• The processing continues then from this state. We showed that this approach is
not generic and highly application-dependent.
• Backward error recovery, however, is generic as its main principle is to create
recovery points containing the state of the system or at least parts of it which
software can restore to eliminate the effects of the faults.
• For recovery preparation, we revised and compared existing approaches,
introduced recovery on the level of procedures and analyzed the advantages and
disadvantages of this approach. We then showed a generic approach of hardware
support for creating recovery points and explained a method of adapting the
current recovery point creation rate to the current fault rate.
• Schemes of possible “embedding” of recovery procedures into runtime system
were also described, showing flexibility of system software support of
recoverability.
• We also analyzed hardware system and technological supports of recovery
processes that have to be implemented for safety-critical systems. We presented
an approach of a highly reliable software-based stable storage together with a
possible implementation.
• We distinct commercial and real-time systems in terms of requirements and
implementation of reliable functioning at the level of architecture, system
software and hardware elements involved.
References
1. Liedtke J (1995) On micro-kernel construction. In: Proceedings of the fifteenth ACM
symposium on operating systems principles, SOSP ’95. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 237–
250
2. Monkman S, Schagaev I (2013) Redundancy + reconfigurability = recoverability. Electronics
2:212–233. ISSN 2079-9292, https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics2030212
3. Haeberlen A et al (2000) Stub-code performance is becoming important. In: Proceedings of
1st conference on industrial experiences with systems software, vol 1. USENIX Association,
Berkeley, CA, USA, p 4
4. Wirth N, Gutknecht J (1992) Project Oberon: the design of an operating system and compiler.
Addison-Wesley, Wokingham
5. Шагаев И., Берштейн А. Исследования систем команд их влияние на архитектуру
современных ЭВМ. Зарубежная радиоэлектроника, 1989 N7, 8
6. Johannes M (2002) The active object system—design and multiprocessor implementation.
ETH Zurich, Zurich
7. Mossenbock H, Wirth N (1991) The programming language oberon-2. Technical report,
Johannes Kepler Universitat Linz
8. Martin R, Wirth N (1992) Programming in Oberon: steps beyond Pascal and Modula.
Addison-Wesley, Wokingham
9. Wirth N (1977) Modula: a language for modular multiprogramming. Softw: Pract Experience
7(1):1–35
10. Wirth N (1985) Programming in Modula-2. Springer, New York
11. Wirth N (1971) The programming language Pascal. Acta Informatica 35–63
12. Wirth N (1977) The use of Modula. Softw—Pract Experience 7
8.8 Summary
137
not generic and highly application-dependent.
• Backward error recovery, however, is generic as its main principle is to create
recovery points containing the state of the system or at least parts of it which
software can restore to eliminate the effects of the faults.
• For recovery preparation, we revised and compared existing approaches,
introduced recovery on the level of procedures and analyzed the advantages and
disadvantages of this approach. We then showed a generic approach of hardware
support for creating recovery points and explained a method of adapting the
current recovery point creation rate to the current fault rate.
• Schemes of possible “embedding” of recovery procedures into runtime system
were also described, showing flexibility of system software support of
recoverability.
• We also analyzed hardware system and technological supports of recovery
processes that have to be implemented for safety-critical systems. We presented
an approach of a highly reliable software-based stable storage together with a
possible implementation.
• We distinct commercial and real-time systems in terms of requirements and
implementation of reliable functioning at the level of architecture, system
software and hardware elements involved.
References
1. Liedtke J (1995) On micro-kernel construction. In: Proceedings of the fifteenth ACM
symposium on operating systems principles, SOSP ’95. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 237–
250
2. Monkman S, Schagaev I (2013) Redundancy + reconfigurability = recoverability. Electronics
2:212–233. ISSN 2079-9292, https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics2030212
3. Haeberlen A et al (2000) Stub-code performance is becoming important. In: Proceedings of
1st conference on industrial experiences with systems software, vol 1. USENIX Association,
Berkeley, CA, USA, p 4
4. Wirth N, Gutknecht J (1992) Project Oberon: the design of an operating system and compiler.
Addison-Wesley, Wokingham
5. Шагаев И., Берштейн А. Исследования систем команд их влияние на архитектуру
современных ЭВМ. Зарубежная радиоэлектроника, 1989 N7, 8
6. Johannes M (2002) The active object system—design and multiprocessor implementation.
ETH Zurich, Zurich
7. Mossenbock H, Wirth N (1991) The programming language oberon-2. Technical report,
Johannes Kepler Universitat Linz
8. Martin R, Wirth N (1992) Programming in Oberon: steps beyond Pascal and Modula.
Addison-Wesley, Wokingham
9. Wirth N (1977) Modula: a language for modular multiprogramming. Softw: Pract Experience
7(1):1–35
10. Wirth N (1985) Programming in Modula-2. Springer, New York
11. Wirth N (1971) The programming language Pascal. Acta Informatica 35–63
12. Wirth N (1977) The use of Modula. Softw—Pract Experience 7
8.8 Summary
137