# Library prosa.analysis.abstract.definitions

# Definitions for Abstract Response-Time Analysis

## a) Interference

Execution of a job may be postponed by the environment and/or the system due to different factors (preemption by higher-priority jobs, jitter, black-out periods in hierarchical scheduling, lack of budget, etc.), which we call interference.## b) Interfering Workload

In addition to interference, the analysis assumes that at any time t, we know an upper bound on the potential cumulative interference that can be incurred in the future by any job (i.e., the total remaining potential delays). Based on that, assume a function interfering_workload that indicates for any job j, at any time t, the amount of potential interference for job j that is introduced into the system at time t. This function will be later used to upper-bound the length of the busy window of a job. One example of workload function is the "total cost of jobs that arrive at time t and have higher-or-equal priority than job j". In some task models, this function expresses the amount of the potential interference on job j that "arrives" in the system at time t.
Next we introduce all the abstract notions required by the analysis.

Consider any type of job associated with any type of tasks...

... with arrival times and costs.

Consider any kind of processor state model.

Consider any arrival sequence ...

... and any schedule of this arrival sequence.

Let tsk be any task that is to be analyzed

Assume we are provided with abstract functions for interference
and interfering workload.

In order to perform subsequent abstract Response Time Analyses
(RTAs), it is essential that we have the capability to bound
interference of a certain type (for example, interference that
comes from other tasks' jobs). To achieve this, we define
"conditional" interference as a conjunction of a predicate P :
Job → instant → bool encoding the property of interest and
interference.

In order to bound the response time of a job, we must consider
(1) the cumulative conditional interference, ...

... (2) cumulative interference, ...

... and (3) cumulative interfering workload.

Next, we introduce a notion of absence of speculative
execution. This notion is
We say that the functions Interference and
InterferingWorkload do not allow speculative execution if the
cumulative interference never exceeds the cumulative interfering
workload. Intuitively, one can interpret this definition as
stating that it is not allowed to perform work before it is
known whether it is actually needed (i.e., before the work
appears as actual workload).

*not*directly related to Abstract RTA, but it is useful when proving the existence of bounded busy intervals.
Definition no_speculative_execution :=

∀ j t,

cumulative_interference j 0 t ≤ cumulative_interfering_workload j 0 t.

∀ j t,

cumulative_interference j 0 t ≤ cumulative_interfering_workload j 0 t.

Definition of Busy Interval Further analysis will be based on the notion of a busy
interval. The overall idea of the busy interval is to take into
account the workload that cause a job under consideration to
incur interference. In this section, we provide a definition of
an abstract busy interval.

We say that time instant t is a quiet time for job j iff
two conditions hold. First, the cumulative interference at
time t must be equal to the cumulative interfering
workload. Intuitively, this condition indicates that the
potential interference seen so far has been fully "consumed"
(i.e., there is no more higher-priority work or other kinds of
delay pending). Second, job j cannot be pending at any time
earlier than t

*and*at time instant t (i.e., either it was pending earlier but is no longer pending now, or it was previously not pending and may or may not be released now). The second condition ensures that the busy window captures the execution of job j.
Definition quiet_time (j : Job) (t : instant) :=

(cumulative_interference j 0 t == cumulative_interfering_workload j 0 t)

&& ~~ pending_earlier_and_at sched j t.

(cumulative_interference j 0 t == cumulative_interfering_workload j 0 t)

&& ~~ pending_earlier_and_at sched j t.

Based on the definition of quiet time, we say that an interval

`[t1, t2)`

is a (potentially unbounded) busy-interval prefix
w.r.t. job j iff the interval (a) contains the arrival of
job j, (b) starts with a quiet time and (c) remains
non-quiet.
Definition busy_interval_prefix (j : Job) (t1 t2 : instant) :=

t1 ≤ job_arrival j < t2 ∧

quiet_time j t1 ∧

(∀ t, t1 < t < t2 → ¬ quiet_time j t).

t1 ≤ job_arrival j < t2 ∧

quiet_time j t1 ∧

(∀ t, t1 < t < t2 → ¬ quiet_time j t).

Next, we say that an interval

`[t1, t2)`

is a busy interval
iff `[t1, t2)`

is a busy-interval prefix and t2 is a quiet
time.
Definition busy_interval (j : Job) (t1 t2 : instant) :=

busy_interval_prefix j t1 t2 ∧

quiet_time j t2.

busy_interval_prefix j t1 t2 ∧

quiet_time j t2.

Note that the busy interval, if it exists, is unique.

Fact busy_interval_is_unique :

∀ j t1 t2 t1' t2',

busy_interval j t1 t2 →

busy_interval j t1' t2' →

t1 = t1' ∧ t2 = t2'.

