Predictive Reliability and Fault Management in Exascale Systems: State of the Art and Perspectives

© ACM, 2020. This is the author's version of the work. It is posted here by permission of ACM for your personal use. Not for redistribution. The definitive version was published in ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 53, No. 5, Article 95. Publication date: September 2020. https://doi.org/10.1145/3403956[EN] Performance and power constraints come together with Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor technology scaling in future Exascale systems. Technology scaling makes each individual transistor more prone to faults and, due to the exponential increase in the number of devices per chip, to higher system fault rates. Consequently, High-performance Computing (HPC) systems need to integrate prediction, detection, and recovery mechanisms to cope with faults efficiently. This article reviews fault detection, fault prediction, and recovery techniques in HPC systems, from electronics to system level. We analyze their strengths and limitations. Finally, we identify the promising paths to meet the reliability levels of Exascale systems.This work has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 (H2020) research and innovation program under the FET-HPC Grant Agreement No. 801137 (RECIPE). Jaume Abella was also partially supported by the Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness of Spain under Contract No. TIN2015-65316-P and under Ramon y Cajal Postdoctoral Fellowship No. RYC-2013-14717, as well as by the HiPEAC Network of Excellence. Ramon Canal is partially supported by the Generalitat de Catalunya under Contract No. 2017SGR0962.Canal, R.; Hernández Luz, C.; Tornero-Gavilá, R.; Cilardo, A.; Massari, G.; Reghenzani, F.; Fornaciari, W.... (2020). Predictive Reliability and Fault Management in Exascale Systems: State of the Art and Perspectives. ACM Computing Surveys. 53(5):1-32. https://doi.org/10.1145/3403956S132535Abella, J., Hernandez, C., Quinones, E., Cazorla, F. J., Conmy, P. R., Azkarate-askasua, M., … Vardanega, T. (2015). WCET analysis methods: Pitfalls and challenges on their trustworthiness. 10th IEEE International Symposium on Industrial Embedded Systems (SIES). doi:10.1109/sies.2015.7185039E. Agullo L. Giraud A. Guermouche J. Roman and M. Zounon. 2013. Towards resilient parallel linear Krylov solvers: Recover-restart strategies. INRIA Research Report RR-8324. E. Agullo L. Giraud A. Guermouche J. Roman and M. Zounon. 2013. Towards resilient parallel linear Krylov solvers: Recover-restart strategies. INRIA Research Report RR-8324.Agullo, E., Giraud, L., Salas, P., & Zounon, M. (2016). Interpolation-Restart Strategies for Resilient Eigensolvers. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 38(5), C560-C583. doi:10.1137/15m1042115Al-Qawasmeh, A. M., Pasricha, S., Maciejewski, A. A., & Siegel, H. J. (2015). Power and Thermal-Aware Workload Allocation in Heterogeneous Data Centers. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 64(2), 477-491. doi:10.1109/tc.2013.116ARM. 2017. ARM Reliability Availability and Serviceability (RAS) Specification—ARMv8 for the ARMv8-A Architecture Profile. White paper. Retrieved from https://developer.arm.com/docs/ddi0587/latest. ARM. 2017. ARM Reliability Availability and Serviceability (RAS) Specification—ARMv8 for the ARMv8-A Architecture Profile. White paper. Retrieved from https://developer.arm.com/docs/ddi0587/latest.Avizienis, A., Laprie, J.-C., Randell, B., & Landwehr, C. (2004). Basic concepts and taxonomy of dependable and secure computing. