Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science Emery Berger University of Massachusetts, Amherst Operating Systems CMPSCI 377 Lecture.

Published by Modified over 9 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science Emery Berger University of Massachusetts, Amherst Operating Systems CMPSCI 377 Lecture."— Presentation transcript:

1 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science Emery Berger University of Massachusetts, Amherst Operating Systems CMPSCI 377 Lecture 6: Scheduling

2 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 2 Last Time: Threads & Scheduling Thread = execution stream within process User-level, kernel-level, hybrid No perfect scheduling algorithm Policy decision Goals: Minimize response time Maximize throughput Fairness

3 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 3 This Time: Scheduling Algorithms FCFS First-Come, First-Served Round-robin SJF Multilevel Feedback Queues Lottery Scheduling

4 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 4 Round-Robin Scheduling Quantum expires: move to back of queue Variants used in most real systems Tradeoffs: length of quantum Large: response time increases quantum ) 1 = FCFS Small: throughput decreases quantum ) 0 = overhead dominates context switches, cache misses

5 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 5 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

6 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 6 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

7 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 7 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

8 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 8 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

9 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 9 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

10 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 10 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

11 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 11 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

12 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 12 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

13 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 13 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

14 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 14 Example: Round-Robin waiting running

15 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 15 Example: Round-Robin waiting running + Fair - Long average wait times

16 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 16 Round-Robin vs. FCFS Example 1: 5 jobs, 100 seconds each, quantum = 1s ignore context switch time

17 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 17 Round-Robin vs. FCFS Example 1: 5 jobs, 100 seconds each, quantum = 1s ignore context switch time

18 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 18 Round-Robin vs. FCFS Example 2: 5 jobs: 50, 40, 30, 20, 10 seconds each

19 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 19 Round-Robin vs. FCFS Example 2: 5 jobs: 50, 40, 30, 20, 10 seconds each

20 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 20 This Time: Scheduling Algorithms FCFS First-Come, First-Served Round-robin SJF Multilevel Feedback Queues Lottery Scheduling

21 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 21 Example: SJF 50 40 30 20 10 Schedule job with least work until I/O or done 0103060100150

22 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 22 Example: SJF 50 40 30 20 10 Schedule job with least work until I/O or done 0103060100150

23 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 23 Example: SJF 50 40 30 20 10 Schedule job with least work until I/O or done 0103060100150

24 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 24 Example: SJF 50 40 30 20 10 Schedule job with least work until I/O or done 0103060100150

25 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 25 Example: SJF 50 40 30 20 10 Schedule job with least work until I/O or done 0103060100150

26 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 26 Example: SJF 50 40 30 20 10 0 3060100150 Schedule job with least work until I/O or done

27 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 27 Example: SJF 5 jobs, length 50, 40, 30, 20, 10 seconds

28 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 28 Example: SJF 5 jobs, length 50, 40, 30, 20, 10 seconds

29 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 29 SJF/SRTF: Shortest-Job First Advantages: Provably optimal – minimizes average waiting time Works for preemptive & non-preemptive schedulers Preemptive SJF = SRTF Shortest remaining time first I/O-bound jobs get priority over CPU-bound jobs Disadvantages: Impossible to predict CPU time job has left Long-running CPU-bound jobs can starve

30 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 30 This Time: Scheduling Algorithms FCFS First-Come, First-Served Round-robin SJF Multilevel Feedback Queues Lottery Scheduling

31 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 31 Multilevel Feedback Queues (MLFQ) Use past behavior to predict future, assign job priorities Overcome prediction problem in SJF Assumption: I/O-bound in past, I/O-bound in future Scheduler favors jobs that used least CPU time Adaptive: Change in behavior ) change in scheduling decisions

32 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 32 MLFQ: Approximating SJF Multiple queues, different priorities Round-robin scheduling at each priority level Run all at highest priority first, then next, etc. Can lead to starvation Increase quantum exponentially at lower priorities

33 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 33 MLFQ Example

34 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 34 MLFQ: Assigning Priorities Job starts in highest priority queue Quantum expires ) CPU-bound Drop priority one level Quantum does not expire ) I/O-bound Increase priority one level  CPU-bound jobs move down, I/O-bound jobs move up

35 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 35 Improving Fairness SJF: optimal, but unfair Increase fairness = give long jobs CPU time  degrades average waiting time Solutions: Each queue – fraction of CPU time Fair iff even distribution of jobs among queues Adjust priority of jobs w/o service Originally done by UNIX Avoids starvation Under load, waiting time suffers

36 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 36 This Time: Scheduling Algorithms FCFS First-Come, First-Served Round-robin SJF Multilevel Feedback Queues Lottery Scheduling

37 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 37 Lottery Scheduling Every job gets lottery tickets Each quantum: randomly pick winner On average: CPU time proportional to # of tickets Give most tickets to short-running jobs (approximates SJF) Give every job at least one ticket Degrades gracefully as load changes

38 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 38 Example: Lottery Scheduling Paying customers: 40%, guests: 60% 2:1 ticket ratio 2 2111111

39 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 39 Example: Lottery Scheduling Paying customers: 40%, guests: 60% 2:1 ticket ratio 2 2111111