Proof.

move⇒ j t1 t2 t1' t2' BUSY BUSY'.

have EQ: t1 = t1'.

{ apply/eqP.

apply/negPn/negP; intros CONTR.

move: BUSY ⇒ [[IN [QT1 NQ]] _].

move: BUSY' ⇒ [[IN' [QT1' NQ']] _].

move: CONTR; rewrite neq_ltn; move ⇒ /orP [LT|GT].

{ apply NQ with t1' ⇒ //; clear NQ.

apply/andP; split⇒ [//|].

move: IN IN' ⇒ /andP [_ T1] /andP [T2 _].

by apply leq_ltn_trans with (job_arrival j).

}

{ apply NQ' with t1 ⇒ [|//]; clear NQ'.

apply/andP; split⇒ [//|].

move: IN IN' ⇒ /andP [T1 _] /andP [_ T2].

by apply leq_ltn_trans with (job_arrival j).

}

}

subst t1'.

have EQ: t2 = t2'.

{ apply/eqP.

apply/negPn/negP; intros CONTR.

move: BUSY ⇒ [[IN [_ NQ]] QT2].

move: BUSY' ⇒ [[IN' [_ NQ']] QT2'].

move: CONTR; rewrite neq_ltn; move ⇒ /orP [LT|GT].

{ apply NQ' with t2 ⇒ //; clear NQ'.

apply/andP; split⇒ [|//].

move: IN IN' ⇒ /andP [_ T1] /andP [T2 _].

by apply leq_ltn_trans with (job_arrival j).

}

{ apply NQ with t2' ⇒ //; clear NQ.

apply/andP; split⇒ [|//].

move: IN IN' ⇒ /andP [T1 _] /andP [_ T2].

by apply leq_ltn_trans with (job_arrival j).

}

}

by subst t2'.

Qed.

End BusyInterval.

∀ j t1 t2 t1' t2',

busy_interval j t1 t2 →

busy_interval j t1' t2' →

t1 = t1' ∧ t2 = t2'.

Proof.

move⇒ j t1 t2 t1' t2' BUSY BUSY'.

have EQ: t1 = t1'.

{ apply/eqP.

apply/negPn/negP; intros CONTR.

move: BUSY ⇒ [[IN [QT1 NQ]] _].

move: BUSY' ⇒ [[IN' [QT1' NQ']] _].

move: CONTR; rewrite neq_ltn; move ⇒ /orP [LT|GT].

{ apply NQ with t1' ⇒ //; clear NQ.

apply/andP; split⇒ [//|].

move: IN IN' ⇒ /andP [_ T1] /andP [T2 _].

by apply leq_ltn_trans with (job_arrival j).

}

{ apply NQ' with t1 ⇒ [|//]; clear NQ'.

apply/andP; split⇒ [//|].

move: IN IN' ⇒ /andP [T1 _] /andP [_ T2].

by apply leq_ltn_trans with (job_arrival j).

}

}

subst t1'.

have EQ: t2 = t2'.

{ apply/eqP.

apply/negPn/negP; intros CONTR.

move: BUSY ⇒ [[IN [_ NQ]] QT2].

move: BUSY' ⇒ [[IN' [_ NQ']] QT2'].

move: CONTR; rewrite neq_ltn; move ⇒ /orP [LT|GT].

{ apply NQ' with t2 ⇒ //; clear NQ'.

apply/andP; split⇒ [|//].

move: IN IN' ⇒ /andP [_ T1] /andP [T2 _].

by apply leq_ltn_trans with (job_arrival j).

}

{ apply NQ with t2' ⇒ //; clear NQ.

apply/andP; split⇒ [|//].

move: IN IN' ⇒ /andP [T1 _] /andP [_ T2].

by apply leq_ltn_trans with (job_arrival j).

}

}

by subst t2'.

Qed.

End BusyInterval.

In this section, we introduce some assumptions about the busy
interval that are fundamental to the analysis.

We say that a schedule is "work-conserving" (in the abstract
sense) iff, for any job j from task tsk and at any time t
within a busy interval, there are only two options: either (a)
interference(j, t) holds or (b) job j is scheduled at time
t.

Definition work_conserving :=

∀ j t1 t2 t,

arrives_in arr_seq j →

job_cost j > 0 →

busy_interval_prefix j t1 t2 →

t1 ≤ t < t2 →

¬ interference j t ↔ receives_service_at sched j t.

∀ j t1 t2 t,

arrives_in arr_seq j →

job_cost j > 0 →

busy_interval_prefix j t1 t2 →

t1 ≤ t < t2 →

¬ interference j t ↔ receives_service_at sched j t.