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 1(1), 11-33. doi:10.1109/tdsc.2004.2Bautista-Gomez, L., Zyulkyarov, F., Unsal, O., & McIntosh-Smith, S. (2016). Unprotected Computing: A Large-Scale Study of DRAM Raw Error Rate on a Supercomputer. SC16: International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis. doi:10.1109/sc.2016.54Berrocal, E., Bautista-Gomez, L., Di, S., Lan, Z., & Cappello, F. (2017). Toward General Software Level Silent Data Corruption Detection for Parallel Applications. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 28(12), 3642-3655. doi:10.1109/tpds.2017.2735971M.-A. Breuer and A. D. Friedman. 1976. Diagnosis 8 Reliable Design of Digital Systems. Springer. M.-A. Breuer and A. D. Friedman. 1976. Diagnosis 8 Reliable Design of Digital Systems. Springer.P. Bridges K. Ferreira M. Heroux and M. Hoemmen. 2012. Fault-tolerant linear solvers via selective reliability. ArXiv e-prints June 2012. arXiv:1206.1390 [math.NA]. P. Bridges K. Ferreira M. Heroux and M. Hoemmen. 2012. Fault-tolerant linear solvers via selective reliability. ArXiv e-prints June 2012. arXiv:1206.1390 [math.NA].F. Cappello A. Geist W. Gropp S. Kale B. Kramer and M. Snir. 2014. Toward exascale resilience: 2014 update. Supercomput. Front. Innovat. 1 1 (2014). http://superfri.org/superfri/article/view/14. F. Cappello A. Geist W. Gropp S. Kale B. Kramer and M. Snir. 2014. Toward exascale resilience: 2014 update. Supercomput. Front. Innovat. 1 1 (2014). http://superfri.org/superfri/article/view/14.F. J. Cazorla L. Kosmidis E. Mezzetti C. Hernandez J. Abella and T. Vardanega. 2019. Probabilistic worst-case timing analysis: Taxonomy and comprehensive survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 52 1 Article 14 (Feb. 2019) 35 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3301283 F. J. Cazorla L. Kosmidis E. Mezzetti C. Hernandez J. Abella and T. Vardanega. 2019. Probabilistic worst-case timing analysis: Taxonomy and comprehensive survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 52 1 Article 14 (Feb. 2019) 35 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3301283Chan, C. S., Pan, B., Gross, K., Vaidyanathan, K., & Rosing, T. Š. (2014). Correcting vibration-induced performance degradation in enterprise servers. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 41(3), 83-88. doi:10.1145/2567529.2567555Chantem, T., Hu, X. S., & Dick, R. P. (2011). Temperature-Aware Scheduling and Assignment for Hard Real-Time Applications on MPSoCs. IEEE Transactions on Very Large Scale Integration (VLSI) Systems, 19(10), 1884-1897. doi:10.1109/tvlsi.2010.2058873Chen, M. Y., Kiciman, E., Fratkin, E., Fox, A., & Brewer, E. (s. f.). Pinpoint: problem determination in large, dynamic Internet services. Proceedings International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks. doi:10.1109/dsn.2002.1029005Chen, Z. (2011). Algorithm-based recovery for iterative methods without checkpointing. Proceedings of the 20th international symposium on High performance distributed computing - HPDC ’11. doi:10.1145/1996130.1996142Chen, Z. (2013). Online-ABFT. Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGPLAN symposium on Principles and practice of parallel programming - PPoPP ’13. doi:10.1145/2442516.2442533Coskun, A. K., Rosing, T. S., Mihic, K., De Micheli, G., & Leblebici, Y. (2006). Analysis and Optimization of MPSoC Reliability. Journal of Low Power Electronics, 2(1), 56-69. doi:10.1166/jolpe.2006.007G. Da Costa A. Oleksiak W. Piatek J. Salom and L. Sisó. 2015. Minimization of costs and energy consumption in a data center by a workload-based capacity management. In Energy Efficient Data Centers S. Klingert M. Chinnici and M. Rey Porto (Eds.). Springer International Publishing Cham 102--119. G. Da Costa A. Oleksiak W. Piatek J. Salom and L. Sisó. 2015. Minimization of costs and energy consumption in a data center by a workload-based capacity management. In Energy Efficient Data Centers S. Klingert M. Chinnici and M. Rey Porto (Eds.). Springer International Publishing Cham 102--119.Cupertino, L., Da Costa, G., Oleksiak, A., Pia¸tek, W., Pierson, J.