MARTE12_ — Missing constraint between scheduler and scheduling parameters

In the GRM domain model (Figure 10.11) and GRM profile (Figure 10.16), there should be a constraint that enforce consistency between scheduling parameters and the related scheduler (e.g. a task brokered by an HPF scheduler cannot have anything else than a priority - integer - as a scheduling parameter).

Resolved

Discussion:
The nature of a scheduler is described by mean of its corresponding Scheduling Policy. It is this policy the one that has to be compatible with the scheduling parameters of the schedulable resources linked to the respective scheduler.

This requires a brief comment in the description of the scheduling package and specific constraints in the description of the schedulable resource element in the explanation of the semantic of the domain model in appendix F and the description of the SchedulableResource stereotype.

The same need for compatibility exist between the Scheduling Policy of a scheduler and the ProtectProtocolKind of the MutualExclussionProtocol of the MutualExclusionResources associated to the scheduler. Also between that ProtectProtocolKind and the corresponding ProtectionParameters of the MutualExclusionResources

Summary:
So the need for these details in the consistency of models will be pointed out in the description of the scheduling package and specific constraints will be inserted in the description of the schedulable resource element; both, in the explanation of the semantic of the domain model in appendix F and in the description of the SchedulableResource stereotype.
Also the definition of MutualExclusionResources indicates this constraints but a precise consistency table needs to be provided.