DOCSLIB.ORG

QEMU/Linux Assignments, Scheduling Continued

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Operating Systems 9/20/2018 Programming Assignment #2 About QEMU • DUE DATE: Monday, October 1 2018 • A processor emulator • Emulates code for target CPU on host CPU MINI-HOMEWORK DEADLINE: Tuesday Sep 25 • Download assignment files • Build the Linux kernel • Boot the QEMU image with the Linux kernel Guest System • Report output of the procedure Host System – uname -a 1 2 Why QEMU? Download the Code • Allow you to change the kernel • Get the files you need: – OS requires privilege to overwrite kernel file – Use git clone • Isolate kernel changes from the real machine – Approximate space requirements • Make programming and debugging easier – Kernel source and object code: 4 GB – Everything: About 4 GB of disk space 3 4 CSC 256/456 1 Operating Systems 9/20/2018 Get It Started! Start Up a New Kernel • Start QEMU and default Debian installation • Specify path to your kernel bzImage to – cd install runqemu.sh – sh runqemu.sh – sh runqemu.sh linux-3.18- • No password 77/arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage • Use poweroff command to shutdown • When QEMU boots, use uname -a to check if you booted the correct kernel image • Can kill qemu from different window if kernel panics • README.md file contains useful information 5 6 CPU Scheduling • Selects from among the processes/threads that are ready to execute, and allocates the CPU to it • CPU scheduling may take place at: 1. Hardware interrupt/software exception CPU Scheduling 2. System calls • Nonpreemptive: – Scheduling only when the current process terminates CS 256/456 or not able to run further Department of Computer Science • Preemptive: University of Rochester – Scheduling can occur at any opportunity possible 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 7 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 8 CSC 256/456 2 Operating Systems 9/20/2018 First-Come, First-Served (FCFS) Scheduling Criteria Scheduling • Minimize turnaround time – amount of time to execute a Process CPU Time particular process (includes I/O, CPU, memory time, waiting time in the ready queue) P1 24 P 3 • Maximize throughput – # of processes that complete their 2 execution per time unit P3 3 • Suppose that the processes arrive in the order: P1 , P2 , P3 • Maximize CPU utilization – the proportion of the CPU that The schedule is: is not idle • Minimize response time – amount of time it takes from when a request was submitted until the first response is P1 P2 P3 produced (interactivity) 0 24 27 30 • Waiting time: time spent in the ready queue • Turnaround time for P1 = 24; P2 = 27; P3 = 30 • Fairness: avoid starvation • Average turnaround time: (24 + 27 + 30)/3 = 27 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 9 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 10 Shortest-Job-First (SJF) FCFS Scheduling (Cont.) Scheduling Suppose that the processes arrive in the order • Associate with each process the length of its CPU time. P , P , P . Use these lengths to schedule the process with the 2 3 1 shortest CPU time • The schedule is: • Two variations: – Non-preemptive – once CPU given to the process it P2 P3 P1 cannot be taken away until it completes – preemptive – if a new process arrives with CPU time 0 3 6 30 less than remaining time of current executing process, • Turnaround time for P1 = 30; P2 = 3; P3 = 6 preempt • Average turnaround time: (30 + 3 + 6)/3 = 13 • Preemptive SJF is optimal – gives minimum average • Much better than previous case. turnaround time for a given set of processes • Short process delayed by long process: Convoy effect • Problem: – don’t know the process CPU time ahead of time 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 11 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 12 CSC 256/456 3 Operating Systems 9/20/2018 Example of Preemptive SJF Priority Scheduling • A priority number (integer) is associated with each process Process Arrival Time CPU Time • The CPU is allocated to the process with the highest priority P1 0.0 7 – preemptive P2 2.0 4 P3 4.0 1 – nonpreemptive P4 5.0 4 • SJF is a priority scheduling where priority is the predicted • SJF (preemptive) CPU time • Problem: Starvation – low priority processes may never P P P P P P 1 2 3 2 4 1 execute • Solution: Aging – as time progresses, increase the priority of 0 11 16 2 4 5 7 the process • Average turnaround time = (16 + 5 + 1 +6)/4 = 7 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 13 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 14 What Happened on the Mars Round Robin (RR) Pathfinder (1997)? • Each process gets a fixed unit of CPU time (time quantum), https://cs.unc.edu/~anderson/teach/comp790/papers/mars_pathfinder_long_version.html usually 10-100 milliseconds. After this time has elapsed, the process is preempted and added to the end of the ready Problem: Priority Inversion 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 small fair, starvation-free, better interactivity – q large FIFO https://www.rapitasystems.com/blog/what-really-happened-to-the-software-on-the-mars-pathfinder-spacecraft – q must be large with respect to context switch cost, Solution: Priority Inheritance [L. Sha, R. Rajkumar, and J. P. Lehoczky. Priority otherwise overhead is too high Inheritance Protocols: An Approach to Real-Time Synchronization. In IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 39, pp. 1175-1185, Sep. 1990.] 