Patent Abstract:
The present invention is directed to a system and method for actively auditing a software system to determine the status. The software system includes a plurality of processes executed in an active processor domain. An active message is generated for processing in the active processor domain. Each process receiving the message modifies it by adding an active time indicator to it; thereby creating a modified active message. The status of the active processor domain is determined in response to the modified active message.

Full Description:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION 
   The invention relates generally to fault detection in a computer system and more specifically to a method and system for determining software faults within a processor domain. 
   BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
   Generally, it is difficult to determine the health and status of software processes in distributed software system due to the complex inter-relationships and distributed nature of the software environment. Typically, fault detection mechanisms in this environment are either very fine-grained for specific errors (e.g., bus errors) or very course-grained for general errors (e.g., protocol timeouts). There are many other fault conditions (e.g., system hangs, priority inversion, scheduler thrashing, and over-burdened queue depths) which are also detrimental to proper system functionality but which are difficult to detect and isolate in distributed software systems. 
   Typically, a redundant software system is employed to increase the overall availability of the system. When a software fault is detected in one system the redundant system takes control of the system operations. Generally, three redundancy models are used that vary in cost and complexity. A first model, depicted in  FIG. 1 , includes four processor domains  100   a ,  100   b ,  100   c ,  100   d  (referred to generally as  100 ), grouped into two pairs. Each pair communicates with its own non-redundant comparator function  110   a ,  110   b  (referred to generally as  110 ) that checks the output from each pair separately in a synchronous fashion. Each processor element in each of the processor domains  100  of the pair should generate the same result (the same software is operating with the same data). When a comparator function  110  determines mismatch in any result, the other pair of processor domains  100  take over. If the comparator function  110  fails, the other pair of processor domains  100  takes over. Thus both the active processor domains  100  and comparator function  110  are protected from single points of failures. 
   With reference to  FIG. 2 , a second redundancy model includes three processor domains  200   a ,  200   b  and  200   c  (referred to generally as  200 ). The model runs as a single lockstep entity (i.e., each processor domain runs the same code and receives the same data). A comparator function  210  compares the output of all three processor domains  200 . If the results of one of the processor domains disagrees with the results of the other two processor domains, that processor domain  200  is declared faulty and it is taken out of service. If the comparator  210  fails then one processor domain is taken out of service, but the other two processor domains remain in service. 
   The third typical redundancy model includes two processors domains, one active and one stand-by. The processor domains may be running in lockstep or the stand-by processor domain could constantly be updated by state messages from the active processor domain. There is no comparator function because there is no way to determine which processor domain is functioning correctly. Thus, failure is “self-determined” within a processor domain by running a low-level “heartbeat” function or relying on system traps (e.g., bus error timeouts). This model is generally less expensive than the other redundancy models mentioned above. However, the ability to isolate faults is reduced because of the lack of hardware comparator redundancy. 
   What is needed is a redundancy scheme capable of providing high availability with an increased sensitivity to process faults within a processor domain. 
   SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
   The present invention is directed to providing a highly available redundancy scheme sensitive to individual process faults within a processor domain. A message is provided to processes in a processor domain in a “daisy-chained” fashion and each process time-stamps the message and passes it on to the next process in a list. The list is included in the message and represents all the processes within the given processor domain that will receive the message. The same method is implemented in a redundant (stand-by)processor domain. Once the messages have been time-stamped by all the processes, the time-stamped messages are communicated to a separate processor domain that verifies the time-stamped process list as correct, thereby determining the health and correctness of the audited processor domains. 
   One aspect of the present invention is directed to a method of actively auditing a software system to determine the status. The software system includes a plurality of processes executed in an active processor domain. The method includes the steps of generating an active message to be processed by the active processor domain, generating a modified active message by providing an active time indicator associated with the active message for at least one of the processes of the plurality, and determining the status of the active processor domain in response to the modified active message. 
   In one embodiment, the status of the active processor domain is determined in response to the active time indicator. In another embodiment, the active time indicator includes a time-stamp indicating the time that the at least one process completed processing the active message. In an alternate embodiment, the time-stamp indicates the time elapsed while the at least one process completed processing the active message. 
   In another embodiment, the method includes the steps of determining a statistical characteristic of the active processor domain, and determining the status of the active processor domain in response to the statistical characteristic. In a further embodiment, the step of determining a statistical characteristic includes generating a time average of the duration of the at least one process of the plurality of processes for a plurality of active messages. In still a further embodiment, the step of determining a statistical characteristic includes generating a standard deviation from the time average. 
