, T., and Tardieu, S. 2010.PolyORB 2.7.0w
Users Guide. http://www.adacore.com/wp-content/files/auto_update/
polyorb-docs/polyor%b_ug.html/.
Eisenstadt, M. 1997. My hairiest bug war stories. Communications of the ACM,
40(4), 3037.
English, J. 2001. Ada 95: The Craft of Object-Oriented Programming. http://www.
it.bton.ac.uk/staff/je/adacraft/.
ESTEC, ESA. 2003. ECSS-E-50-12A SpaceWire Links, Nodes, Routers and Net-
works. Tech. rept. European Space Agency.
Fernandez, J. L., and Marmol, G. 2008. An eective collaboration of a modeling
tool and a simulation and evaluation framework.In: 18th Annual International
Symposium, INCOSE 2008. Systems Engineering for the Planet. INCOSE.
Fersman, E., Mokrushin, L., Pettersson, P., and Yi, W. 2006.Schedulability analysis
of xed-priority systems using timed automata.Theoretical Computer Science,
354(2), 301317.
Flynn, M. 1974. Some computer organizations and their eectiveness. IEEE Trans-
actions on Computers, C-21, 948960.
Frederic, T., Gerard, S., and Delatour, J. 2006. Towards an UML 2.0 prole for
real-time execution platform modeling. In: Proceedings of the 18th Euromicro
Conference on Real-Time Systems (ECRTS 06), Work in progress session.
IEEE.
Gallmeister, B. O. 1995. POSIX 4: Programming for the Real World. OReilly and
Associates.
George, L., Rivierre, N., and Spuri, M. 1996.Preemptive and Non-Preemptive Real-
time Uni-processor Scheduling. Tech. rept. INRIA.
Giering, III, E. W., and Baker, T. P. 1994.The GNU Ada runtime library (GNARL).
Pages 97107 of: WADAS 94: Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Washington
Ada Symposium & Summer ACM SIGAda Meeting on Ada. ACM.
GNAT. 2010. GNAT Reference Manual. AdaCore.
Hamez, A., Hillah, L., Kordon, F., Linard, A., Paviot-Adet, E., Renault, X., and
Thierry-Mieg, Y. 2006.New features in CPN-AMI 3: focusing on the analysis of
complex distributed systems. Pages 273275 of: 6th International Conference
on Application of Concurrency to System Design (ACSD06). IEEE Computer
Society.
Harbour, M. G., Moyano, J. M. D., Rivas, M. A., and Fern andez, J. G. 1997.
Implementing robot controllers under real-time POSIX and Ada. Pages 5764
of: IRTAW 97: Proceedings of the Eighth International Workshop on Real-
Time Ada. ACM.
Harbour, M. G., Garcia, J. J. G., Gutierrez, J. C. P., and Moyano, J. M. D. 2001.
MAST: Modeling and Analysis Suite for Real Time Applications. Pages 125
134 of: Proceedings of the 13th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems
(ECRTS 2001). IEEE Computer Society.
Heitmeyer, C., and Mandrioli, D. 1996. Formal Methods for Real Time Computing.
John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
362 References
Hugues, J., Pautet, L., and Kordon, F. 2003. Contributions to middleware archi-
tectures to prototype distribution infrastructures. Pages 124131 of: Proceed-
ings of the 14th IEEE International Workshop on Rapid System Prototyping
(RSP03). IEEE.
Joseph, M., and Pandya, P. 1986. Finding response time in a real-time system.
Computer Journal, 29(5), 390395.
Klein, M. H., Ralya, T., Pollak, B., Obenza, R., and Harbour, M. G. 1994. A
Practitioners Handbook for Real Time Analysis.Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kleinrock, L. 1975a. Queueing Systems: Computer Application. Wiley-interscience.
Kleinrock, L. 1975b. Queueing Systems: Theory. Wiley-interscience.
Knoll, K. T. 1993. Risk Management In Fly-By-Wire Systems. NASA STI/Recon.
NASA.
Koren, G., and Shasha, D. 1992. D-Over, an optimal on-line scheduling algorithm
for overloaded real time systems. Tech. rept. INRIA technical report number
RT-0138.
Laplante, Phillip. 2004. Real-Time Systems Design and Analysis. Piscataway, New
Jersey: IEEE Press.
Liu, C. L., and Layland, J. W. 1973. Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming
in a hard real-time environment. Journal of the Association for Computing
Machinery, 20(1), 4661.
Lyu, M. R. 1995. Handbook of Software Reliability Engineering. McGraw-Hill.
Mauro, J., and Dougall, R. 2001. Solaris Internals: Core Kernel Architecture. Pren-
