This course can also be taken for academic credit as ECEA 5316, part of CU Boulder’s Master of Science in Electrical Engineering degree.
This course provides an in-depth and full mathematical derivation and review of models for scheduling policies and feasibility determination by hand and with rate monotonic tools along with comparison to actual performance for real-time scheduled threads running on a native Linux system. By the end of this course the learner will be able to full derive the fixed priority rate monotonic least upper bound for feasibility as well as justifying the rate monotonic policy and will be able to compare to dynamic priority scheduling including earliest deadline first and least laxity policies. At the end of this course learners will be able to fully derive and explain the math model for the rate monotonic least upper bound as well as performing timing diagram analysis for fixed and dynamic priority software services. Tools to provide analysis will be learned (Cheddar) to automate timing analysis and to compare to actual performance. Specific objectives include: ● Rate monotonic theory (complete math models) ● Differences between fixed priority rate monotonic policy and dynamic priority earliest deadline first and least laxity policies ● Scheduling theory and practice writing code for multi-frequency executives, priority preemptive RTOS services, and real-time threaded services on traditional operating systems (Linux) ● Building a simple Linux multi-service system using POSIX real-time extensions on Raspberry Pi 3b using sequencing and methods to log and verify agreement between theory and practice ● Timing diagram generation and analysis using Cheddar This course includes specific hardware and software requirements. Please review the FAQ below for complete details.
Showing: 4 of 4
There is a lot of helpful information in this course, but the professor often repeats himself, quizzes you on topics not covered, and is generally disorganized compared to other courses offered through the CU Boulder MSEE program.
It is with quite some regret that I have to rate this course "1" (failure). The contents are really interesting and relevant to my work. But the assignment are a total chaos, and many users have reported this, also for the first course of this specialization. Unfortunately, neither the course provider nor Coursera seem to care about this, which I find blatantly unprofessional. This leaves me no other choice than to give a bad rating. Will this wake up the responsible persons so that action is taken here?
This couse is outdated and has dead links. No one graded my peer review assignment.
Very nice and interesting course. The Professor is an enthusiast and his lessons are very well structured. His preparation and knowledge can be clearly felt from its way of teaching.