   In another embodiment, the method includes the steps of generating a stand-by message to be processed in a stand-by processor domain that includes a plurality of stand-by processes, and generating a modified stand-by message by providing a stand-by time indicator for at least one process of the plurality of stand-by processes in the stand-by domain. In a further embodiment, the method includes the step transforming the active processor domain to the stand-by processor domain in response to the modified active message. 
   Another aspect of the present invention is directed to a system for actively auditing a software system to determine status. The system includes an active processor domain, a time-stamp mechanism and a redundancy manager. The active processor domain has at least one processor executing at least on process that receives an active message and generates a modified active message in response. The time-stamp mechanism is in communication with the at least one process and provides an active time indicator for use in generation of the modified active message. The redundancy manager is in communication with the active processor domain and determines the status of the active processor domain in response to the modified active message. 
   In one embodiment, the system includes a stand-by processor domain. The stand-by processor domain includes at least one processor executing at least one stand-by process that receives a stand-by message and generates a modified stand-by message in response. In this embodiment, the redundancy manager determines the status of the stand-by processor domain in response to the modified stand-by message. In a further embodiment, the system includes a control determination module that transforms the active processor domain into the stand-by processor domain in response to the modified active message. 

   
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
     The invention is pointed out with particularity in the appended claims. The advantages of the invention may be better understood by referring to the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawing in which: 
       FIG. 1  is a block diagram depicting an embodiment of a prior art redundancy scheme: 
       FIG. 2  is a block diagram of another embodiment of a prior art redundancy scheme; 
       FIG. 3A  is a block diagram of an embodiment of software audit system constructed in accordance with the present invention; 
       FIG. 3B  is a block diagram of another embodiment of software audit system constructed in accordance with the present invention; 
       FIG. 4  is a flow chart representation of an embodiment of a method of the present invention; 
       FIG. 5  is a flow chart representation of an embodiment of a method step of the present invention; and 
       FIG. 6  is a flow chart representation of an embodiment of a method step of the present invention. 
   

   DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 
   With reference to  FIG. 3A , one embodiment of the present invention includes an active processor domain  310  including an active redundancy manager  314  and a plurality of active processes  318   a ,  318   b ,  318   c  . . .  318   x  (referred to generally a  318 ), a redundant processor domain  320  including a redundant redundancy manager  324  and a plurality of redundant processes  328   a ,  328   b ,  328   c  . . .  328   x  (referred to generally a  328 ), and a voting processor domain  330  including a voting redundancy manger  334 . 
   In operation, active processor domain  310  is fully active (i.e., performing system functions). Active redundancy manger  314  generates an active message. The active message includes a list of the plurality of active processes  318  that will receive the active message and the location of the voting redundancy manager  334 . The active message is communicated to the first active process  318 , more specifically in this illustrative example active process  318   a . Active process  318   a  receives the active message and in response time-stamps the message to generate a modified active message and communicates it to the next active process  318   b . This process continues until the final active process in the list receives the modified active message and time-stamps it. Upon completion of processing the modified active message by the last active process  318   m , the modified active message is communicated to the voting redundancy manager  334 . In a preferred embodiment, the time-stamp includes the time the active message was received by an active process  318 . In an alternative embodiment, the time-stamp includes the time an active process  318  completes the processing of the active message. In yet another embodiment, the time-stamp includes the time elapsed while the active process  318  completed processing the active message. 
   Generally, redundancy processor domain  304  mirrors (i.e., contains the same processes as) active processor domain  310 . Redundant processor domain  320  tracks the state of active processor domain  310 , thus the processing load of the redundant processor domain  320  is significantly less than that of active processor domain  310 . Similar to active redundancy manager  314 , redundant redundancy manger  324  generates a redundant message. The redundant message includes a list of which of the plurality of redundant process  328  that will receive the redundant message and the location of the voting redundancy manager  334 . The redundant message is communicated to the first redundant processes  328 , more specifically in this illustrative example redundant process  328   a . Redundant process  328   a  receives the redundant message and in response time-stamps the message to generate a modified redundant message and communicates it to the next redundant process  328   b . This process continues until the final redundant process in the list receives the modified redundant message and time-stamps it. Upon completion of processing the modified redundant message by the last redundant process  328   m , the modified redundant message is communicated to the voting redundancy manager  334 . In another embodiment, redundant processor domain  314  does not mirror active processor domain  310 . Additionally, redundant processor domain  320  and active processor domain  310  do not have to have synchronized time measurement means. 