tice Hall.
McCormick, J. 1997. Forum letter. Communications of the ACM, 40(8), 30.
McHale, Ciaran. 2007. CORBA Explained Simply.
Nyberg, K. 2007. Multi-core + multi-tasking = multi-opportunity. Ada Letters,
27(3), 7981.
OAR. 2004. RTEMS Ada Users Guide. OAR Corporation.
OMG. 2001. Ada Language to IDL Mapping v1.2. OMG.
OMG. 2004. The Common Object Request Broker: Architecture and Specication,
Revision 3.0.3. OMG. OMG Technical Document formal/2004-03-12.
OMG. 2007.A UML Prole for MARTE, Beta 1.OMG Document Number: ptc/07-
08-04.
Panwalkar, S. S., and Iskander, W. 1976. A survey of scheduling rules. Operations
Research, 25(1), 4561.
Patterson, D. A., and Hennessy, J. L. 2008. Computer Organization & Design: The
Hardware/Software Interface. 4th edn. Morgan Kaufmann.
Pautet, L., and Tardieu, S. 2000. GLADE: a framework for building large object-
oriented real-time distributed systems. Page 244 of: ISORC 00: Proceedings
of the Third IEEE International Symposium on Object-Oriented Real-Time
Distributed Computing. IEEE Computer Society.
Pautet, L., Quinot, T., and Tardieu, S. 1999. CORBA & DSA: divorce or mar-
riage? In: Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Reliable Software
Conference. Springer Verlag.
Pease, M., Shostak, R., and Lamport, L. 1980. Reaching agreement in the presence
of faults. Journal of the ACM, 27(2), 228234.
Philippou, T. A., and Sokolsky, O. 2007. Process-algebraic analysis of timing and
schedulability properties. In: Handbook of Real-Time and Embedded Systems.
Chapman and Hall/CRC.
References 363
Riehle, R. 2003.Ada Distilled: An Introduction to Ada Programming for Experienced
Computer Programmers. Tech. rept. AdaWorks Software Engineering.
Rivas, M. A., and Harbour, M. G. 2001. MaRTE OS: an Ada kernel for real-time
embedded applications.In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Re-
liable Software Technologies, Ada-Europe-2001.
SAE. 2009. Architecture Analysis and Design Language (AADL) AS 5506. Tech.
rept. The Engineering Society For Advancing Mobility Land Sea Air and
Space, Aerospace Information Report, Version 2.0.
Schonberg, E., and Banner, B. 1994.The GNAT Project: A GNU-Ada 9X Compiler.
Pages 4857 of: TRI-Ada. ACM.
Sha, L., Rajkumar, R., and Lehoczky, J. P. 1990. Priority inheritance protocols:
an approach to real-time synchronization. IEEE Transactions on Computers,
39(9), 11751185.
Shen, S., and Baker, T. P. 1999.A Linux kernel module implementation of restricted
Ada tasking. ACM SIGAda Ada Letters, 19(2), 96103.
Singho, F., Legrand, J., Nana, L., and Marce, L. 2004. Cheddar: a exible real
time scheduling framework. Pages 18 of: SIGAda 04: Proceedings of the 2004
Annual ACM SIGAda International Conference on Ada. ACM.
Singho, F., Plantec, A., Dissaux, P., and Legrand, J. 2009.Investigating the usabil-
ity of real-time scheduling theory with the Cheddar project. Journal of Real
Time Systems, 43(3), 259295.
Sprunt, B., Sha, L., and Lehoczky, J.P. 1989. Aperiodic task scheduling for hard-
real-time systems. Journal of Real Time Systems, 1, 2760.
Spuri, M. 1996. Analysis of Deadline Scheduled Real-Time Systems. Tech. rept. RR-
2772. INRIA.
Stankovic, John. 1988.Misconceptions about real-time computing.IEEE Computer,
21(10): 1019.
Taft, S. T., Du, R. A., Brukardt, R. L., Ploedereder, E., and Leroy, P. 2006. Ada
2005 Reference Manual. Language and Standard Libraries. International Stan-
dard ISO/IEC 8652/1995(E) with Technical Corrigendum 1 and Amendment
1. LNCS Springer Verlag, number XXII, volume 4348.
TimeSys. 2002. Using TimeWiz to Understand System Timing before you Build or
Buy. Tech. rept. TimeSys Corporation.
Tindell, K. W., and Clark, J. 1994. Holistic schedulability analysis for distributed
hard real-time systems.Microprocessing and Microprogramming, 40(2-3), 117
134.
Tri-Pacic. 2003. Rapid-RMA: The Art of Modeling Real-Time Systems. Tech. rept.
Tri-Pacic Software, Inc.
Turley, J. 1999. Embedded processors by the numbers. Embedded Systems Program-
ming, 12(5), 99.
Vahalia, U. 1996. UNIX Internals: the New Frontiers. Prentice Hall.
