Towards a design-by-contract based approach for realizable connector-centric software architectures

Despite being a widely-used language for specifying software systems, UML remains less than ideal for software architectures. Architecture description languages (ADLs) were developed to provide more comprehensive support. However, so far the application of ADLs in practice has been impeded by at least one of the following problems: (i) advanced formal notations, (ii) lack of support for complex connectors, and (iii) potentially unrealizable designs. In this paper we propose a new ADL that is based on Design-by-Contract (DbC) for specifying software architectures. While DbC promotes a formal and precise way of specifying system behaviours, it is more familiar to practising developers, thus allowing for a more comfortable way of specifying architectures than using process algebras. Furthermore, by granting connectors a first-class status, our ADL allows designers to specify not only simple interaction mechanisms as connectors but also complex interaction protocols. Finally, in order to ensure that architectural designs are always realizable we eliminate potentially unrealizable constructs in connector specifications (the connector “glue”)

Tighter Integration of Drivers and Protocols in a AADL-based Code Generation Process

Model-based engineering provides an appealing frame- work for the precise modeling and analysis of embed- ded systems. Architecture Description Languages provide a clear and precise semantics to address multiple analy- sis dimensions: scheduling, fault, resource accounting, etc. This is completed by code generation tools that generate all required glue code to enable intercommunication between components and associated configuration mechanisms. The diversity of embedded targets requires extended con- figuration to support multiple devices, operating systems but also compilation toolchains. Yet, those are usually hard- wired in the code generation process. In this paper, we propose several patterns to support model- level configuration of the target, but also increased analysis capabilities in the context of the AADLv2

Formal Verification of AADL models with Fiacre and Tina

9 pagesInternational audienceThis paper details works undertaken in the scope of the Spices project concerning the behavioral verification of AADL models. We give a high-level view of the tools involved and describe the successive transformations performed by our verification process. We also report on an experiment carried out in order to evaluate our framework and give the first experimental results obtained on real-size models. This demonstrator models a network protocol in charge of data communications between an airplane and ground stations. From this study we draw a set of conclusions about the integration of model-checking tools in an industrial development process

From AADL Model to LNT Specification

The verification of distributed real-time systems designed by architectural languages such as AADL (Architecture Analysis and Design Language) is a research challenge. These systems are often used in safety- critical domains where one mistake can result in physical damages and even life loss. In such domains, formal methods are a suitable solution for rigorous analysis. This paper studies the formal verification of distributed real-time systems modelled with AADL. We transform AADL model to another specification formalism enabling the verification. We choose LNT language which is an input to CADP toolbox for formal analysis. Then, we illustrate our approach with the ”Flight Control System” case study

Issues of Architectural Description Languages for Handling Dynamic Reconfiguration

Dynamic reconfiguration is the action of modifying a software system at runtime. Several works have been using architectural specification as the basis for dynamic reconfiguration. Indeed ADLs (architecture description languages) let architects describe the elements that could be reconfigured as well as the set of constraints to which the system must conform during reconfiguration. In this work, we investigate the ADL literature in order to illustrate how reconfiguration is supported in four well-known ADLs: pi-ADL, ACME, C2SADL and Dynamic Wright. From this review, we conclude that none of these ADLs: (i) addresses the issue of consistently reconfiguring both instances and types; (ii) takes into account the behaviour of architectural elements during reconfiguration; and (iii) provides support for assessing reconfiguration, e.g., verifying the transition against properties.Comment: 6\`eme Conf\'erence francophone sur les architectures logicielles (CAL'2012), Montpellier : France (2012