-M., Salom, J., … Zilio, T. (2015). Energy-efficient, thermal-aware modeling and simulation of data centers: The CoolEmAll approach and evaluation results. Ad Hoc Networks, 25, 535-553. doi:10.1016/j.adhoc.2014.11.002Dally, W. J. (1991). Express cubes: improving the performance of k-ary n-cube interconnection networks. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 40(9), 1016-1023. doi:10.1109/12.83652Dauwe, D., Pasricha, S., Maciejewski, A. A., & Siegel, H. J. (2018). Resilience-Aware Resource Management for Exascale Computing Systems. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Computing, 3(4), 332-345. doi:10.1109/tsusc.2018.2797890R. I. Davis and A. Burns. 2011. A survey of hard real-time scheduling for multiprocessor systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 43 4 Article 35 (Oct. 2011) 44 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1978802.1978814 R. I. Davis and A. Burns. 2011. A survey of hard real-time scheduling for multiprocessor systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 43 4 Article 35 (Oct. 2011) 44 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1978802.1978814Di, S., & Cappello, F. (2016). Adaptive Impact-Driven Detection of Silent Data Corruption for HPC Applications. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 27(10), 2809-2823. doi:10.1109/tpds.2016.2517639Di, S., Guo, H., Gupta, R., Pershey, E. R., Snir, M., & Cappello, F. (2019). Exploring Properties and Correlations of Fatal Events in a Large-Scale HPC System. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 30(2), 361-374. doi:10.1109/tpds.2018.2864184Di, S., Robert, Y., Vivien, F., & Cappello, F. (2017). Toward an Optimal Online Checkpoint Solution under a Two-Level HPC Checkpoint Model. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 28(1), 244-259. doi:10.1109/tpds.2016.2546248J. Dongarra T. Herault and Y. Robert. 2015. Fault Tolerance Techniques for High-Performance Computing. Springer. J. Dongarra T. Herault and Y. Robert. 2015. Fault Tolerance Techniques for High-Performance Computing. Springer.DOWNING, S., & SOCIE, D. (1982). Simple rainflow counting algorithms. International Journal of Fatigue, 4(1), 31-40. doi:10.1016/0142-1123(82)90018-4Eghbalkhah, B., Kamal, M., Afzali-Kusha, H., Afzali-Kusha, A., Ghaznavi-Ghoushchi, M. B., & Pedram, M. (2015). Workload and temperature dependent evaluation of BTI-induced lifetime degradation in digital circuits. Microelectronics Reliability, 55(8), 1152-1162. doi:10.1016/j.microrel.2015.06.004Gottscho, M., Shoaib, M., Govindan, S., Sharma, B., Wang, D., & Gupta, P. (2017). Measuring the Impact of Memory Errors on Application  Performance. IEEE Computer Architecture Letters, 16(1), 51-55. doi:10.1109/lca.2016.2599513Greenberg, A., Hamilton, J. R., Jain, N., Kandula, S., Kim, C., Lahiri, P., … Sengupta, S. (2011). VL2. Communications of the ACM, 54(3), 95-104. doi:10.1145/1897852.1897877Heroux, M. A., Bartlett, R. A., Howle, V. E., Hoekstra, R. J., Hu, J. J., Kolda, T. G., … Stanley, K. S. (2005). An overview of the Trilinos project. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software, 31(3), 397-423. doi:10.1145/1089014.1089021Hoffmann, G. A., Trivedi, K. S., & Malek, M. (2007). A Best Practice Guide to Resource Forecasting for Computing Systems. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 56(4), 615-628. doi:10.1109/tr.2007.909764Hsiao, M. Y., Carter, W. C., Thomas, J. W., & Stringfellow, W. R. (1981). Reliability, Availability, and Serviceability of IBM Computer Systems: A Quarter Century of Progress. