Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Chapter 6: CPU Scheduling Basic Concepts Scheduling Criteria Scheduling Algorithms Multiple-Processor Scheduling Real-Time Scheduling Algorithm Evaluation

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts 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 distribution

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Alternating Sequence of CPU And I/O Bursts Process execution begins with a CPU burst. That is followed by an I\O burst, then another CPU burst, then another I/O burst, and so on. Eventually, the last CPU burst will end with a system request to terminate execution, rather than with another I/O burst

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Histogram of CPU-burst Times many short CPU bursts, and a few long CPU bursts. An I/O-bound program would typically have many very short CPU bursts. A CPU-bound program might have a few very long CPU bursts.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts CPU Scheduler Selects from among the processes in memory that are ready to execute, and allocates the CPU to one of them. CPU scheduling decisions may take place when a process: 1.Switches from running to waiting state. (for example, I/O request, or invocation of wait for the termination of one of the child processes) 2.Switches from running to ready state. (for example, when an interrupt occurs) 3.Switches from waiting to ready. (for example, completion of I/O) 4.Terminates. When scheduling takes place only under circumstances 1 and 4, we say the scheduling scheme is nonpreemptive; otherwise, the scheduling scheme is preemptive. Under nonpreemptive scheduling, once the CPU has been allocated to a process, the process keeps the CPU until it releases the CPU either by terminating or by switching to the waiting state.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Dispatcher Dispatcher module gives control of the CPU to the process selected by the short-term 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.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts 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. (a process can produce some output fairly early, and can continue computing new results while previous results are being output to the user.)

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Optimization Criteria Max CPU utilization Max throughput Min turnaround time Min waiting time Min response time

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts First-Come, First-Served (FCFS) Scheduling ProcessBurst Time P 1 24 P 2 3 P 3 3 Suppose that the processes arrive in the order: P 1, P 2, P 3 The Gantt Chart for the schedule is: Waiting time for P 1 = 0; P 2 = 24; P 3 = 27 Average waiting time: ( )/3 = 17 P1P1 P2P2 P3P

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts FCFS Scheduling (Cont.) Suppose that the processes arrive in the order P 2, P 3, P 1. The Gantt chart for the schedule is: Waiting time for P 1 = 6; P 2 = 0 ; P 3 = 3 Average waiting time: ( )/3 = 3 Much better than previous case. The effect short process behind long process P1P1 P3P3 P2P

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Shortest-Job-First (SJR) Scheduling Associate with each process the length of its next CPU burst. Use these lengths to schedule the process with the shortest time. Two schemes:  nonpreemptive – once CPU given to the process it cannot be preempted until completes its CPU burst.  preemptive – if a new process arrives with CPU burst length less than remaining time of current executing process, preempt. This scheme is know as the Shortest-Remaining-Time-First (SRTF). SJF is optimal – gives minimum average waiting time for a given set of processes.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts ProcessArrival TimeBurst Time P P P P SJF (non-preemptive) Average waiting time = ( )/4 =4 Example of Non-Preemptive SJF P1P1 P3P3 P2P P4P4 812

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Example of Preemptive SJF ProcessArrival TimeBurst Time P P P P SJF (preemptive) Average waiting time = ( )/4 - 3 P1P1 P3P3 P2P P4P4 57 P2P2 P1P1 16

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts 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). Equal-priority processes are scheduled in FCFS order.  Preemptive  nonpreemptive SJF is a priority scheduling where priority is the predicted next CPU burst time. (The larger the CPU burst, the lower the priority, and vice versa.) Problem  Starvation – low priority processes may never execute. Solution  Aging – as time progresses increase the priority of the process.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Round Robin (RR) Each process gets a small unit of CPU time (time quantum), usually 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. Performance  q large  FIFO  q small  q must be large with respect to context switch, otherwise overhead is too high.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Example of RR with Time Quantum = 20 ProcessBurst Time P 1 53 P 2 17 P 3 68 P 4 24 The Gantt chart is: Typically, higher average turnaround than SJF, but better response. P1P1 P2P2 P3P3 P4P4 P1P1 P3P3 P4P4 P1P1 P3P3 P3P

