ch5.pptx

Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling
Operating System Concepts – 10th Edition Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018
Outline
▪ Basic Concepts
▪ Scheduling Criteria
▪ Scheduling Algorithms
▪ Thread Scheduling
▪ Multi-Processor Scheduling
▪ Real-Time CPU Scheduling
▪ Operating Systems Examples
▪ Algorithm Evaluation
Operating System Concepts – 10th Edition 5.2 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018
Objectives
▪ Describe various CPU scheduling algorithms

▪ Assess CPU scheduling algorithms based on scheduling criteria
▪ Explain the issues related to multiprocessor and multicore
scheduling
▪ Describe various real-time scheduling algorithms
▪ Describe the scheduling algorithms used in the Windows, Linux, and
Solaris operating systems
▪ Apply modeling and simulations to evaluate CPU scheduling
algorithms
Basic Concepts
▪ Maximum CPU utilization

obtained with multiprogramming
▪ CPU–I/O Burst Cycle – Process
execution consists of a cycle of
CPU execution and I/O wait
▪ CPU burst followed by I/O burst
▪ CPU burst distribution is of main
concern
Histogram of CPU-burst Times
Large number of short bursts
Small number of longer bursts
CPU Scheduler
▪ The CPU scheduler selects from among the processes in ready
queue, and allocates a CPU core to one of them
• Queue may be ordered in various ways
▪ CPU scheduling decisions may take place when a process:
1. Switches from running to waiting state
2. Switches from running to ready state
3. Switches from waiting to ready
4. Terminates
▪ For situations 1 and 4, there is no choice in terms of scheduling.
A new process (if one exists in the ready queue) must be selected
for execution.
▪ For situations 2 and 3, however, there is a choice.
Preemptive and Nonpreemptive Scheduling
▪ When scheduling takes place only under circumstances 1

and 4, the scheduling scheme is nonpreemptive.
▪ Otherwise, it is preemptive.
▪ Under Nonpreemptive scheduling, once the CPU has been
allocated to a process, the process keeps the CPU until it
releases it either by terminating or by switching to the waiting
state.
▪ Virtually all modern operating systems including Windows,
MacOS, Linux, and UNIX use preemptive scheduling
algorithms.
Preemptive Scheduling and Race Conditions
▪ Preemptive scheduling can result in race conditions

when data are shared among several processes.
▪ Consider the case of two processes that share data.
While one process is updating the data, it is preempted
so that the second process can run. The second
process then tries to read the data, which are in an
inconsistent state.
▪ This issue will be explored in detail in Chapter 6.
Dispatcher
▪ Dispatcher module gives control of the
CPU to the process selected by the CPU
scheduler; this involves:
• Switching context
• Switching to user mode
• Jumping to the proper location in the
user program to restart that program
▪ Dispatch latency – time it takes for the
dispatcher to stop one process and start
another running
Scheduling Criteria
▪ CPU utilization – keep the CPU as busy as possible

▪ Throughput – # of processes that complete their execution
per time unit
▪ Turnaround time – amount of time to execute a particular
process
▪ Waiting time – amount of time a process has been waiting
in the ready queue
▪ Response time – amount of time it takes from when a
request was submitted until the first response is produced.
Scheduling Algorithm Optimization Criteria
▪ Max CPU utilization

▪ Max throughput
▪ Min turnaround time
▪ Min waiting time
▪ Min response time
First- Come, First-Served (FCFS) Scheduling
Process Burst Time

P1 24
P2 3
P3 3
▪ Suppose that the processes arrive in the order: P1 , P2 , P3
The Gantt Chart for the schedule is:
▪ Waiting time for P1 = 0; P2 = 24; P3 = 27

▪ Average waiting time: (0 + 24 + 27)/3 = 17
FCFS Scheduling (Cont.)
Suppose that the processes arrive in the order:

P2 , P3 , P1
▪ The Gantt chart for the schedule is:
▪ Waiting time for P1 = 6; P2 = 0; P3 = 3