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 25(5), 453-468. doi:10.1147/rd.255.0453Hughes, G. F., Murray, J. F., Kreutz-Delgado, K., & Elkan, C. (2002). Improved disk-drive failure warnings. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 51(3), 350-357. doi:10.1109/tr.2002.802886S. Hukerikar and C. Engelmann. 2017. Resilience design patterns: A structured approach to resilience at extreme scale. Supercomput. Front. Innov. 4 3 (2017). DOI:https://doi.org/10.14529/jsfi170301 S. Hukerikar and C. Engelmann. 2017. Resilience design patterns: A structured approach to resilience at extreme scale. Supercomput. Front. Innov. 4 3 (2017). DOI:https://doi.org/10.14529/jsfi170301Hussain, H., Malik, S. U. R., Hameed, A., Khan, S. U., Bickler, G., Min-Allah, N., … Rayes, A. (2013). A survey on resource allocation in high performance distributed computing systems. Parallel Computing, 39(11), 709-736. doi:10.1016/j.parco.2013.09.009Intel Corporation. [n.d.]. Intel Xeon Processor E7 Family: Reliability Availability and Serviceability. White paper. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/xeon/xeon-e7-family-ras-server-paper.html. Intel Corporation. [n.d.]. Intel Xeon Processor E7 Family: Reliability Availability and Serviceability. White paper. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/xeon/xeon-e7-family-ras-server-paper.html.Jha, S., Formicola, V., Martino, C. D., Dalton, M., Kramer, W. T., Kalbarczyk, Z., & Iyer, R. K. (2018). Resiliency of HPC Interconnects: A Case Study of Interconnect Failures and Recovery in Blue Waters. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing, 15(6), 915-930. doi:10.1109/tdsc.2017.2737537Kiciman, E., & Fox, A. (2005). Detecting Application-Level Failures in Component-Based Internet Services. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks, 16(5), 1027-1041. doi:10.1109/tnn.2005.853411Kim, T., Sun, Z., Cook, C., Zhao, H., Li, R., Wong, D., & Tan, S. X.-D. (2016). Invited - Cross-layer modeling and optimization for electromigration induced reliability. Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Design Automation Conference. doi:10.1145/2897937.2905010Kurowski, K., Oleksiak, A., Piątek, W., Piontek, T., Przybyszewski, A., & Węglarz, J. (2013). DCworms – A tool for simulation of energy efficiency in distributed computing infrastructures. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 39, 135-151. doi:10.1016/j.simpat.2013.08.007Langou, J., Chen, Z., Bosilca, G., & Dongarra, J. (2008). Recovery Patterns for Iterative Methods in a Parallel Unstable Environment. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 30(1), 102-116. doi:10.1137/040620394J. C. Laprie (Ed.). 1995. Dependability—Its Attributes Impairments and Means. Springer-Verlag Berlin. J. C. Laprie (Ed.). 1995. Dependability—Its Attributes Impairments and Means. Springer-Verlag Berlin.Laprie, J.-C. (s. f.). DEPENDABLE COMPUTING AND FAULT TOLERANCE : CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGY. Twenty-Fifth International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing, 1995, ’ Highlights from Twenty-Five Years’. doi:10.1109/ftcsh.1995.532603Lasance, C. J. M. (2003). Thermally driven reliability issues in microelectronic systems: status-quo and challenges. Microelectronics Reliability, 43(12), 1969-1974. doi:10.1016/s0026-2714(03)00183-5Yinglung Liang, Yanyong Zhang, Sivasubramaniam, A., Jette, M., & Sahoo, R. (s. f.). BlueGene/L Failure Analysis and Prediction Models. International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN’06). doi:10.1109/dsn.2006.18Lin, T.-T. Y., & Siewiorek, D. P. (1990). Error log analysis: statistical modeling and heuristic trend analysis. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 39(4), 419-432. doi:10.1109/24.58720Losada, N., González, P., Martín, M. J., Bosilca, G., Bouteiller, A., & Teranishi, K. (2020). Fault tolerance of MPI applications in exascale systems: The ULFM solution. Future Generation Computer Systems, 106, 467-481. doi:10.1016/j.future.2020.01.026Lyons, R. E., & Vanderkulk, W. (1962). The Use of Triple-Modular Redundancy to Improve Computer Reliability. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 6(2), 200-209. doi:10.1147/rd.62.0200M. Médard and S. S. Lumetta. 2003. Network Reliability and Fault Tolerance. American Cancer Society. Retrieved from arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/0471219282.eot281. M. Médard and S. S. Lumetta. 2003. Network Reliability and Fault Tolerance. American Cancer Society. Retrieved from arXiv:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/0471219282.eot281.Moody, A., Bronevetsky, G., Mohror, K., & de Supinski, B. (2010). Detailed Modeling, Design, and Evaluation of a Scalable Multi-level Checkpointing System. doi:10.2172/984082Moor Insights 8 Strategy. 2017. AMD EPYC Brings New RAS Capability. White paper. Retrieved from https://www.amd.com/system/files/2017-06/AMD-EPYC-Brings-New-RAS-Capability.pdf. Moor Insights 8 Strategy. 2017. AMD EPYC Brings New RAS Capability. White paper. Retrieved from https://www.amd.com/system/files/2017-06/AMD-EPYC-Brings-New-RAS-Capability.pdf.Mulas, F., Atienza, D., Acquaviva, A., Carta, S., Benini, L., & De Micheli, G. (2009). Thermal Balancing Policy for Multiprocessor Stream Computing Platforms. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 28(12), 1870-1882. doi:10.1109/tcad.2009.2032372Oleksiak, A., Kierzynka, M., Piatek, W., Agosta, G., Barenghi, A., Brandolese, C., … Janssen, U. (2017). M2DC – Modular Microserver DataCentre with heterogeneous hardware. Microprocessors and Microsystems, 52, 117-130. doi:10.1016/j.micpro.2017.05.019Oxley, M. A., Jonardi, E., Pasricha, S., Maciejewski, A. A., Siegel, H. J., Burns, P. J., & Koenig, G. A. (2018). Rate-based thermal, power, and co-location aware resource management for heterogeneous data centers. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 112, 126-139. doi:10.1016/j.jpdc.2017.04.015K. O’brien I. Pietri R. Reddy A. Lastovetsky and R. Sakellariou. 2017. A survey of power and energy predictive models in HPC systems and applications. ACM Comput. Surv. 50 3 Article 37 (June 2017) 38 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3078811 K. O’brien I. Pietri R. Reddy A. Lastovetsky and R. Sakellariou. 2017. A survey of power and energy predictive models in HPC systems and applications. ACM Comput. Surv. 50 3 Article 37 (June 2017) 38 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3078811Park, S.-M., & Humphrey, M. (2011). Predictable High-Performance Computing Using Feedback Control and Admission Control. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 22(3), 396-411. doi:10.1109/tpds.2010.100Pfefferman, J. D., & Cernuschi-Frias, B. (2002). A nonparametric nonstationary procedure for failure prediction. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 51(4), 434-442. doi:10.1109/tr.2002.804733Rangan, K. K., Wei, G.-Y., & Brooks, D. (2009). Thread motion. ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News, 37(3), 302-313. doi:10.1145/1555815.1555793Paolo Rech. [n.d.]. Reliability Issues in Current and Future Supercomputers. Retrieved from http://energysfe.ufsc.br/slides/Paolo-Rech-260917.pdf. Paolo Rech. [n.d.]. Reliability Issues in Current and Future Supercomputers. Retrieved from http://energysfe.ufsc.br/slides/Paolo-Rech-260917.pdf.F. Reghenzani G. Massari and W. Fornaciari. 2019. The real-time Linux kernel: A survey on PREEMPT_RT. Comput. Surveys 52 1 Article 18 (Feb. 2019) 36 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3297714 F. Reghenzani G. Massari and W. Fornaciari. 