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Time Quantum and Context Switch Time

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Turnaround Time Varies With The Time Quantum

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Multilevel Queue Ready queue is partitioned into separate queues: foreground (interactive) background (batch) Each queue has its own scheduling algorithm, foreground – RR background – FCFS Scheduling must be done between the queues.  Fixed priority scheduling; (i.e., serve all from foreground then from background). Possibility of starvation.  Time slice – each queue gets a certain amount of CPU time which it can schedule amongst its processes; i.e., 80% to foreground in RR 20% to background in FCFS

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Let us look at an example of a multilevel queue-scheduling algorithm with five queues:  1. System processes  2. Interactive processes  3. Interactive editing processes  4. Batch processes  5. Student processes Each queue has absolute priority over lower-priority queues. No process in the batch queue, for example, could run unless the queues for system processes, interactive processes, and interactive editing processes were all empty. If an interactive editing process entered the ready queue while a batch process was running, the batch process would be preempted. Solaris 2 uses a form of this algorithm.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Multilevel Queue Scheduling

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Multilevel Feedback Queue A process can move between the various queues; aging can be implemented this way. 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

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Example of Multilevel Feedback Queue For example, consider a multilevel feedback queue scheduler with three queues, numbered from 0 to 2 (Figure 6.7). The scheduler first executes all processes in queue 0. Only when queue 0 is empty will it execute processes in queue 1. Similarly, processes in queue 2 will be executed only if queues 0 and 1 are empty. A process that arrives for queue 1 will preempt a process in queue 2. A process that arrives for queue 0 will, in turn, preempt a process in queue 1. A process entering the ready queue is put in queue 0. A process in queue 0 is given a time quantum of 8 milliseconds. If it does not finish within this time, it is moved to the tail of queue 1. If queue 0 is empty, the process at the head of queue 1 is given a quantum of 16 milliseconds. If it does not complete, it is preempted and is put into queue 2. Processes in queue 2 are run on an FCFS basis, only when queues 0 and 1 are empty.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Example of Multilevel Feedback Queue This scheduling algorithm gives highest priority to any process with a CPU burst of 8 milliseconds or less. Such a process will quickly get the CPU, finish its CPU burst, and go off to its next I/O burst. Processes that need more than 8, but less than 16, milliseconds are also served quickly, although with lower priority than shorter processes. Long processes automatically sink to queue 2 and are served in FCFS order with any CPU cycles left over from queues 0 and 1.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Figure 6.7

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Multiple-Processor Scheduling CPU scheduling more complex when multiple CPUs are available. Homogeneous processors within a multiprocessor: We concentrate on systems where the processors are identical (or homogeneous) in terms of their functionality; any available processor can then be used to run any processes in the queue. Load sharing : If several identical processors are available, then load sharing can occur. It would be possible to provide a separate queue for each processor. In this case, however, one processor could be idle, with an empty queue, while another processor was very busy. To prevent this situation, we use a common ready queue. All processes go into one queue and are scheduled onto any available processor. Asymmetric multiprocessing – only one processor accesses the system data structures, alleviating the need for data sharing. having all scheduling decisions, I/O processing, and other system activities handled by one single processor-the master server. The other processors only execute user code.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Real-Time Scheduling Hard real-time systems – required to complete a critical task within a guaranteed amount of time. Soft real-time computing – requires that critical processes receive priority over less fortunate(أقل حظا) ones.

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Dispatch Latency Dispatch latency – time it takes for the dispatcher to stop one process and start another running. The conflict phase of dispatch latency has two components:  1. Preemption of any process running in the kernel  2. Release by low-priority processes resources needed by the high-priority process

Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne  Operating System Concepts Algorithm Evaluation How do we select a CPU-scheduling algorithm for a particular system?. The first problem is defining the criteria to be used in selecting an algorithm. Criteria are often defined in terms of CPU utilization, response time, or throughput. To select an algorithm, we must first define the relative importance of these measures. Our criteria may include several measures, such as:  Maximize CPU utilization under the constraint that the maximum response time is 1 second.  Maximize throughput such that turnaround time is (on average) linearly proportional to total execution time. Once the selection criteria have been defined, we want to evaluate the various algorithms under consideration.