▪ Average waiting time: (6 + 0 + 3)/3 = 3
▪ Much better than previous case
▪ Convoy effect - short process behind long process
• Consider one CPU-bound and many I/O-bound processes
Shortest-Job-First (SJF) Scheduling
▪ Associate with each process the length of its next CPU burst
• Use these lengths to schedule the process with the shortest time
▪ SJF is optimal – gives minimum average waiting time for a given set
of processes
• The difficulty is knowing the length of the next CPU request
• Could ask the user
Shortest-Job-First (SJF) Scheduling
▪ Associate with each process the length of its next CPU burst
• Use these lengths to schedule the process with the
shortest time
▪ SJF is optimal – gives minimum average waiting time for a
given set of processes
▪ Preemptive version called shortest-remaining-time-first
▪ How do we determine the length of the next CPU burst?
• Could ask the user
• Estimate
Example of SJF
ProcessArriva l Time Burst Time

P1 0.0 6
P2 2.0 8
P3 4.0 7
P4 5.0 3
▪ SJF scheduling chart
▪ Average waiting time = (3 + 16 + 9 + 0) / 4 = 7
Determining Length of Next CPU Burst
▪ Can only estimate the length – should be similar to the previous one
• Then pick process with shortest predicted next CPU burst
▪ Can be done by using the length of previous CPU bursts, using
exponential averaging
▪ Commonly, α set to ½
Prediction of the Length of the Next CPU Burst
Examples of Exponential Averaging
▪ α =0
• τn+1 = τn
• Recent history does not count
▪ α =1
• τn+1 = α tn
• Only the actual last CPU burst counts
▪ If we expand the formula, we get:
τn+1 = α tn+(1 - α)α tn -1 + …
+(1 - α )j α tn -j + …
+(1 - α )n +1 τ0
▪ Since both α and (1 - α) are less than or equal to 1, each successive

term has less weight than its predecessor
Example of Shortest-remaining-time-first
▪ Now we add the concepts of varying arrival times and preemption to

the analysis
ProcessA arri Arrival TimeT Burst Time
P1 0 8
P2 1 4
P3 2 9
P4 3 5
▪ Preemptive SJF Gantt Chart
▪ Average waiting time = [(10-1)+(1-1)+(17-2)+(5-3)]/4 = 26/4 = 6.5
Round Robin (RR)
▪ Each process gets a small unit of CPU time (time quantum q),
usually 10-100 milliseconds. After this time has elapsed, the
process is preempted and added to the end of the ready queue.
▪ If there are n processes in the ready queue and the time quantum
is q, then each process gets 1/n of the CPU time in chunks of at
most q time units at once. No process waits more than (n-1)q
time units.
▪ Timer interrupts every quantum to schedule next process
▪ Performance
• q large ⇒ FIFO
• q small ⇒ q must be large with respect to context switch,
otherwise overhead is too high
Example of RR with Time Quantum = 4
Process Burst Time

P1 24
P2 3
P3 3
▪ The Gantt chart is:
▪ Typically, higher average turnaround than SJF, but better response

▪ q should be large compared to context switch time
• q usually 10 milliseconds to 100 milliseconds,
• Context switch < 10 microseconds
Time Quantum and Context Switch Time
Turnaround Time Varies With The Time Quantum
80% of CPU bursts

should be shorter than q
Priority Scheduling
▪ A priority number (integer) is associated with each process
▪ The CPU is allocated to the process with the highest priority (smallest
integer ≡ highest priority)
• Preemptive
• Nonpreemptive
▪ SJF is priority scheduling where priority is the inverse of predicted

next CPU burst time
▪ Problem ≡ Starvation – low priority processes may never execute
▪ Solution ≡ Aging – as time progresses increase the priority of the

