skip to main content
research-article

Minimization of WCRT with Recovery Assurance from Hardware Trojans for Tasks on FPGA-based Cloud

Authors Info & Claims
Published:07 December 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Dynamic partial reconfiguration (DPR) enabled FPGA-based Cloud architecture acts as a flexible and efficient shared environment to facilitates application support to users’ request at low cost. While on one hand we need to handle a variety of tasks, such as periodic or sporadic, deadline or non-deadline, high or low critical tasks from the point of producing correct results, on the other hand we are constrained to use untrusted FPGA-based application IP blocks procured from various third-party vendors, which may contain hardware Trojan horse (HTH) affecting throughput and reliability of the Cloud. We propose Trojan-aware processing of tasks by monitored execution of a task on different untrusted cores, and then one more execution is done upon detection of hardware Trojan effects. For this stringent scheduling environment, the proposed dynamic scheduling algorithm is also properly extended to guarantee successful recovery from Trojan effects for all accepted tasks. Experimental results show that our algorithm improves worst-case-response-time for all tasks including non-deadline tasks and achieves lower task rejection rate for the deadline tasks, through judicious non-uniform partitioning of FPGAs based on supported jobs and subsequent better resource utilization, compared to that for existing Trojan-aware scheduling techniques.

References

  1. T. Mitra, J. Teich, and L. Thiele. 2018. Time-critical systems design: A survey. IEEE Des. Test 35, 2 (2018), 8--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Y. Xiang and S. Pasricha. 2014. Fault-aware application scheduling in low- power embedded systems with energy harvesting. In Proceedings of the International Conference on (CODEC+ISSS’14), 32:1--32:10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Y. Xiang and S. Pasricha. 2018. Mixed-criticality scheduling on heterogeneous multicore systems powered by energy harvesting. Integration, the VLSI Journal 61 (2018), 114--124.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Y. Xiang and S. Pasricha. 2015. Run-time management for multicore embedded systems with energy harvesting. IEEE Trans. VLSI Syst. 23, 12 (2015), 2176--2889.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. A. Biondi and G. Buttazzo. 2017. Timing-aware FPGA partitioning for real-time applications under dynamic partial reconfiguration. In Proceedings of the NASA/ESA Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems (AHS’17). 172--179.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. M. Damschen, Lars Bauer, and J. Henkel. 2016. Extending the WCET Problem to Optimize for Runtime-Reconfigurable Processors. ACM Trans. Arch. Code Optimiz. 13, 4 (2016), Article 45.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. M. Damschen. 2019. Worst-Case Execution Time Guarantees for Runtime-Reconfigurable Architectures. Ph.D. Dissertation. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), GermanyGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. G. Charitopoulos, I. Koidis, K. Papadimitriou, and D. Pnevmatikatos. 2015. Hardware task scheduling for partially reconfigurable FPGAs. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Applied Reconfigurable Computing (ARC’15). 487--498.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. S. Saha, A. Sarkar, and A. Chakrabarti. 2017. Spatio-temporal scheduling of preemptive real-time tasks on partially reconfigurable systems. ACM Trans. Design Autom. Electr. Syst. 22, 4 (2017), Article 71, 1--26.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. S. Saha, A. Sarkar, A. Chakrabarti, and R. Ghosh. 2018. Co-scheduling persistent periodic and dynamic aperiodic real-time tasks on reconfigurable platforms. IEEE Trans. Multi-Scale Comput. Syst. 4, 1 (2018), 41--54.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. A. Basak, S. Bhunia, T. E. Tkacik, and S. Ray. 2017. Security assurance for system-on-chip designs with untrusted IPs. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forens. Secur. 12, 7 (2017), 1515--1528.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. K. Guha, A. Majumder, D. Saha, and A. Chakrabarti. 2018. Reliability driven mixed critical tasks processing on FPGAs against hardware Trojan attacks. In Proceedings of the Conference on Digital System Design (DSD’18). 537--544.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. K. Guha, A. Majumder, D. Saha, and A. Chakrabarti. 2019. Criticality based reliability against hardware Trojan attacks for processing of tasks on reconfigurable hardware. Microprocessors and Microsystems 71 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. S. Saha, S. Ehsan, A. Stoica, R. Stolkin, and K. McDonald-Maier. 2018. Real-time application processing for FPGA-based resilient embedded systems in harsh environments. In Proceedings of the NASA/ESA Conference on Adaptive Hardware and Systems (AHS’18). 299--304.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. K. Guha, S. Saha, and A. Chakrabarti. 2018. SHIRT (Self Healing Intelligent Real Time) scheduling for secure embedded task processing. In Proceedings of the International Conference on VLSI Design and Embedded Systems. 463--464.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. K. Guha, D. Saha, and A. Chakrabarti. 2020. A multi-agent co-operative model to facilitate criticality based reliability for mixed critical task execution on FPGA based cloud environment. In Proceedings of the International Conference on VLSI Design and Embedded Systems (VLSID’20). 143--148.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. K. Guha, A. Majumder, D. Saha, and A. Chakrabarti. 2020. Dynamic power-aware scheduling of real-time tasks for FPGA-based cyber physical systems against power draining hardware trojan attacks. The Journal of Supercomputing 76 (2020), 8972–9009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. A. Aliyu, A. Bello, et. al. 2014. Hardware Trojan model for attack and detection techniques. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 3, 3 (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. K. R. Townsend, O. G. Attia, P. H. Jones, and J. Zambreno. 2015. A scalable unsegmented multiport memory for FPGA-based systems. Int. J. Reconfig. Comput. 2015 (2015), Article 826283, 12 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. A. Iordache, G. Pierre, P. Sanders, J. G. de F. Coutinho, and M. Stillwell. 2016. High performance in the cloud with FPGA groups. In Proceedings of the 9th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Utility and Cloud Computing (UCC’16). 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. P. Banerjee, M. Sangtani, and S. Sur-Kolay. 2011. Floorplanning for partially reconfigurable fpgas. IEEE Trans. CAD Integr. Circ. Syst. 30, 1 (2011), 8--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Xilinx. 2018. 7 Series FPGAs Clocking Resources, User Guide UG 472, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. J. JV Rajendran, O. Sinanoglu, and R. Karri. 2016. Building trustworthy systems using untrusted components: A high-level synthesis approach. IEEE Trans. VLSI 24, 9 (2016), 2946--2959.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Xilinx boards. Retrieved from https://www.xilinx.com/products/boards-and-kits.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Minimization of WCRT with Recovery Assurance from Hardware Trojans for Tasks on FPGA-based Cloud

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format
        About Cookies On This Site

        We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

        Learn more

        Got it!