Vardanega, T., Zamorano, J., and de la Puente, J. A. 2005. On the dynamic se-
mantics and the timing behavior of Ravenscar kernels.Real-Time Systems, 29,
5989.
Vinoski, S. 2004. An overview of middleware. Pages 3551 of: Proceedings of the 9th
International Conference on Reliable Software Techologies Ada-Europe 2004
(RST04). Springer Verlag.
Wells, Lisa. 2006. Performance analysis using CPN tools. Page 59 of: Valuetools 06:
Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Performance Evaluation
Methodolgies and Tools. ACM.
364 References
Wikibooks. 2010a. Ada Programming. http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Ada_
Programming.
Wikibooks. 2010b.Ada Quality and Style Guide.http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/
Ada_Style_Guide.
Wilhelm, R., Engblom, J., Ermedahl, A., Holsti, N., Thesing, S., Whalley, D.,
Bernat, G., Ferdinand, C., Heckmann, R., Mitra, T., Mueller, F., Puaut, I.,
Puschner, P., Staschulat, J., and Stenstrm, P. 2008. The worst-case execution
time problem overview of methods and survey of tools. ACM Transactions
on Embedded Computing Systems, 7(3), 3653.
Wind River. 1997. VxWorks: Programmers Guide. Wind River Systems.
Index
abstract data type, 69
accept statement, 166
activation time, see release time
actuator, 82
Ada Reference Manual, 23
aggregate
array, 188
record, 55
aliased object, 61
allocator, 58, 109
Amdahls Law, 3
analog to digital converter, 15,
88
aperiodic task, 256
ARM, see Ada Reference Manual
array, 49
constrained, 52
unconstrained, 52
assembly language, 98
atomic action, 10
attribute, 45, 53, 76, 86, 121
rst, 45, 53
image, 45, 46
last, 45, 53
length, 53
partition id, 220
pos, 86
pred, 45
range, 53
size, 97
succ, 45
val, 86
version, 219
attribute denition clause, 86
address, 87
component size, 97
size, 86, 87, 97
small, 356
barrier, 135, 147
Ben-Ari, 5, 142
block, 62
broadcast, 148
capacity, 256, 300, 314,
353
case statement, 27
casting, see type conversion
ceiling priority, 307
Cheddar, 349
child package, 75
class, 76
client-server, 166
communication, 7, 126
concatenation, 52
concurrent programming, 5
condition variables, 324
context, 253
context clause, 24
context switch, 15, 113, 254
conversion, see type conversion
CORBA, 221
CDR, 239
GIOP, 239
IDL, 221, 223
IIOP, 239
IOR, 234, 241
naming service, 237
ORB, 222
POA, 243
servant, 243
critical instant, 261, 305, 313
critical section, 8, 132, 140
critical task, 254
cumulative drift, 300
cyclic executive, 258
deadline, 12, 257
deadline monotonic, 258
deadlines on requests, 261
deadlock, 9
declarative part, 24
declarative region, 33
366 Index
delay statement
absolute delay, 178
relative delay, 177
dependent task, 255
dereference, 59
device driver, 83, 88
digital to analog converter, 15
Dijkstra, 5
discriminant
record, 56
task, 109
dispatching policy, 309
distributed object, 198
distributed program, 11
distributed shared memory, 198
distributed system, 195
distributed systems annex, 202
distribution mechanisms, 197
distribution model, 197
DSA, see distributed systems annex
dynamic priority scheduler, 258, 272
earliest deadline rst, 272, 345
EDF, see earliest deadline rst
elaboration, 63, 110, 111, 219
embedded, 14
entry call, 135, 166
conditional, 181
timed, 180
entry queue, 141, 307
environment task, 113
epoch, 296
exception, 62, 63, 117
handler, 64
exhaustive simulations, 252
fairness, 11
feasibility tests, 252
FIFO queuing, 307
rm real-time, 13
xed priority scheduler, 258
xed priority scheduling, 260, 311
Florist, 318
for loop, 29, 45
fork, 316
generalization, 77
generic package, 39, 73
guard, 174
hard real-time, 13
harmonic set, 264
holistic analysis, 285
homograph, 33
hyper-period, 263
ICPP, see immediate ceiling priority protocol
IDL, 221, 223
if statement, 26
immediate ceiling priority protocol, 281, 306,
311
independent task, 254
inheritance, see generalization
interface, 223
interrupt, 155
interrupt handler, 156
jitter, 283
library unit, 65
livelock, 21
liveness, 11
local drift, 300
loop parameter, 29
loop statement, 28
for scheme, 29, 45