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 15 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 16 CSC 256/456 4 Operating Systems 9/20/2018 Example of RR with Quantum = 20 Multilevel Scheduling • Ready tasks are partitioned into separate classes: Process CPU Time foreground (interactive) P1 53 background (batch) P 17 2 • Each class has its own scheduling algorithm, P 68 3 foreground – RR P4 24 background – FCFS • The schedule is: • Scheduling must be done between the classes. – Fixed priority scheduling; (i.e., serve all from P P P P P P P P P P 1 2 3 4 1 3 4 1 3 3 foreground then from background). Possibility of 0 20 37 57 77 97 117 121 134 154 162 starvation • Typically, higher average turnaround than SJF, but – Time slice – each class gets a certain amount of CPU better response time which it can schedule amongst its processes; e.g., • 80% to foreground in RR • 20% to background in FCFS 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 17 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 18 Example of Multilevel Feedback Multilevel Feedback Queue Queue • A process can move between the various queues; aging can • Three queues: be implemented this way – Q – RR with time quantum 8 milliseconds • Multilevel-feedback-queue scheduler defined by the 0 following parameters: – Q1 – RR time quantum 16 milliseconds – number of queues – Q2 – FCFS – scheduling algorithms for each queue • Scheduling – method used to determine when to upgrade a process – A new job enters queue Q0 which is served FCFS. When it gains CPU, job receives 8 milliseconds. If it does not finish in 8 – method used to determine when to demote a process milliseconds, job is moved to queue Q1. – method used to determine which queue a process will – At Q job is again served FCFS and receives 16 additional enter when that process needs service 1 milliseconds. If it still does not complete, it is preempted and moved to queue Q2. 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 19 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 20 CSC 256/456 5 Operating Systems 9/20/2018 Multilevel Feedback Queues Lottery Scheduling • Give processes lottery tickets for various system resources • Choose ticket at random and allow process holding the ticket to get the resource • Hold a lottery at periodic intervals • Properties – Chance of winning proportional to number of tickets held (highly responsive) – Cooperating processes may exchange tickets – Fair-share scheduling easily implemented by allocating tickets to users and dividing tickets among child processes 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 21 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 22 Real-Time Scheduling Cost of Context Switch • Hard real-time systems – required to complete a critical task within a guaranteed amount of time • Direct overhead of context switch • Soft real-time computing – requires that critical processes – saving old contexts, restoring new contexts, … … receive priority over less fortunate ones • EDF – Earliest Deadline First Scheduling • Indirect overhead of context switch – caching, memory management overhead 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 23 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 24 CSC 256/456 6 Operating Systems 9/20/2018 Solaris Dispatch Table Solaris Scheduling 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 25 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 26 Priorities and Time-slice length Linux Task Scheduling • Linux 2.5 and up uses a preemptive, priority-based algorithm with two separate priority ranges: – A time-sharing class/range for fair preemptive scheduling (nice value ranging from 100-140) – A real-time class that conforms to POSIX real-time standard (0- 99) • Numerically lower values indicate higher priority • Higher-priority tasks get longer time quanta (200-10 ms) • One runqueue per processor (logical or physical); load balancing phase to equally distribute tasks among runqueues • Runqueue indexed by priority and contains two priority arrays – active and expired • Choose task with highest priority on active array; switch active and expired arrays when active is empty • Time-sharing tasks are assigned the nice value +/- 5 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 27 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 28 CSC 256/456 7 Operating Systems 9/20/2018 List of Tasks Indexed According to Multiprocessor Context Switch Priorities • Disabling signals not sufficient • Acquire scheduler lock when accessing any scheduler data structure, e.g., yield: disable_signals acquire(scheduler_lock) // spin lock enqueue(ready_list, current) reschedule release(scheduler_lock) re-enable_signals 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 29 9/20/2018 CSC 2/456 30 CPU Scheduling on Multi- Processors Multiprocessor
Recommended publications
  • Lottery Scheduling in the Linux Kernel: a Closer Look