Next, we say that busy intervals of task tsk are bounded by
L iff, for any job j of task tsk, there exists a busy
interval with length at most L. Note that the existence of
such a bounded busy interval is not guaranteed if the schedule
is overloaded with work. Therefore, in the later concrete
analyses, we will have to introduce an additional condition
that prevents overload.

Definition busy_intervals_are_bounded_by L :=

∀ j,

arrives_in arr_seq j →

job_of_task tsk j →

job_cost j > 0 →

∃ t1 t2,

t1 ≤ job_arrival j < t2 ∧

t2 ≤ t1 + L ∧

busy_interval j t1 t2.

∀ j,

arrives_in arr_seq j →

job_of_task tsk j →

job_cost j > 0 →

∃ t1 t2,

t1 ≤ job_arrival j < t2 ∧

t2 ≤ t1 + L ∧

busy_interval j t1 t2.

Although we have defined the notion of cumulative
(conditional) interference of a job, it cannot be used in a
(static) response-time analysis because of the dynamic
variability of job parameters. To address this issue, we
define the notion of an interference bound.
As a first step, we introduce a notion of an "interference
bound function" IBF. An interference bound function is any
function with a type duration → duration → work that bounds
cumulative conditional interference of a job of task tsk (a
precise definition will be presented below).
Note that the function has two parameters. The second
parameter is the length of an interval in which the
interference is supposed to be bounded. It is quite intuitive;
so, we will not explain it in more detail. However, the first
parameter deserves more thoughtful explanation, which we
provide next.

The first parameter of IBF allows one to organize a case
analysis over a set of values that are known only during the
computation. For example, the most common parameter is the
relative arrival time A of a job (of a task under
analysis). Strictly speaking, A is not known when computing
a fixpoint; however, one can consider a set of A that covers
all the relevant cases. There can be other valid properties
such as "a time instant when a job under analysis has received
enough service to become non-preemptive."
To make the first parameter customizable, we introduce a
predicate ParamSem : Job → instant → Prop that is used to
assign meaning to the second parameter. More precisely,
consider an expression IBF(X, delta), and assume that we
instantiated ParamSem as some predicate P. Then, it is
assumed that IBF(X, delta) bounds (conditional) interference
of a job under analysis j ∈ tsk if P j X holds.

As mentioned, IBF must upper-bound the cumulative

*conditional*interference. This is done to make further extensions of the base aRTA easier. The most general aRTA assumes that an IBF bounds*all*interference of a given job j. However, as we refine the model under analysis, we split the IBF into more and more parts. For example, assuming that tasks are sequential, it is possible to split IBF into two parts: (1) the part that upper-bounds the cumulative interference due to self-interference and (2) the part that upper-bounds the cumulative interference due to all other reasons. To avoid duplication, we parameterize the definition of an IBF by a predicate that encodes the type of interference that must be upper-bounded.
Next, let us define this reasoning formally. We say that the
conditional interference is bounded by an "interference bound
function" IBF iff for any job j of task tsk and its busy
interval
In other words, for a job j ∈ tsk, the term IBF(X, Δ)
provides an upper-bound on the cumulative conditional
interference (w.r.t. the predicate Cond) that j might
experience in an interval of length Δ

`[t1, t2)`

the cumulative conditional interference
incurred by j w.r.t. predicate Cond in the sub-interval
`[t1, t1 + Δ)`

does not exceed IBF(X, Δ), where X is a
constant that satisfies a predefined predicate ParamSem.
*assuming*that ParamSem j X holds.
Consider a job j of task tsk, a busy interval

```
[t1,
```

t2)>> of j, and an arbitrary interval ```
[t1, t1 + Δ) ⊆
```

t1, t2)>>.
Next, we require the IBF to bound the interference only
until the job is completed, after which the function can
behave arbitrarily.

And finally, the IBF function might depend not only on the
length of the interval, but also on a constant X
satisfying predicate Param.

∀ X,

ParamSem j X →

cumul_cond_interference Cond j t1 (t1 + Δ) ≤ IBF X Δ.

End BusyIntervalProperties.

ParamSem j X →

cumul_cond_interference Cond j t1 (t1 + Δ) ≤ IBF X Δ.

End BusyIntervalProperties.

As an important special case, we say that a job's interference
is (unconditionally) bounded by IBF if it is conditionally
bounded with Cond := fun j t ⇒ true.

Definition job_interference_is_bounded_by IBF Param :=

cond_interference_is_bounded_by IBF Param (fun _ _ ⇒ true).

End AbstractRTADefinitions.

cond_interference_is_bounded_by IBF Param (fun _ _ ⇒ true).

End AbstractRTADefinitions.