2019. The real-time Linux kernel: A survey on PREEMPT_RT. Comput. Surveys 52 1 Article 18 (Feb. 2019) 36 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3297714F. Salfner M. Lenk and M. Malek. 2010. A survey of online failure prediction methods. ACM Comput. Surv. 42 3 Article 10 (March 2010) 42 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1670679.1670680 F. Salfner M. Lenk and M. Malek. 2010. A survey of online failure prediction methods. ACM Comput. Surv. 42 3 Article 10 (March 2010) 42 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/1670679.1670680Salfner, F., Schieschke, M., & Malek, M. (2006). Predicting failures of computer systems: a case study for a telecommunication system. Proceedings 20th IEEE International Parallel & Distributed Processing Symposium. doi:10.1109/ipdps.2006.1639672Shi, L., Chen, H., Sun, J., & Li, K. (2012). vCUDA: GPU-Accelerated High-Performance Computing in Virtual Machines. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 61(6), 804-816. doi:10.1109/tc.2011.112D. P. Siewiorek and R. S. Swarz. 1998. Reliable Computer Systems 3rd ed. A. K. Peters Ltd. D. P. Siewiorek and R. S. Swarz. 1998. Reliable Computer Systems 3rd ed. A. K. Peters Ltd.Singh, S., & Chana, I. (2016). A Survey on Resource Scheduling in Cloud Computing: Issues and Challenges. Journal of Grid Computing, 14(2), 217-264. doi:10.1007/s10723-015-9359-2Slegel, T. J., Averill, R. M., Check, M. A., Giamei, B. C., Krumm, B. W., Krygowski, C. A., … Webb, C. F. (1999). IBM’s S/390 G5 microprocessor design. IEEE Micro, 19(2), 12-23. doi:10.1109/40.755464Sridhar, A., Sabry, M. M., & Atienza, D. (2014). A Semi-Analytical Thermal Modeling Framework for Liquid-Cooled ICs. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 33(8), 1145-1158. doi:10.1109/tcad.2014.2323194Sridharan, V., DeBardeleben, N., Blanchard, S., Ferreira, K. B., Stearley, J., Shalf, J., & Gurumurthi, S. (2015). Memory Errors in Modern Systems. ACM SIGARCH Computer Architecture News, 43(1), 297-310. doi:10.1145/2786763.2694348Stathis, J. H. (2018). The physics of NBTI: What do we really know? 2018 IEEE International Reliability Physics Symposium (IRPS). doi:10.1109/irps.2018.8353539Stellner, G. (s. f.). CoCheck: checkpointing and process migration for MPI. Proceedings of International Conference on Parallel Processing. doi:10.1109/ipps.1996.508106Stone, J. E., Gohara, D., & Shi, G. (2010). OpenCL: A Parallel Programming Standard for Heterogeneous Computing Systems. Computing in Science & Engineering, 12(3), 66-73. doi:10.1109/mcse.2010.69Subasi, O., Di, S., Bautista-Gomez, L., Balaprakash, P., Unsal, O., Labarta, J., … Cappello, F. (2018). Exploring the capabilities of support vector machines in detecting silent data corruptions. Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems, 19, 277-290. doi:10.1016/j.suscom.2018.01.004Tang, D., & Iyer, R. K. (1993). Dependability measurement and modeling of a multicomputer system. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 42(1), 62-75. doi:10.1109/12.192214D. Turnbull and N. Alldrin. 2003. Failure Prediction in Hardware Systems. Tech. rep. University of California San Diego CA. Retrieved from http://www.cs.ucsd.edu/ dturnbul/Papers/ServerPrediction.pdf. D. Turnbull and N. Alldrin. 2003. Failure Prediction in Hardware Systems. Tech. rep. University of California San Diego CA. Retrieved from http://www.cs.ucsd.edu/ dturnbul/Papers/ServerPrediction.pdf.Vilalta, R., Apte, C. V., Hellerstein, J. L., Ma, S., & Weiss, S. M. (2002). Predictive algorithms in the management of computer systems. IBM Systems Journal, 41(3), 461-474. doi:10.1147/sj.413.0461Vinoski, S. (2007). Reliability with Erlang. IEEE Internet Com