40 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 40 Example: Lottery Scheduling Paying customers: 40%, guests: 60% 2:1 ticket ratio 2 2111111

41 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 41 Example: Lottery Scheduling Paying customers: 40%, guests: 60% 2:1 ticket ratio 2 2111111

42 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 42 Example: Lottery Scheduling Paying customers: 40%, guests: 60% 2:1 ticket ratio 2 2111111

43 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 43 Example: Lottery Scheduling Paying customers: 40%, guests: 60% 2:1 ticket ratio 2 2111111

44 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 44 Example: Lottery Scheduling Paying customers: 40%, guests: 60% 2:1 ticket ratio 2 2111111

45 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 45 Example: Lottery Scheduling 2 2111111 2/5= 40%

46 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 46 Example: Lottery Scheduling Probabilistically achieves desired proportions 2 2111111 2/5= 40% 3/5= 60%

47 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 47 Summary of Scheduling Algorithms FCFS: unfair, average waiting time poor Round robin: fair, average waiting time poor SJF: unfair, minimizes average waiting time requires accurate prediction Multilevel Feedback Queueing: approximates SJF Lottery scheduling: fair, low average waiting time poor fit to priority

48 U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science 48 Next Time Synchronization

Download ppt "U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science Emery Berger University of Massachusetts, Amherst Operating Systems CMPSCI 377 Lecture."

Similar presentations

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute CSCI-4210 – Operating Systems David Goldschmidt, Ph.D.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute CSCI-4210 – Operating Systems David Goldschmidt, Ph.D.
CPU Scheduling Questions answered in this lecture: What is scheduling vs. allocation? What is preemptive vs. non-preemptive scheduling? What are FCFS,

CPU Scheduling Questions answered in this lecture: What is scheduling vs. allocation? What is preemptive vs. non-preemptive scheduling? What are FCFS,
CPU Scheduling CPU Scheduler Performance metrics for CPU scheduling

CPU Scheduling CPU Scheduler Performance metrics for CPU scheduling
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute CSCI-4210 – Operating Systems David Goldschmidt, Ph.D.

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute CSCI-4210 – Operating Systems David Goldschmidt, Ph.D.
Operating Systems Chapter 6

Operating Systems Chapter 6
CPU Scheduling Section 2.5.

CPU Scheduling Section 2.5.
Day 25 Uniprocessor scheduling. Algorithm: Selection function Selection function – which process among ready processes to select. w – time spent in system,

Day 25 Uniprocessor scheduling. Algorithm: Selection function Selection function – which process among ready processes to select. w – time spent in system,
CENG 334 – Operating Systems 05- Scheduling

CENG 334 – Operating Systems 05- Scheduling
Operating Systems 1 K. Salah Module 2.1: CPU Scheduling Scheduling Types Scheduling Criteria Scheduling Algorithms Performance Evaluation.

Operating Systems 1 K. Salah Module 2.1: CPU Scheduling Scheduling Types Scheduling Criteria Scheduling Algorithms Performance Evaluation.
U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science Emery Berger University of Massachusetts Amherst Operating Systems CMPSCI 377 Lecture.

U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science Emery Berger University of Massachusetts Amherst Operating Systems CMPSCI 377 Lecture.
Scheduling in Batch Systems

Scheduling in Batch Systems
Project 2 – solution code

Project 2 – solution code
CPU Scheduling. Schedulers Process migrates among several queues –Device queue, job queue, ready queue Scheduler selects a process to run from these queues.

CPU Scheduling. Schedulers Process migrates among several queues –Device queue, job queue, ready queue Scheduler selects a process to run from these queues.
Chapter 2 Processes and Threads 2.4 - 2.5 Scheduling Classical Problems.

Chapter 2 Processes and Threads Scheduling Classical Problems.
CS 104 Introduction to Computer Science and Graphics Problems Operating Systems (2) Process Management 10/03/2008 Yang Song (Prepared by Yang Song and.

CS 104 Introduction to Computer Science and Graphics Problems Operating Systems (2) Process Management 10/03/2008 Yang Song (Prepared by Yang Song and.
Job scheduling Queue discipline.

Job scheduling Queue discipline.
CPU Scheduling Prof. Sirer (dr. Willem de Bruijn) CS 4410 Cornell University.

CPU Scheduling Prof. Sirer (dr. Willem de Bruijn) CS 4410 Cornell University.
U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science Emery Berger University of Massachusetts, Amherst Operating Systems CMPSCI 377 Lecture.

U NIVERSITY OF M ASSACHUSETTS, A MHERST Department of Computer Science Emery Berger University of Massachusetts, Amherst Operating Systems CMPSCI 377 Lecture.
1 Scheduling Algorithms FCFS First-Come, First-Served Round-robin SJF Multilevel Feedback Queues.

1 Scheduling Algorithms FCFS First-Come, First-Served Round-robin SJF Multilevel Feedback Queues.
1Chapter 05, Fall 2008 CPU Scheduling The CPU scheduler (sometimes called the dispatcher or short-term scheduler): Selects a process from the ready queue.

1Chapter 05, Fall 2008 CPU Scheduling The CPU scheduler (sometimes called the dispatcher or short-term scheduler): Selects a process from the ready queue.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google