1. Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling

2. 5.2 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling Basic Concepts Scheduling Criteria Scheduling Algorithms Multiple-Processor Scheduling Real-Time Scheduling Thread Scheduling Operating Systems Examples Java Thread Scheduling Algorithm Evaluation

3. 5.3 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 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

4. 5.4 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Alternating Sequence of CPU And I/O Bursts

5. 5.5 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Histogram of CPU-burst Times

6. 5.6 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 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 2.Switches from running to ready state 3.Switches from waiting to ready 4.Terminates Scheduling only under 1 and 4 is nonpreemptive (once given, CPU isn’t taken away) All other scheduling is preemptive (CPU can be taken away)

7. 5.7 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 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

8. 5.8 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Scheduling Criteria CPU utilization – % of time the CPU is in use; goal is to keep the CPU as busy as possible (90% is heavily loaded) Throughput – number of processes that complete their execution per time unit Turnaround time – amount of time to execute a particular process Waiting time – total 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, not until all output is done (for time-sharing environment)

9. 5.9 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Optimization Criteria Maximize CPU utilization Maximize throughput Minimize turnaround time Minimize waiting time Minimize response time

10. 5.10 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 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: (0 + 24 + 27)/3 = 17 P1P1 P2P2 P3P3 2427300

11. 5.11 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 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: (6 + 0 + 3)/3 = 3 Much better than previous case Convoy effect short process behind long process P1P1 P3P3 P2P2 63300

12. 5.12 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 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 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

13. 5.13 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 ProcessArrival TimeBurst Time P 1 0.07 P 2 2.04 P 3 4.01 P 4 5.04 SJF (non-preemptive) Average waiting time = (0 + 6 + 3 + 7)/4 = 4 Example of Non-Preemptive SJF P1P1 P3P3 P2P2 73160 P4P4 812

14. 5.14 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Example of Preemptive SJF ProcessArrival TimeBurst Time P 1 0.07 P 2 2.04 P 3 4.01 P 4 5.04 SJF (preemptive) Average waiting time = (9 + 1 + 0 +2)/4 = 3 P1P1 P3P3 P2P2 42 11 0 P4P4 57 P2P2 P1P1 16

15. 5.15 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Determining Length of Next CPU Burst Can only estimate the length Can be done by using the length of previous CPU bursts, using exponential averaging

16. 5.16 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Prediction of the Length of the Next CPU Burst

17. 5.17 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Examples of Exponential Averaging  =0  n+1 =  n Recent history does not count  =1  n+1 =  t n Only the actual last CPU burst counts  = 0.5 is most common, balancing recent and past history If we expand the formula, we get:  n+1 =  t n +(1 -  )  t n -1 + … +(1 -  ) j  t n -j + … +(1 -  ) n +1  0 Since both  and (1 -  ) are less than or equal to 1, each successive term has less weight than its predecessor

18. 5.18 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 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 in this book) Preemptive Nonpreemptive SJF is a priority scheduling where priority is the predicted next CPU burst time Problem  Starvation – low priority processes may never execute Solution  Aging – as time progresses increase the priority of the process

19. 5.19 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Round Robin (RR) Similar to FCFS, but with preemption Ready queue is treated as a circular queue, or FIFO Each process gets a small unit of CPU time (time quantum), 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. Performance q large  FCFS q small  q must be large with respect to context switch, otherwise overhead is too high

20. 5.20 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 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 P3P3 02037577797117121134154162

21. 5.21 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Time Quantum and Context Switch Time

22. 5.22 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Turnaround Time Varies With The Time Quantum

23. 5.23 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Multilevel Queue Scheduling Ready queue is partitioned into separate queues: foreground (interactive) background (batch) Each queue has its own scheduling algorithm foreground – e.g. RR background – e.g. FCFS Scheduling must be done between the queues Fixed priority preemptive scheduling; (i.e., serve all from foreground, then from background). Possibility of starvation. Time slice among the queues – 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

24. 5.24 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Multilevel Queue

25. 5.25 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 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 MLFQ is most general CPU-scheduling algorithm, but also the most complex

26. 5.26 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Example of Multilevel Feedback Queue Three queues: Q 0 – RR with time quantum 8 milliseconds Q 1 – RR time quantum 16 milliseconds Q 2 – FCFS Scheduling A new job enters queue Q 0 which is served RR. When it gains CPU, job receives 8 milliseconds. If it does not finish in 8 milliseconds, job is moved to queue Q 1. At Q 1 job is again served RR and receives 16 additional milliseconds. If it still does not complete, it is preempted and moved to queue Q 2. The idea is to separate processes according to their CPU bursts, with long-burst processes moving lower, and IO-bound processes in higher-priority queues.