while scheme, 29
machine scalar, 92
marshalling, 240
MaRTE, 344
MAST, 349
memory mapped I/O, 86
message passing, 197
method, 76
middleware, 197
MIMD, 4
MISD, 4
model number, 38
module, 66, 223
monotonic time, 295
mutexes, 324
mutual exclusion, 7, 126
name precedence, 33
naming service, 237
natural, 49
non-preemptive scheduler, 259
null pointer, 58
null range, 30
object, 76
object adapter, 243
o-line scheduler, 258
OMG, 221
on-line scheduler, 258
optimal scheduler, 260
ORK+, 342
package, 66
child, 75
data abstraction, 69
denition, 66
generic, 39, 73
service, 68
parallel program, 2
parameter
association, 25
mode, 32
partition, 202
Patriot missile, 41
PCP, see priority ceiling protocol
PCS, 213
period, 256, 300
Index 367
periodic task, 255
parameters, 256
PIP, see priority inheritance protocol
pointer, see type, access
polling, 94, 155, 179
polling server, 277
polymorphism, 77
port mapped I/O, 88
positive, 49
POSIX, 314
API, 318
post-protocol, 8, 132, 144, 278
pragma, 39
all calls remote, 219
asynchronous, 215
atomic, 153
atomic components, 155
attach handler, 160
inline, 39
interrupt handler, 161
interrupt priority, 160, 302
locking policy, 306
partition elaboration policy, 305
priority, 302
prole, 312
pure, 203
queuing policy, 307
remote call interface, 203
remote types, 208
shared passive, 210
storage size, 111
volatile, 88, 153
volatile components, 155
warnings, 233
pre-protocol, 8, 132, 144, 278
precedence constraint, 255
preemption, 253, 308
preemptive scheduler, 259
priority, 258
active, 300
base, 300
ceiling, 307
priority ceiling protocol, 280, 324,
343
priority inheritance protocol, 280
priority inversion, 278
priority queuing, 307
priority specic dispatching, 311
private operations, 149
process, 107, 119, 318, see task
processor utilization factor, 264
producer-consumer, 7, 135
prole, 312
protected entry, 135
protected function, 132
protected object, 130
locks, 132
protected procedure, 132
quality of service, 14, 239
RACW, see remote access-to-class-wide
RAS, see remote access-to-subprogram
rate monotonic, 258, 260
Ravenscar, 312
real-time, 12
release time, 255, 298
remote access-to-class-wide, 204
remote access-to-subprogram, 203
remote procedure call, 198
rendezvous, 166
representation clause
enumeration, 85
record, 91
requeue, 149, 161, 166
reserved word, 24
RPC, see remote procedure call
RTEMS, 346
run-time conguration, 333
run-time system, 119, 334
scenario, 9, 139
scheduler, 257
scope, 33
select statement, 171
accept alternative, 172, 308
delay alternative, 176
else part, 179
guarded alternative, 174
terminate alternative, 175
semaphore, 144
sensor, 82
servant, 222, 243
shadow register, 90
SIMD, 3
simulations, exhaustive, 252
SISD, 3
skeleton, 222
soft real-time, 13
sporadic task, 256
starvation, 11
state machine, 181
active object, 188
passive object, 183
state transition table, 185
static real-time system, 260
storage pool, 61
storage unit, 92
string, 54
stub, 222
subtype, 48
natural, 49
positive, 49
synchronization, 6, 134, 167
synchronous periodic task, 261
task, 107
aborting, 120
activation, 111
368 Index
task (cont.)
attributes, 121
completion, 113
context, 253
creation, 110
dening, 107
exceptions, 117
execution, 112
hierarchy
master-dependent, 114
parent-child, 114
identication, 120
implementation, 119
life cycle, 109
states, 109, 112, 114, 253
termination, 113
task control block, 254
task dispatching times, 309
task dispatching policy, 309
thread, 119, 315
transducer, 82
type
access, 57, 186
general, 61
pool specic, 61
array, 49
constrained, 52
unconstrained, 52
atomic, 36
composite, 36
denition of, 35
derived, 57, 76
discrete, 43
enumeration, 43
extension, 80
integer
modular, 47
signed, 46
private, 72, 74
protected, 130
real, 37
decimal, 42
xed point, 39
oating point, 38
record, 55
scalar, 36
string, 54
tagged, 80
type conversion, 25, 47
unchecked, 96
typedef, 224
urgent task, 254
use clause, 25, 65, 67
use type clause, 67
valid schedule, 260
WCET, 22, 256, 300, 353
while loop, 29
with clause, 24, 65
worst case response time feasibility test, 265