process
Example of Priority Scheduling
ProcessA arri Burst TimeT Priority

P1 10 3
P2 1 1
P3 2 4
P4 1 5
P5 5 2
▪ Priority scheduling Gantt Chart
▪ Average waiting time = 8.2
Priority Scheduling w/ Round-Robin
ProcessA arri Burst TimeT Priority
P1 4 3
P2 5 2
P3 8 2
P4 7 1
P5 3 3
▪ Run the process with the highest priority. Processes with the same
priority run round-robin
▪ Gantt Chart with time quantum = 2
Multilevel Queue
▪ With priority scheduling, have separate queues for each priority.
▪ Schedule the process in the highest-priority queue!
Multilevel Queue
▪ Prioritization based upon process type
Multilevel Feedback Queue
▪ A process can move between the various queues.
▪ Multilevel-feedback-queue scheduler defined by the following
parameters:
• Number of queues
• Scheduling algorithms for each queue
• Method used to determine when to upgrade a process
• Method used to determine when to demote a process
• Method used to determine which queue a process will enter
when that process needs service
▪ Aging can be implemented using multilevel feedback queue
Example of Multilevel Feedback Queue
▪ Three queues:
• Q0 – RR with time quantum 8 milliseconds
• Q1 – RR time quantum 16 milliseconds
• Q2 – FCFS
▪ Scheduling
• A new process enters queue Q0 which is
served in RR
4 When it gains CPU, the process receives 8
milliseconds
4 If it does not finish in 8 milliseconds, the
process is moved to queue Q1
• At Q1 job is again served in RR and
receives 16 additional milliseconds
4 If it still does not complete, it is preempted
and moved to queue Q2
Thread Scheduling
▪ Distinction between user-level and kernel-level threads
▪ When threads supported, threads scheduled, not processes
▪ Many-to-one and many-to-many models, thread library schedules
user-level threads to run on LWP
• Known as process-contention scope (PCS) since scheduling
competition is within the process
• Typically done via priority set by programmer
▪ Kernel thread scheduled onto available CPU is system-contention
scope (SCS) – competition among all threads in system
Pthread Scheduling
▪ API allows specifying either PCS or SCS during thread creation
• PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS schedules threads using PCS
scheduling
• PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM schedules threads using SCS
scheduling
▪ Can be limited by OS – Linux and macOS only allow
PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM
Pthread Scheduling API
#include <pthread.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#define NUM_THREADS 5
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
int i, scope;
pthread_t tid[NUM THREADS];
pthread_attr_t attr;
/* get the default attributes */
pthread_attr_init(&attr);
/* first inquire on the current scope */
if (pthread_attr_getscope(&attr, &scope) != 0)
fprintf(stderr, "Unable to get scheduling scope\n");
else {
if (scope == PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS)
printf("PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS");
else if (scope == PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM)
printf("PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM");
else
fprintf(stderr, "Illegal scope value.\n");
}
Pthread Scheduling API
/* set the scheduling algorithm to PCS or SCS */

pthread_attr_setscope(&attr, PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM);
/* create the threads */
for (i = 0; i < NUM_THREADS; i++)
pthread_create(&tid[i],&attr,runner,NULL);
/* now join on each thread */
pthread_join(tid[i], NULL);
}
/* Each thread will begin control in this function */
void *runner(void *param)
{
/* do some work ... */
pthread_exit(0);
}
Multiple-Processor Scheduling
▪ CPU scheduling more complex when multiple CPUs are available

▪ Multiprocess may be any one of the following architectures:
• Multicore CPUs
• Multithreaded cores
• NUMA systems
• Heterogeneous multiprocessing
Multiple-Processor Scheduling
▪ Symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) is where each processor is self

scheduling.
▪ All threads may be in a common ready queue (a)
▪ Each processor may have its own private queue of threads (b)
Multicore Processors
▪ Recent trend to place multiple processor cores on same physical chip
▪ Faster and consumes less power
▪ Multiple threads per core also growing
• Takes advantage of memory stall to make progress on another
thread while memory retrieve happens
▪ Figure
Multithreaded Multicore System
▪ Each core has > 1 hardware threads.

▪ If one thread has a memory stall, switch to another thread!
▪ Figure
▪ Chip-multithreading (CMT)
assigns each core multiple
hardware threads. (Intel refers
to this as hyperthreading.)
▪ On a quad-core system with 2

hardware threads per core, the
operating system sees 8 logical
processors.
▪ Two levels of scheduling:
1. The operating system

deciding which
software thread to run
on a logical CPU
2. How each core

decides which
hardware thread to
run on the physical
core.
Multiple-Processor Scheduling – Load Balancing
▪ If SMP, need to keep all CPUs loaded for efficiency

▪ Load balancing attempts to keep workload evenly distributed
▪ Push migration – periodic task checks load on each processor,
and if found pushes task from overloaded CPU to other CPUs
▪ Pull migration – idle processors pulls waiting task from busy
processor
Multiple-Processor Scheduling – Processor Affinity
▪ When a thread has been running on one processor, the cache contents
of that processor stores the memory accesses by that thread.
▪ We refer to this as a thread having affinity for a processor (i.e.,
“processor affinity”)
▪ Load balancing may affect processor affinity as a thread may be
moved from one processor to another to balance loads, yet that thread
loses the contents of what it had in the cache of the processor it was
moved off of.
▪ Soft affinity – the operating system attempts to keep a thread running
on the same processor, but no guarantees.
▪ Hard affinity – allows a process to specify a set of processors it may
run on.
NUMA and CPU Scheduling
If the operating system is NUMA-aware, it will assign memory closes
to the CPU the thread is running on.
Real-Time CPU Scheduling
▪ Can present obvious challenges
▪ Soft real-time systems – Critical real-time tasks have the highest
priority, but no guarantee as to when tasks will be scheduled
▪ Hard real-time systems – task must be serviced by its deadline
Real-Time CPU Scheduling
▪ Event latency – the amount of