n-Dimensional QoS Framework for Real-Time Service-Oriented Architectures

Service-Orientation has long provided an effective mechanism to integrate heterogeneous systems in a loosely coupled fashion as services. However, with the emergence of Internet of Things (IoT) there is a growing need to facilitate the integration of real-time services executing in non-controlled, non-real-time, environments such as the Cloud. With the need to integrate both cyberphysical systems as hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) components and also with Simulation as a Service (SIMaaS) the execution performance and response-times of the services must be managed. This paper presents a mathematical framework that captures the relationship between the host execution environment and service performance allowing the estimation of Quality of Service (QoS) under dynamic Cloud workloads. A formal mathematical definition is provided and this is evaluated against existing techniques from both the Cloud and Real-Time Service Oriented Architecture (RT-SOA) domains. The proposed approach is evaluated against the existing techniques through simulation and demonstrates a reduction of QoS violation percentage by 22% with respect to response-times as well as reducing the number of Micro-Service (uS) instances with QoS violations by 27%

Dynamic Composition of Cyber-Physical Systems

Future cyber-physical systems must fulfill strong demands on timeliness and reliability, so that the safety of their operational environment is never violated. At the same time, such systems are networked computers with the typical demand for reconfigurability and software modification. The combination of both expectations makes established modeling and analysis techniques difficult to apply, since they cannot scale with the number of possible operational constellations resulting from the dynamics. The problem increases when components with different non-functional demands are combined to one cyber-physical system and updated independent from each other. We propose a new approach for the design and development of composable, dynamic and dependable software architectures, with a focus on the area of networked embedded systems. Our key concept is the specification of software components and their non-functional composition constraints in the formal language TLA+. We discuss how this technique can be embedded in an overall software design workflow, and show the practical applicability with a detailed resource scheduling example

Digital Trust - Trusted Computing and Beyond A Position Paper

Along with the invention of computers and interconnected networks, physical societal notions like security, trust, and privacy entered the digital environment. The concept of digital environments begins with the trust (established in the real world) in the organisation/individual that manages the digital resources. This concept evolved to deal with the rapid growth of the Internet, where it became impractical for entities to have prior offline (real world) trust. The evolution of digital trust took diverse approaches and now trust is defined and understood differently across heterogeneous domains. This paper looks at digital trust from the point of view of security and examines how valid trust approaches from other domains are now making their way into secure computing. The paper also revisits and analyses the Trusted Platform Module (TPM) along with associated technologies and their relevance in the changing landscape. We especially focus on the domains of cloud computing, mobile computing and cyber-physical systems. In addition, the paper also explores our proposals that are competing with and extending the traditional functionality of TPM specifications

Feedback-Based Admission Control for Firm Real-Time Task Allocation with Dynamic Voltage and Frequency Scaling

Feedback-based mechanisms can be employed to monitor the performance of Multiprocessor Systems-on-Chips (MPSoCs) and steer the task execution even if the exact knowledge of the workload is unknown a priori. In particular, traditional proportional-integral controllers can be used with firm real-time tasks to either admit them to the processing cores or reject in order not to violate the timeliness of the already admitted tasks. During periods with a lower computational power demand, dynamic voltage and frequency scaling (DVFS) can be used to reduce the dissipation of energy in the cores while still not violating the tasks’ time constraints. Depending on the workload pattern and weight, platform size and the granularity of DVFS, energy savings can reach even 60% at the cost of a slight performance degradation

Performance Evaluation of Scheduling Algorithms for Real Time Cloud Computing Systems

Cloud computing shares data and oers services transparently among its users. With the increase in number of users of cloud the tasks to be scheduled increases. The performance of cloud depends on the task scheduling algorithms used in the scheduling components or brokering components. Scheduling of tasks on cloud computing systems is one of the research problem, Where the matching of machines and completion time of the tasks are considered. Tasks matching of machines problem is that, assume number of active hosts are Y, number of VMs in each host are Z. Maximum number of possible Virtual Machines(VMs) to schedule a single task is (y*z). If we need to schedule X tasks, number of possibilities are (y *z)^x. So scheduling of tasks is NP Hard problem. NP Hard means this scheduling of tasks on VMs not having polynomial time complexity, but it may have algorithm for verifying solution. Fault-tolerance becomes an important key to establish dependability in cloud computing system. In task scheduling, if task not completed in it's deadline ,then it is one type of fault in scheduling of tasks. In this thesis this type of faults are taken and try to overcome it. In this thesis we present a non-preemptive scheduling algorithm, By inserting the ideal time for postponing the task by ensuring the other task will completes its execution with in the deadline. In simulation the proposed algorithm maximizes the prot of 25%, throughput of 25% and minimizes the penalty of 20% over EDF

