Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-2h6rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-13T07:11:14.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hardware integrity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

W. J. Cullyer
W. J. Cullyer*
Affiliation:
Computing Division, Royal Signals and Radar Establishment, Great Malvern
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Research at RSRE has revealed significant problems in the use of commercial microprocessors in safety critical equipment. The difficulties arise from the imprecise documentation of the instruction sets by the microprocessor manufacturers and changes in internal design and external functionality during the years a popular device is marketed. To meet certain defence needs, RSRE is conducting research on formal methods of design and implementation of VLSI chips which provide simple processing capability and can be proved to be functionally correct. The first product of this research is a new 32-bit microprocessor architecture, called VIPER, which is described in outline in this paper. Although the primary application of such high integrity devices is in the defence field it is believed that they would be of great value in civil aviation, both in fast control loops in aircraft and in the control of critical DVOR/ DME, ILS and MLS transmitters on the ground.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 89 , Issue 887 , September 1985 , pp. 263 - 268
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1985 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cullyer, W. J. Software Design Methods, Proceedings of Symposium ‘Design and advanced concepts of avionics/weapons systems integration’, Royal Aeronautical Society, April 1984.Google Scholar
2 Gordon, M. LCF-LSM, University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory, Technical Report No 41.Google Scholar
3 Gordon, M., Milner, R. A. and Wadsworth, C. P. Edinburgh LCF. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag. 1979.Google Scholar
4 Currie, I. F. Orwellian programming in safety critical systems Proceedings of Conference ‘System programming languages practice and experience’, IFIP, University of Kent at Canterbury, September 1984.Google Scholar
5 Kershaw, J. TWO implementations of the FLEX machine. Proceedings of the 14th Microprogramming Workshop, ACM/IEEE, October 1981.Google Scholar
6 Kershaw, J. GEMINI microprogrammers handbook. RSRE Report 82015, September 1982 (unlimited).Google Scholar
7 Morison, J. D., Peeling, N. E., Thorp, T. L. ELLA: Hardware description or specification? Proceedings IEEE International Conference, CAD-84. Santa Clara, November 1984.Google Scholar
8 Grierson, J. R., Cosgrove, B., Daniel, R., Halliwell, R. E. Kirk, I. H., Knight, J. C, Mclean, J. A., Mcgrail, J. M. and Newton, C.O. The UK5000, successful collaborative develop ment of an integrated design system for a 5000 gate CMOS array with built-in test. Proceedings ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference, Miami Beach, June 1983.Google Scholar
9 Pygott, C. H. Formal hardware validation using a high level simulation language (Submitted by RSRE for open publication, February 1985).Google Scholar