time that elapses from when
an event occurs to when it is
serviced.
▪ Two types of latencies affect
performance
1. Interrupt latency – time
from arrival of interrupt to
start of routine that
services interrupt
2. Dispatch latency – time
for schedule to take
current process off CPU
and switch to another
Interrupt Latency
Dispatch Latency
▪ Conflict phase of
dispatch latency:
1. Preemption of
any process
running in kernel
mode
2. Release by
low-priority
process of
resources
needed by
high-priority
processes
Priority-based Scheduling
▪ For real-time scheduling, scheduler must support preemptive,
priority-based scheduling
• But only guarantees soft real-time
▪ For hard real-time must also provide ability to meet deadlines
▪ Processes have new characteristics: periodic ones require CPU at
constant intervals
• Has processing time t, deadline d, period p
• 0≤t≤d≤p
• Rate of periodic task is 1/p
Rate Monotonic Scheduling
▪ A priority is assigned based on the inverse of its period
▪ Shorter periods = higher priority;
▪ Longer periods = lower priority
▪ P1 is assigned a higher priority than P2.
Missed Deadlines with Rate Monotonic Scheduling
▪ Process P2 misses finishing its deadline at time 80

▪ Figure
Earliest Deadline First Scheduling (EDF)
▪ Priorities are assigned according to deadlines:

• The earlier the deadline, the higher the priority
• The later the deadline, the lower the priority
▪ Figure
Proportional Share Scheduling
▪ T shares are allocated among all processes in the system

▪ An application receives N shares where N < T
▪ This ensures each application will receive N / T of the total
processor time
POSIX Real-Time Scheduling
▪ The POSIX.1b standard
▪ API provides functions for managing real-time threads
▪ Defines two scheduling classes for real-time threads:
1. SCHED_FIFO - threads are scheduled using a FCFS strategy with
a FIFO queue. There is no time-slicing for threads of equal priority
2. SCHED_RR - similar to SCHED_FIFO except time-slicing occurs
for threads of equal priority
▪ Defines two functions for getting and setting scheduling policy:
1. pthread_attr_getsched_policy(pthread_attr_t
*attr, int *policy)
2. pthread_attr_setsched_policy(pthread_attr_t
*attr, int policy)
POSIX Real-Time Scheduling API
#include <pthread.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#define NUM_THREADS 5
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
int i, policy;
pthread_t_tid[NUM_THREADS];
pthread_attr_t attr;
/* get the default attributes */
pthread_attr_init(&attr);
/* get the current scheduling policy */
if (pthread_attr_getschedpolicy(&attr, &policy) != 0)
fprintf(stderr, "Unable to get policy.\n");
else {
if (policy == SCHED_OTHER) printf("SCHED_OTHER\n");
else if (policy == SCHED_RR) printf("SCHED_RR\n");
else if (policy == SCHED_FIFO) printf("SCHED_FIFO\n");
}
POSIX Real-Time Scheduling API (Cont.)
/* set the scheduling policy - FIFO, RR, or OTHER */

if (pthread_attr_setschedpolicy(&attr, SCHED_FIFO) != 0)
fprintf(stderr, "Unable to set policy.\n");
/* create the threads */
pthread_create(&tid[i],&attr,runner,NULL);
/* now join on each thread */
pthread_join(tid[i], NULL);
}
/* Each thread will begin control in this function */