    Lottery Scheduling in the Linux Kernel: a Closer Look

    LOTTERY SCHEDULING IN THE LINUX KERNEL: A CLOSER LOOK A Thesis presented to the Faculty of California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in Computer Science by David Zepp June 2012 © 2012 David Zepp ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP TITLE: LOTTERY SCHEDULING IN THE LINUX KERNEL: A CLOSER LOOK AUTHOR: David Zepp DATE SUBMITTED: June 2012 COMMITTEE CHAIR: Michael Haungs, Associate Professor of Computer Science COMMITTEE MEMBER: John Bellardo, Assistant Professor of Computer Science COMMITTEE MEMBER: Aaron Keen, Associate Professor of Computer Science iii ABSTRACT LOTTERY SCHEDULING IN THE LINUX KERNEL: A CLOSER LOOK David Zepp This paper presents an implementation of a lottery scheduler, presented from design through debugging to performance testing. Desirable characteristics of a general purpose scheduler include low overhead, good overall system performance for a variety of process types, and fair scheduling behavior. Testing is performed, along with an analysis of the results measuring the lottery scheduler against these characteristics. Lottery scheduling is found to provide better than average control over the relative execution rates of processes. The results show that lottery scheduling functions as a good mechanism for sharing the CPU fairly between users that are competing for the resource. While the lottery scheduler proves to have several interesting properties, overall system performance suffers and does not compare favorably with the balanced performance afforded by the standard Linux kernel’s scheduler. Keywords: lottery scheduling, schedulers, Linux iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………. vi LIST OF FIGURES……………………………………………………………….... vii CHAPTER 1. Introduction................................................................................................... 1 2.
  • Multilevel Feedback Queue Scheduling Program in C

    Multilevel Feedback Queue Scheduling Program in C

    Multilevel Feedback Queue Scheduling Program In C Matias is featureless and carnalize lethargically while psychical Nestor ruralized and enamelling. Wallas live asleep while irreproducible Hallam immolate paramountly or ogle wholly. Pertussal Hale cutinize schismatically and circularly, she caponizes her exanimation licences ineluctably. Under these lengths, higher priority queue program just for scheduling program in multilevel feedback queue allows movement of this multilevel queue Operating conditions of scheduling program in multilevel feedback queue have issue. Operating System OS is but software which acts as an interface between. Jumping to propose proper location in the user program to restart. N Multilevel-feedback-queue scheduler defined by treaty following parameters number. A fixed time is allotted to every essence that arrives in better queue. Why review it where for the scheduler to distinguish IO-bound programs from. Computer Scheduler Multilevel Feedback to question. C Program For Multilevel Feedback Queue Scheduling Algorithm. Of the program but spend the parameters like a UNIX command line. Roadmap Multilevel Queue Scheduling Multilevel Queue Example. CPU Scheduling Algorithms in Operating Systems Guru99. How would a queue program as well organized as improving the survey covered include distributed computing. Multilevel Feedback Queue Scheduling MLFQ CPU Scheduling. A skip of Scheduling parallel program tasks DOI. Please chat if a computer systems and shortest tasks, the waiting time quantum increases context is quite complex, multilevel feedback queue scheduling algorithms like the higher than randomly over? Scheduling of Processes. Suppose now the dispatcher uses an algorithm that favors programs that have used. Data on a scheduling c time for example of the process? You need a feedback scheduling is longer than the line records? PowerPoint Presentation.
  • Lottery Scheduler for the Linux Kernel Planificador Lotería Para El Núcleo