0521197163

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

0521197163

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

0521197163

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This page intentionally left blank

BUILDING PARALLEL, EMBEDDED, AND REAL-TIME

.35 dc22 2010053214

procedure Read ( Channel : i n Channel Number ;

task Fl ash Red LED ; De c l ar e a s i n g l e t o n t as k

task type Fl ash LED ( Col or : Col or Type ; A t as k t ype

Thi s v e r s i o n wor ks most of t he t i me

Someti mes at c l o s i n g ti me , i t i n d i c a t e s t hat

Someti mes an e nt r anc e moni t or t as k t e r mi na t e s wi t h

package I nt e ge r Que ue i s new

protected type Bounded Buf f er ( Max Si ze : Po s i t i v e ) i s

protected Random Durati on i s

138 Communication and synchronization based on shared objects

Use of t he semaphore t o pr o t e c t t he s har ed v a r i a b l e Popul at i on

procedure Put ( I tem : i n St r i n g ) i s

protected ADC I nt er r upt i s

entry Wai t For Compl et i on ( Channel : i n Channel Number ;

procedure Read ( Channel : i n Channel Number ;

protected Random Durati on i s

wi th Types ; use Types ;

wi th Types ; use Types ;

wi th Types ; use Types ;

6.3 DSA, the Distributed Systems Annex 209

wi th Types ; use Types ;

Here is the body of package RACWStudent whose specication was given

You might also like