   Voting redundancy manager  334  receives both the modified active message and the modified redundant message. Voting redundancy manager  334  logs the received messages and generates a statistical characteristic for the modified active message and the modified redundant message. In one embodiment, the statistical characteristic includes a running mean of the time need to complete the active software audit and a standard deviation therefrom. If the standard deviation determined for the modified active message exceeds a predetermined threshold value (e.g., 2 standard deviations), voting redundancy manger  334  instructs the redundant processor domain  320  to become the fully active (i.e., an active processor domain). Consequently, active processor domain  310  is instructed to transition to a second state and function as a redundant processor domain. The voting function performed by voting processor domain  330  requires a small amount of processing time and thus does not place a large burden on the overall processing resources of the voting processor domain  330 . As a result, active redundancy manager  314  can also function as a voting redundancy manager  334 ′ for voting processor domain  330  and a fourth processor domain  340 . 
     FIG. 3B  depicts an embodiment of the present invention in which six processor domains are being audited for faults. In this embodiment, a redundancy manager  334  of a third processor domain  330  performs the voting function for a first processor domain  310  and a second processor domain  320 . Additionally, a redundancy manager  354  of a fifth processor domain  350  performs the voting function for the third processor domain  330  and a forth processor domain  340 . As shown, one can see that this method can be extended to any number of processor domains and is not limited to the above-described illustrative embodiments. 
   In addition to determining if the processor domain contains a faulted process, the present invention provides the ability to isolate which process or processes in the processor domains have faulted. By subtracting the time-stamp from a process in the list and the previous process in the list, the elapsed time needed for the process to complete the time-stamping function can be determined and logged each time the software audit is performed. Voting redundancy manager  334  generates a running average for each process in the processor domains, and also a standard deviation from the running average for each process in the current audit. If the standard deviation for a process exceeds a predetermined threshold (e.g., two standard deviations), the process is determined to have faulted. This information can be stored or communicated for use in restoring the faulted processor domain to a non-faulty state. 
   With reference to  FIG. 4 , one embodiment of the present invention relates to a method  400  of actively auditing a software system to determine its status. In step  410 , a message is generated for processing by a first processing domain. In one embodiment, the message includes a list of all the processes that will receive the message and process it. In step  430 , a modified message is created by a process in the first processor domain. After each process in the list has attempted to modify the message, the modified active message is provided to a determination processor domain in step  450 . The determination processor domain is separate from the first processor domain and determines the status of the first processor domain in response to the modified active message in step  470 . 
   With reference to  FIG. 5 , the creating of a modified active message in step  430  of method  400  includes, in more detail step  432 , receiving the message by a first process (N) of a plurality of processes running in the first processor domain. The message is time-stamped in step  434  by process N. In one embodiment, if process N is not running or has faulted in another manner, an error message is added to the active message in place of the time-stamp. After the message is modified, a decision is made in step  436  to determine if process N is the last process in the list of processes to receive the message. If process N is not the last process on the list, the method proceeds to step  438  and the message is provide to process N+1, (i.e., the next process in the list) and the time-stamping step  434  is repeated. Once the list process in the list is reached, the modified active message is provided to the determination processor domain in step  450 . 
   With reference to  FIG. 6 , in more detail step  470 , determining the status of the first (active) processor domain, includes receiving the modified message by the determination domain in step  472 . Step  476  determines whether or not the modified active message contains an error message. If an error message is present, the method proceeds to step  480  and the first processor domain is transformed into a stand-by processor domain, and the stand-by processor domain is transformed into an active processor domain. If an error message is not present in the modified message, the method continues to step  484  and a statistical characteristic of the modified message is generated. The statistical characteristic is analyzed to determine if it exceeds a predetermined threshold in step  488 . If the statistical characteristic exceeds the predetermined threshold, the method proceeds to step  480  and the first processor domain is transformed into a stand-by processor domain, and the stand-by processor domain is transformed into an active processor domain. If the statistical characteristic does not exceed the predetermined threshold then method  400  is repeated. In one embodiment, this method is repeated about once per second, although other periods of repetition are possible without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. 
   Having shown the preferred embodiments, one skilled in the art will realize that many variations are possible within the scope and spirit of the claimed invention. It is therefore the intention to limit the invention only by the scope of the claims.

Technology Classification (CPC): 6