    Lottery Scheduler for the Linux Kernel Planificador Lotería Para El Núcleo

    Lottery scheduler for the Linux kernel María Mejía a, Adriana Morales-Betancourt b & Tapasya Patki c a Universidad de Caldas and Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Manizales, Colombia, [email protected] b Departamento de Sistemas e Informática at Universidad de Caldas, Manizales, Colombia, [email protected] c Department of Computer Science, University of Arizona, Tucson, USA, [email protected] Received: April 17th, 2014. Received in revised form: September 30th, 2014. Accepted: October 20th, 2014 Abstract This paper describes the design and implementation of Lottery Scheduling, a proportional-share resource management algorithm, on the Linux kernel. A new lottery scheduling class was added to the kernel and was placed between the real-time and the fair scheduling class in the hierarchy of scheduler modules. This work evaluates the scheduler proposed on compute-intensive, I/O-intensive and mixed workloads. The results indicate that the process scheduler is probabilistically fair and prevents starvation. Another conclusion is that the overhead of the implementation is roughly linear in the number of runnable processes. Keywords: Lottery scheduling, Schedulers, Linux kernel, operating system. Planificador lotería para el núcleo de Linux Resumen Este artículo describe el diseño e implementación del planificador Lotería en el núcleo de Linux, este planificador es un algoritmo de administración de proporción igual de recursos, Una nueva clase, el planificador Lotería (Lottery scheduler), fue adicionado al núcleo y ubicado entre la clase de tiempo-real y la clase de planificador completamente equitativo (Complete Fair scheduler-CFS) en la jerarquía de los módulos planificadores. Este trabajo evalúa el planificador propuesto en computación intensiva, entrada-salida intensiva y cargas de trabajo mixtas.
  • CPU Scheduling

    CPU Scheduling

    Last Class: Processes • A process is the unit of execution. • Processes are represented as Process Control Blocks in the OS – PCBs contain process state, scheduling and memory management information, etc • A process is either New, Ready, Waiting, Running, or Terminated. • On a uniprocessor, there is at most one running process at a time. • The program currently executing on the CPU is changed by performing a context switch • Processes communicate either with message passing or shared memory Computer Science CS377: Operating Systems Lecture 5, page Today: Scheduling Algorithms • Goals for scheduling • FCFS & Round Robin • SJF • Multilevel Feedback Queues • Lottery Scheduling Computer Science CS377: Operating Systems Lecture 5, page 2 Scheduling Processes • Multiprogramming: running more than one process at a time enables the OS to increase system utilization and throughput by overlapping I/O and CPU activities. • Process Execution State • All of the processes that the OS is currently managing reside in one and only one of these state queues. Computer Science CS377: Operating Systems Lecture 5, page Scheduling Processes • Long Term Scheduling: How does the OS determine the degree of multiprogramming, i.e., the number of jobs executing at once in the primary memory? • Short Term Scheduling: How does (or should) the OS select a process from the ready queue to execute? – Policy Goals – Policy Options – Implementation considerations Computer Science CS377: Operating Systems Lecture 5, page Short Term Scheduling • The kernel runs the scheduler at least when 1. a process switches from running to waiting, 2. an interrupt occurs, or 3. a process is created or terminated. • Non-preemptive system: the scheduler must wait for one of these events • Preemptive system: the scheduler can interrupt a running process Computer Science CS377: Operating Systems Lecture 5, page 5 Criteria for Comparing Scheduling Algorithms • CPU Utilization The percentage of time that the CPU is busy.
  • Interactive Scheduling Two Level Scheduling Round Robin