27. 5.27 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Multilevel Feedback Queues

28. 5.28 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Multiple-Processor Scheduling CPU scheduling more complex when multiple CPUs are available Homogeneous processors within a multiprocessor – any processor can run any process Load sharing results in speed-up. Asymmetric multiprocessing – one processor runs the kernel and accesses the system data structures, alleviating the need for data sharing. It does scheduling, I/O, system activities. Other processors run user code. Symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) – scheduling is distributed, all processors run kernel + user code. E.g. Windows 2000/XP, Solaris, Linux, Mac OS X

29. 5.29 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Multiple-Processor Scheduling Processor affinity – to avoid cache misses, keep a process running on the same processor, rather than migrating. Hard affinity guarantees no migration, soft affinity attempts to avoid it. Load balancing – attempts to keep the workload evenly distributed across all processors in SMP. Push migration by a workload balancer task, pull migration by empty processors Symmetric multithreading (SMT) – hardware support to present multiple logical processors on one physical processor. Named hyperthreading technology by Intel. See Figure 5.8 (next slide)

30. 5.30 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Typical SMT architecture

31. 5.31 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Real-Time Scheduling Hard real-time systems – required to complete a critical task within a guaranteed amount of time. E.g. safety-critical systems. Soft real-time computing – requires that critical processes receive priority over less fortunate ones. Linux and other OS support this. Both need: preemptive, priority-based scheduling, preemptive kernel, and minimized latency. (see Chap. 19)

32. 5.32 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Dispatch Latency

33. 5.33 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Pthread Scheduling API #include #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); /* set the scheduling algorithm to PCS or SCS */ pthread_attr_setscope (&attr, PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM); /* set the scheduling policy - FIFO, RR, or OTHER */ pthread_attr_setschedpolicy (&attr, SCHED_OTHER);

34. 5.34 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Pthread Scheduling API /* create the threads */ for (i = 0; i < NUM_THREADS; i++) pthread_create (&tid[i], &attr, runner, NULL); /* now join on each thread */ for (i = 0; i < NUM_THREADS; i++) pthread_join (tid[i], NULL); }/* end of main */ /* Each thread will begin control in this function */ void *runner (void *param) { /* do some work ….*/ pthread_exit(0); }

35. 5.35 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Operating System Examples Solaris scheduling -uses priority-based thread scheduling, with 4 classes (real time, system, time sharing, interactive), multi-level feedback queue Windows XP scheduling -uses priority-based preemptive thread scheduling, with classes (related to Win32 API classes) and relative priorities within a class. Linux scheduling -uses preemptive priority-based thread scheduling

36. 5.36 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Solaris 2 Scheduling

37. 5.37 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Solaris Dispatch Table

38. 5.38 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Windows XP Priorities

39. 5.39 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Linux Scheduling Two algorithms: time-sharing and real-time Time-sharing Prioritized credit-based – process with most credits is scheduled next Credit subtracted when timer interrupt occurs When credit = 0, another process chosen When all processes have credit = 0, recrediting occurs  Based on factors including priority and history Real-time Soft real-time Posix.1b compliant – two classes  FCFS and RR  Highest priority process always runs first

40. 5.40 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Relationship Between Priorities and Time-slice

41. 5.41 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 List of Tasks Indexed According to Priorities

42. 5.42 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Algorithm Evaluation Deterministic modeling – takes a particular predetermined workload and defines the performance of each algorithm for that workload Queuing models: using statistical models of process arrival time distributions, and CPU+I/O burst time distributions, and queuing-network analysis Implementation: “Build it and they will run”- code in the changes to OS scheduling algorithms into the real system, under real conditions. Most accurate, but most costly. Simulation: using a programmed model of the computer system, including devices, processes, schedulers. Inputs are events: CPU and IO bursts in processes.

43. 5.43 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Deterministic Modeling Let 5 processes arrive at t=0, in this order, with CPU burst lengths as follows: P1=10, P2=29, P3=3, P4=7, P5=12 For FCFS: average waiting time is (0 + 10 + 39 + 42 + 49)/5 = 28 For nonpreemptive SJF: average waiting time is (10+32+3+0+20)/5 = 13 For RR algorithm, average waiting time is (0+32+20+23+40)/5 = 23

44. 5.44 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 FCFS

45. 5.45 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 SJF

46. 5.46 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 RR (quantum = 10)

47. 5.47 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Evaluation of CPU schedulers by simulation

48. End of Chapter 5

49. 5.49 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Java Thread Scheduling JVM Uses a Preemptive, Priority-Based Scheduling Algorithm FIFO Queue is Used if There Are Multiple Threads With the Same Priority

50. 5.50 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Java Thread Scheduling (cont) JVM Schedules a Thread to Run When: 1. The Currently Running Thread Exits the Runnable State 2. A Higher Priority Thread Enters the Runnable State * Note – the JVM Does Not Specify Whether Threads are Time-Sliced or Not

51. 5.51 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Time-Slicing Since the JVM Doesn’t Ensure Time-Slicing, the yield() Method May Be Used: while (true) { // perform CPU-intensive task... Thread.yield(); } This Yields Control to Another Thread of Equal Priority

52. 5.52 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005 Operating System Concepts – 7 th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 Thread Priorities PriorityComment Thread.MIN_PRIORITYMinimum Thread Priority Thread.MAX_PRIORITY Maximum Thread Priority Thread.NORM_PRIORITY Default Thread Priority Priorities May Be Set Using setPriority() method: setPriority(Thread.NORM_PRIORITY + 2);