System State Management via Bandgap Voting

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Complex computing systems with numerous shared resources face challenges in managing system states due to exponentially increasing numbers of possible states, making comprehensive testing infeasible and inefficient.

Innovation Solution

A method and apparatus for system state management that receive votes from multiple clients to select a suitable system state from a defined set, reducing the number of states to only those used, thereby improving testing efficiency and ensuring proper functionality.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If comprehensive testing of each system state is performed, then testing coverage is improved, but the time and resources required become infeasible due to the exponentially large number of states

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting coverageVSAvoidtesting time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent preconfigures and stores a reduced set of system states that are determined to be necessary for proper functionality before testing begins. This preliminary action eliminates the need to test all possible states during the testing phase, thereby reducing testing time while maintaining adequate coverage of essential system behaviors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Adaptability or versatility

If all possible system states are managed, then system completeness is improved, but device complexity increases exponentially

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem completenessVSAvoidsystem state complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent extracts and retains only the necessary system states from the complete set of possible states. By taking out and storing only those states that are required for proper functionality in a table structure, the system maintains essential completeness while dramatically reducing the complexity of state management.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

3Productivity

If a reduced set of system states is used, then testing efficiency is improved, but the risk of missing critical states increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting efficiencyVSAvoidtesting coverage
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The reduced set of system states is not arbitrarily selected but is preconfigured based on deterministic analysis of which states are necessary for proper functionality. This preliminary determination ensures that the reduced set maintains adequate testing coverage while enabling efficient testing execution.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentUS11132208B2System state management
Publication Date: 2021.09.28 QUALCOMM INC
  • US11132208B2 patent drawing
  • US11132208B2 patent drawing
  • US11132208B2 patent drawing

AI summary

In some aspects, the present disclosure provides a method for bandgap voting. In some configurations, the method includes receiving: (i) a first set of votes from a first client of a system, and (ii) a second set of votes from a second client of the system, wherein the first set of votes indicate a first desired set of operational parameters for controlling a plurality of physical resources in the system, wherein the second set of votes indicate a second desired set of operational parameters for controlling the plurality of physical resources, and wherein the plurality of physical resources are shared by the first client and the second client.