Scribd
Upload
22 views20 pages

2 3 Process-Scheduling

operating systems process scheduling

Uploaded by

Nagababu Katakam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
22 views20 pages

2 3 Process-Scheduling

operating systems process scheduling

Uploaded by

Nagababu Katakam
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 20

Operating Systems

Topic: Process – Policies


(Scheduling)

Endadul Hoque
Acknowledgement

• Youjip Won (Hanyang University)

• OSTEP book – by Remzi and Andrea Arpaci-Dusseau


(University of Wisconsin)
Process Scheduling
• Workload assumptions:
1. Each job runs for the same amount of time.
2. All jobs arrive at the same time.
3. All jobs only use the CPU (i.e., they perform no I/O).
4. The run-time of each job is known.
Process Scheduling
• Performance metric: Turnaround time
– The time at which the job completes minus the
time at which the job arrived in the system.

𝑻𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 = 𝑻𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 − 𝑻𝒂𝒓𝒓𝒊𝒗𝒂𝒍

• Another metric is fairness.


– Performance and fairness are often at odds in
scheduling.
First in, First Out (FIFO)
• Also, known as First Come, First Served (FCFS)
– Very simple and easy to implement
• Example:
– A arrived just before B which arrived just before C.
– Each job runs for 10 seconds.
A B C

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time (Second)

𝟏𝟎 + 𝟐𝟎 + 𝟑𝟎
𝑨𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒈𝒆 𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆 = = 𝟐𝟎 𝒔𝒆𝒄
𝟑
Why is FIFO not that great? – Convoy effect

src: https://www.moveoverslowdrivers.com/speed-up-slowpoke-or-get-a-ticket/
Why is FIFO not that great? – Convoy effect

• Let’s relax assumption 1: Each job no longer


runs for the same amount of time.
• Example:
– A arrived just before B which arrived just before C.
– A runs for 100 seconds, B and C run for 10 each.
A B C

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time (Second)

𝟏𝟎𝟎 + 𝟏𝟏𝟎 + 𝟏𝟐𝟎


𝑨𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒈𝒆 𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆 = = 𝟏𝟏𝟎 𝒔𝒆𝒄
𝟑
Shortest Job First (SJF)
• Run the shortest job first, then the next shortest, and
so on
– Non-preemptive scheduler
• Example:
– A arrived just before B which arrived just before C.
– A runs for 100 seconds, B and C run for 10 each.

B C A

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time (Second)

𝟏𝟎 + 𝟐𝟎 + 𝟏𝟐𝟎
𝑨𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒈𝒆 𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆 = = 𝟓𝟎 𝒔𝒆𝒄
𝟑
SJF with Late Arrivals from B and C
• Let’s relax assumption 2: Jobs can arrive at any time.
• Example:
– A arrives at t=0 and needs to run for 100 seconds.
– B and C arrive at t=10 and each need to run for 10 seconds
[B,C arrive]
A B C

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time (Second)

𝟏𝟎𝟎 + 𝟏𝟏𝟎 − 𝟏𝟎 + (𝟏𝟐𝟎 − 𝟏𝟎)


𝑨𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒈𝒆 𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆 =
𝟑
= 𝟏𝟎𝟑. 𝟑𝟑 𝒔𝒆𝒄
Shortest Time-to-Completion First (STCF)
• Add preemption to SJF
– Also knows as Preemptive Shortest Job First (PSJF)
• A new job enters the system:
– Determine of the remaining jobs and new job
– Schedule the job which has the lowest time left (i.e.,
which requires the minimum time to finish)
Shortest Time-to-Completion First (STCF)
• Example:
– A arrives at t=0 and needs to run for 100 seconds.
– B and C arrive at t=10 and each need to run for 10 seconds

[B,C arrive]
A B C A

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Time (Second)

(𝟏𝟐𝟎 − 𝟎) + 𝟐𝟎 − 𝟏𝟎 + (𝟑𝟎 − 𝟏𝟎)


𝑨𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒈𝒆 𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒏𝒂𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆 =
𝟑
= 𝟓𝟎 𝒔𝒆𝒄
New Scheduling Metric: Response Time
• The time from when the job arrives to the first time it
is scheduled.

𝑻𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒑𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒆 = 𝑻𝒇𝒊𝒓𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒖𝒏 − 𝑻𝒂𝒓𝒓𝒊𝒗𝒂𝒍

– STCF and related disciplines are not particularly good for


response time.

How can we build a scheduler that is


sensitive to response time?
Round Robin (RR) Scheduling
• Time slicing Scheduling
– Run a job for a time slice and then switch to the next
job in the run queue until the jobs are finished.
• Time slice is sometimes called a scheduling quantum.
– It repeatedly does so until the jobs are finished.
– The length of a time slice must be a multiple of the
timer-interrupt period.

RR is fair, but performs poorly on metrics


such as turnaround time
Round Robin (RR) Scheduling
• A, B and C arrive at the same time.
• They each wish to run for 5 seconds.
A B C
0 + 5 + 10
𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒 = = 𝟓𝒔𝒆𝒄
3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (Second)
SJF (Bad for Response Time)

A B CA B CA B CA B CA B C
0+1+2
𝑇𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒 = = 𝟏𝒔𝒆𝒄
3
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (Second)
RR with a time-slice of 1sec (Good for Response Time)
The length of the time slice is critical
• The shorter time slice
– Better response time
– The cost of context switching will dominate overall
performance.

• The longer time slice


– Amortize the cost of switching
– Worse response time

Deciding on the length of the time slice presents


a trade-off to a system designer
Incorporating I/O
• Let’s relax assumption 3: All programs perform
I/O
• Example:
– A and B need 50ms of CPU time each.
– A runs for 10ms and then issues an I/O request
• I/Os each take 10ms
– B simply uses the CPU for 50ms and performs no I/O
– The scheduler runs A first, then B after
Incorporating I/O
A A A A A B B B B B

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140


Time (msec)
Poor Use of Resources

A B A B A B A B A B

Maximize the
CPU utilization

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140


Time (msec)
Overlap Allows Better Use of Resources
Incorporating I/O
• When a job initiates an I/O request.
– The job is blocked waiting for I/O completion.
– The scheduler should schedule another job on the
CPU.

• When the I/O completes


– An interrupt is raised.
– The OS moves the process from blocked back to the
ready state.
Reading Material

• Chapter 7 of OSTEP book – by Remzi and Andrea


Arpaci-Dusseau (University of Wisconsin)
http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/OSTEP/cpu-sched.pdf
Questions?

You might also like