Composition and synchronization of real-time components upon one processor

Many industrial systems have various hardware and software functions for controlling mechanics. If these functions act independently, as they do in legacy situations, their overall performance is not optimal. There is a trend towards optimizing the overall system performance and creating a synergy between the different functions in a system, which is achieved by replacing more and more dedicated, single-function hardware by software components running on programmable platforms. This increases the re-usability of the functions, but their synergy requires also that (parts of) the multiple software functions share the same embedded platform. In this work, we look at the composition of inter-dependent software functions on a shared platform from a timing perspective. We consider platforms comprised of one preemptive processor resource and, optionally, multiple non-preemptive resources. Each function is implemented by a set of tasks; the group of tasks of a function that executes on the same processor, along with its scheduler, is called a component. The tasks of a component typically have hard timing constraints. Fulfilling these timing constraints of a component requires analysis. Looking at a single function, co-operative scheduling of the tasks within a component has already proven to be a powerful tool to make the implementation of a function more predictable. For example, co-operative scheduling can accelerate the execution of a task (making it easier to satisfy timing constraints), it can reduce the cost of arbitrary preemptions (leading to more realistic execution-time estimates) and it can guarantee access to other resources without the need for arbitration by other protocols. Since timeliness is an important functional requirement, (re-)use of a component for composition and integration on a platform must deal with timing. To enable us to analyze and specify the timing requirements of a particular component in isolation from other components, we reserve and enforce the availability of all its specified resources during run-time. The real-time systems community has proposed hierarchical scheduling frameworks (HSFs) to implement this isolation between components. After admitting a component on a shared platform, a component in an HSF keeps meeting its timing constraints as long as it behaves as specified. If it violates its specification, it may be penalized, but other components are temporally isolated from the malignant effects. A component in an HSF is said to execute on a virtual platform with a dedicated processor at a speed proportional to its reserved processor supply. Three effects disturb this point of view. Firstly, processor time is supplied discontinuously. Secondly, the actual processor is faster. Thirdly, the HSF no longer guarantees the isolation of an individual component when two arbitrary components violate their specification during access to non-preemptive resources, even when access is arbitrated via well-defined real-time protocols. The scientific contributions of this work focus on these three issues. Our solutions to these issues cover the system design from component requirements to run-time allocation. Firstly, we present a novel scheduling method that enables us to integrate the component into an HSF. It guarantees that each integrated component executes its tasks exactly in the same order regardless of a continuous or a discontinuous supply of processor time. Using our method, the component executes on a virtual platform and it only experiences that the processor speed is different from the actual processor speed. As a result, we can focus on the traditional scheduling problem of meeting deadline constraints of tasks on a uni-processor platform. For such platforms, we show how scheduling tasks co-operatively within a component helps to meet the deadlines of this component. We compare the strength of these cooperative scheduling techniques to theoretically optimal schedulers. Secondly, we standardize the way of computing the resource requirements of a component, even in the presence of non-preemptive resources. We can therefore apply the same timing analysis to the components in an HSF as to the tasks inside, regardless of their scheduling or their protocol being used for non-preemptive resources. This increases the re-usability of the timing analysis of components. We also make non-preemptive resources transparent during the development cycle of a component, i.e., the developer of a component can be unaware of the actual protocol being used in an HSF. Components can therefore be unaware that access to non-preemptive resources requires arbitration. Finally, we complement the existing real-time protocols for arbitrating access to non-preemptive resources with mechanisms to confine temporal faults to those components in the HSF that share the same non-preemptive resources. We compare the overheads of sharing non-preemptive resources between components with and without mechanisms for confinement of temporal faults. We do this by means of experiments within an HSF-enabled real-time operating system

Energy-efficient checkpointing in high-throughput cycle-stealing distributed systems

Checkpointing is a fault-tolerance mechanism commonly used in High Throughput Computing (HTC) environments to allow the execution of long-running computational tasks on compute resources subject to hardware or software failures as well as interruptions from resource owners and more important tasks. Until recently many researchers have focused on the performance gains achieved through checkpointing, but now with growing scrutiny of the energy consumption of IT infrastructures it is increasingly important to understand the energy impact of checkpointing within an HTC environment. In this paper we demonstrate through trace-driven simulation of real-world datasets that existing checkpointing strategies are inadequate at maintaining an acceptable level of energy consumption whilst maintaing the performance gains expected with checkpointing. Furthermore, we identify factors important in deciding whether to exploit checkpointing within an HTC environment, and propose novel strategies to curtail the energy consumption of checkpointing approaches whist maintaining the performance benefits