'Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)'
Doi
Abstract
Extensive research efforts are being carried out to evaluate and improve the reliability of computing devices either through beam experiments or simulation-based fault injection. Unfortunately, it is still largely unclear to which extend fault injection can provide an accurate error rate estimation at early stages and if beam experiments can be used to identify the weakest resources in a device. The importance and challenges associated with a timely, but yet realistic reliability evaluation grow with the increase of complexity in both the hardware domain, with the integration of different types of cores in an SoC (System-on-Chip), and the software domain, with the OS (operating system) required to take full advantage of the available resources. In this paper, we combine and analyze data gathered with extensive beam experiments (on the final physical CPU hardware) and microarchitectural fault injections (on early microarchitectural CPU models). We target a standalone Arm Cortex-A5 CPU and an Arm Cortex-A9 CPU integrated into an SoC and evaluate their reliability in bare-metal and Linux-based configurations. Combining experimental data that covers more than 18 million years of device time with the result of more than 176,000 injections we find that both the SoC integration and the presence of the OS increase the system DUEs (Detected Unrecoverable Errors) rate (for different reasons) but do not significantly impact the SDCs (Silent Data Corruptions) rate which is solely attributed to the CPU core. Our reliability analysis demonstrates that even considering SoC integration and OS inclusion, early, pre-silicon microarchitecture-level fault injection delivers accurate SDC rates estimations and lower bounds for the DUE rates