void *runner(void *param)
{
/* do some work ... */
pthread_exit(0);
}
Operating System Examples
▪ Linux scheduling
▪ Windows scheduling
▪ Solaris scheduling
Linux Scheduling Through Version 2.5
▪ Prior to kernel version 2.5, ran variation of standard UNIX scheduling algorithm
▪ Version 2.5 moved to constant order O(1) scheduling time
• Preemptive, priority based
• Two priority ranges: time-sharing and real-time
• Real-time range from 0 to 99 and nice value from 100 to 140
• Map into global priority with numerically lower values indicating higher
priority
• Higher priority gets larger q
• Task run-able as long as time left in time slice (active)
• If no time left (expired), not run-able until all other tasks use their slices
• All run-able tasks tracked in per-CPU runqueue data structure
4 Two priority arrays (active, expired)
4 Tasks indexed by priority
4 When no more active, arrays are exchanged
• Worked well, but poor response times for interactive processes
Linux Scheduling in Version 2.6.23 +
▪ Completely Fair Scheduler (CFS)
▪ Scheduling classes
• Each has specific priority
• Scheduler picks highest priority task in highest scheduling class
• Rather than quantum based on fixed time allotments, based on
proportion of CPU time
• Two scheduling classes included, others can be added
1. default
2. real-time
Linux Scheduling in Version 2.6.23 + (Cont.)
▪ Quantum calculated based on nice value from -20 to +19

• Lower value is higher priority
• Calculates target latency – interval of time during which task
should run at least once
• Target latency can increase if say number of active tasks
increases
▪ CFS scheduler maintains per task virtual run time in variable
vruntime
• Associated with decay factor based on priority of task – lower
priority is higher decay rate
• Normal default priority yields virtual run time = actual run time
▪ To decide next task to run, scheduler picks task with lowest
virtual run time
CFS Performance
Linux Scheduling (Cont.)
▪ Real-time scheduling according to POSIX.1b
• Real-time tasks have static priorities
▪ Real-time plus normal map into global priority scheme
▪ Nice value of -20 maps to global priority 100
▪ Nice value of +19 maps to priority 139
Linux Scheduling (Cont.)
▪ Linux supports load balancing, but is also NUMA-aware.
▪ Scheduling domain is a set of CPU cores that can be balanced
against one another.
▪ Domains are organized by what they share (i.e., cache memory.) Goal
is to keep threads from migrating between domains.
Windows Scheduling
▪ Windows uses priority-based preemptive scheduling
▪ Highest-priority thread runs next
▪ Dispatcher is scheduler
▪ Thread runs until (1) blocks, (2) uses time slice, (3)
preempted by higher-priority thread
▪ Real-time threads can preempt non-real-time
▪ 32-level priority scheme
▪ Variable class is 1-15, real-time class is 16-31
▪ Priority 0 is memory-management thread
▪ Queue for each priority
▪ If no run-able thread, runs idle thread
Windows Priority Classes
▪ Win32 API identifies several priority classes to which a process can
belong
• REALTIME_PRIORITY_CLASS, HIGH_PRIORITY_CLASS,
ABOVE_NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLASS,NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLAS
S, BELOW_NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLASS,
IDLE_PRIORITY_CLASS
• All are variable except REALTIME
▪ A thread within a given priority class has a relative priority
• TIME_CRITICAL, HIGHEST, ABOVE_NORMAL, NORMAL,
BELOW_NORMAL, LOWEST, IDLE
▪ Priority class and relative priority combine to give numeric priority
▪ Base priority is NORMAL within the class
▪ If quantum expires, priority lowered, but never below base
Windows Priority Classes (Cont.)
▪ If wait occurs, priority boosted depending on what was waited for
▪ Foreground window given 3x priority boost
▪ Windows 7 added user-mode scheduling (UMS)
• Applications create and manage threads independent of kernel
• For large number of threads, much more efficient
• UMS schedulers come from programming language libraries like
C++ Concurrent Runtime (ConcRT) framework
Windows Priorities
Solaris
▪ Priority-based scheduling
▪ Six classes available
• Time sharing (default) (TS)
• Interactive (IA)
• Real time (RT)
• System (SYS)
• Fair Share (FSS)
• Fixed priority (FP)
▪ Given thread can be in one class at a time
▪ Each class has its own scheduling algorithm
▪ Time sharing is multi-level feedback queue
• Loadable table configurable by sysadmin
Solaris Dispatch Table
Solaris Scheduling
Solaris Scheduling (Cont.)
▪ Scheduler converts class-specific priorities into a per-thread
global priority
• Thread with highest priority runs next
• Runs until (1) blocks, (2) uses time slice, (3) preempted by
higher-priority thread
• Multiple threads at same priority selected via RR
Algorithm Evaluation
▪ How to select CPU-scheduling algorithm for an OS?
▪ Determine criteria, then evaluate algorithms
▪ Deterministic modeling
• Type of analytic evaluation
• Takes a particular predetermined workload and defines
the performance of each algorithm for that workload
▪ Consider 5 processes arriving at time 0:
Deterministic Evaluation
▪ For each algorithm, calculate minimum average waiting time

▪ Simple and fast, but requires exact numbers for input, applies
only to those inputs
• FCS is 28ms:
• Non-preemptive SFJ is 13ms:
• RR is 23ms:
Queueing Models
▪ Describes the arrival of processes, and CPU and I/O bursts
probabilistically
• Commonly exponential, and described by mean
• Computes average throughput, utilization, waiting time, etc.
▪ Computer system described as network of servers, each with
queue of waiting processes
• Knowing arrival rates and service rates
• Computes utilization, average queue length, average wait
time, etc.
Little’s Formula
▪ n = average queue length
▪ W = average waiting time in queue
▪ λ = average arrival rate into queue
▪ Little’s law – in steady state, processes leaving queue must
equal processes arriving, thus:
n=λxW
• Valid for any scheduling algorithm and arrival distribution
▪ For example, if on average 7 processes arrive per second, and
normally 14 processes in queue, then average wait time per
process = 2 seconds
Simulations
▪ Queueing models limited
▪ Simulations more accurate
• Programmed model of computer system
• Clock is a variable
• Gather statistics indicating algorithm performance
• Data to drive simulation gathered via
4 Random number generator according to probabilities
4 Distributions defined mathematically or empirically
4 Trace tapes record sequences of real events in real systems
Evaluation of CPU Schedulers by Simulation
Implementation
▪ Even simulations have limited accuracy
▪ Just implement new scheduler and test in real systems
• High cost, high risk
• Environments vary
▪ Most flexible schedulers can be modified per-site or per-system
▪ Or APIs to modify priorities
▪ But again environments vary
End of Chapter 5
Operating System Concepts – 10th Edition Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

ch5.pptx

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ch5.pptx

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ch5.pptx

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling

▪ Describe various CPU scheduling algorithms

▪ Maximum CPU utilization

Large number of short bursts

Small number of longer bursts

▪ When scheduling takes place only under circumstances 1

▪ Preemptive scheduling can result in race conditions

▪ CPU utilization – keep the CPU as busy as possible

▪ Max CPU utilization

Process Burst Time

▪ Waiting time for P1 = 0; P2 = 24; P3 = 27

Suppose that the processes arrive in the order:

▪ Waiting time for P1 = 6; P2 = 0; P3 = 3

ProcessArriva l Time Burst Time

▪ SJF scheduling chart

▪ Average waiting time = (3 + 16 + 9 + 0) / 4 = 7

▪ Since both α and (1 - α) are less than or equal to 1, each successive

▪ Now we add the concepts of varying arrival times and preemption to

▪ Average waiting time = [(10-1)+(1-1)+(17-2)+(5-3)]/4 = 26/4 = 6.5

Process Burst Time

▪ Typically, higher average turnaround than SJF, but better response

80% of CPU bursts

▪ A priority number (integer) is associated with each process

▪ SJF is priority scheduling where priority is the inverse of predicted

▪ Problem ≡ Starvation – low priority processes may never execute

▪ Solution ≡ Aging – as time progresses increase the priority of the

ProcessA arri Burst TimeT Priority

▪ Priority scheduling Gantt Chart

▪ Average waiting time = 8.2

▪ Gantt Chart with time quantum = 2

▪ Prioritization based upon process type

/* set the scheduling algorithm to PCS or SCS */

▪ CPU scheduling more complex when multiple CPUs are available

▪ Symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) is where each processor is self

▪ Each core has > 1 hardware threads.

▪ On a quad-core system with 2

▪ Two levels of scheduling:

1. The operating system

2. How each core

▪ If SMP, need to keep all CPUs loaded for eﬃciency

▪ Event latency – the amount of

▪ Process P2 misses ﬁnishing its deadline at time 80

▪ Priorities are assigned according to deadlines:

▪ T shares are allocated among all processes in the system

/* set the scheduling policy - FIFO, RR, or OTHER */

/* Each thread will begin control in this function */

• Worked well, but poor response times for interactive processes

▪ Quantum calculated based on nice value from -20 to +19

▪ For each algorithm, calculate minimum average waiting time

• Non-preemptive SFJ is 13ms:

You might also like