    Interactive Scheduling Two Level Scheduling Round Robin

    Two Level Scheduling • Interactive systems commonly employ two-level scheduling Interactive Scheduling – CPU scheduler and Memory Scheduler • Memory scheduler was covered in VM – We will focus on CPU scheduling 1 2 Round Robin Scheduling Our Earlier Example • Each process is given a timeslice to run in • 5 Process J1 • When the timeslice expires, the next – Process 1 arrives slightly before process J2 process preempts the current process, 2, etc… and runs for its timeslice, and so on J3 – All are immediately • Implemented with runnable J4 – Execution times – A ready queue indicated by scale on – A regular timer interrupt J5 x-axis 0246 8 10 12 1416 18 20 3 4 Round Robin Schedule Round Robin Schedule J1 J1 Timeslice = 3 units J2 Timeslice = 1 unit J2 J3 J3 J4 J4 J5 J5 0246 8 10 12 1416 18 20 0246 8 10 12 1416 18 20 5 6 1 Round Robin Priorities •Pros – Fair, easy to implement • Each Process (or thread) is associated with a •Con priority – Assumes everybody is equal • Issue: What should the timeslice be? • Provides basic mechanism to influence a – Too short scheduler decision: • Waste a lot of time switching between processes – Scheduler will always chooses a thread of higher • Example: timeslice of 4ms with 1 ms context switch = 20% round robin overhead priority over lower priority – Too long • Priorities can be defined internally or externally • System is not responsive • Example: timeslice of 100ms – Internal: e.g. I/O bound or CPU bound – If 10 people hit “enter” key simultaneously, the last guy to run will only see progress after 1 second.
  • Stride Scheduling: Deterministic Proportional-Share Resource

    Stride Scheduling: Deterministic Proportional-Share Resource

    Stride Scheduling: Deterministic Proportional-Share Resource Management Carl A. Waldspurger William E. Weihl Technical Memorandum MIT/LCS/TM-528 MIT Laboratory for Computer Science Cambridge, MA 02139 June 22, 1995 Abstract rates is required to achieve service rate objectives for users and applications. Such control is desirable across a This paper presents stride scheduling, a deterministic schedul- broad spectrum of systems, including databases, media- ing technique that ef®ciently supports the same ¯exible based applications, and networks. Motivating examples resource management abstractions introduced by lottery include control over frame rates for competing video scheduling. Compared to lottery scheduling, stride schedul- viewers, query rates for concurrent clients by databases ing achieves signi®cantly improved accuracy over relative and Web servers, and the consumption of shared re- throughput rates, with signi®cantly lower response time vari- sources by long-running computations. ability. Stride scheduling implements proportional-share con- trol over processor time and other resources by cross-applying Few general-purpose approaches have been proposed elements of rate-based ¯ow control algorithms designed for to support ¯exible, responsive control over service rates. networks. We introduce new techniques to support dynamic We recently introduced lottery scheduling, a random- changes and higher-level resource management abstractions. ized resource allocation mechanism that provides ef®- We also introduce a novel hierarchical stride scheduling al- cient, responsive control over relative computation rates gorithm that achieves better throughput accuracy and lower [Wal94]. Lottery scheduling implements proportional- response time variability than prior schemes. Stride schedul- share resource management ± the resource consumption ing is evaluated using both simulations and prototypes imple- rates of active clients are proportional to the relative mented for the Linux kernel.
  • Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling

    Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling

    Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling 肖 卿 俊 办公室：九龙湖校区计算机楼212室 电邮：[email protected] 主页： https://csqjxiao.github.io/PersonalPage 电话：025-52091022 Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling ! Basic Concepts ! Scheduling Criteria ! Scheduling Algorithms ! Real System Examples ! Thread Scheduling ! Algorithm Evaluation ! Multiple-Processor Scheduling Operating System Concepts 5.2 Southeast University Basic Concepts ! Maximum CPU utilization obtained with multiprogramming ! A Fact: Process execution consists of an alternating sequence of CPU execution and I/O wait, called CPU–I/O Burst Cycle Operating System Concepts 5.3 Southeast University CPU-I/O Burst Cycle ! Process execution repeats the CPU burst and I/O burst cycle. ! When a process begins an I/O burst, another process can use the CPU for a CPU burst. Operating System Concepts 5.4 Southeast University CPU-bound and I/O-bound ! A process is CPU-bound if it generates I/O requests infrequently, using more of its time doing computation. ! A process is I/O-bound if it spends more of its time to do I/O than it spends doing computation. Operating System Concepts 5.5 Southeast University ! A CPU-bound process might have a few very long CPU bursts. ! An I/O-bound process typically has many short CPU bursts Operating System Concepts 5.6 Southeast University CPU Scheduler ! When the CPU is idle, the OS must select another process to run. ! This selection process is carried out by the short-term scheduler (or CPU scheduler). ! The CPU scheduler selects a process from the ready queue and allocates the CPU to it. ! The ready queue does not have to be a FIFO one.
  • TOWARDS TRANSPARENT CPU SCHEDULING by Joseph T

    TOWARDS TRANSPARENT CPU SCHEDULING by Joseph T

    TOWARDS TRANSPARENT CPU SCHEDULING by Joseph T. Meehean A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Computer Sciences) at the UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN–MADISON 2011 © Copyright by Joseph T. Meehean 2011 All Rights Reserved i ii To Heather for being my best friend Joe Passamani for showing me what’s important Rick and Mindy for reminding me Annie and Nate for taking me out Greg and Ila for driving me home Acknowledgments Nothing of me is original. I am the combined effort of everybody I’ve ever known. — Chuck Palahniuk (Invisible Monsters) My committee has been indispensable. Their comments have been enlight- ening and valuable. I would especially like to thank Andrea for meeting with me every week whether I had anything worth talking about or not. Her insights and guidance were instrumental. She immediately recognized the problems we were seeing as originating from the CPU scheduler; I was incredulous. My wife was a great source of support during the creation of this work. In the beginning, it was her and I against the world, and my success is a reflection of our teamwork. Without her I would be like a stray dog: dirty, hungry, and asleep in afternoon. I would also like to thank my family for providing a constant reminder of the truly important things in life. They kept faith that my PhD madness would pass without pressuring me to quit or sandbag. I will do my best to live up to their love and trust. The thing I will miss most about leaving graduate school is the people.
  • CPU Scheduling

    CPU Scheduling

    CPU Scheduling CSC 256/456 - Operating Systems Fall 2014 TA: Mohammad Hedayati Agenda ●Scheduling Policy Criteria ●Scheduling Policy Options (on Uniprocessor) ●Multiprocessor scheduling considerations ●CPU Scheduling in Linux ●Real-time Scheduling Process States ●As a process executes, it changes state onew: The process is being created oready: The process is waiting to be assigned to a process orunning: Instructions are being executed owaiting: The process is waiting for some event to occur oterminated: The process has finished execution Queues of PCBs ● Ready Queue: set of all processes ready for execution. ● Device Queue: set of processes waiting for IO on that device. ● Processes migrate between the various queues. Scheduling ●Question: How the OS should decide which of the several processes to take of the queue? oWe will only worry about ready queue, but it is applicable to other queues as well. ●Scheduling Policy: which process is given the access to resources? CPU Scheduling ● Selects from among the processes/threads that are ready to execute, and allocates the CPU to it ● CPU scheduling may take place at: o hardware interrupt o software exception o system calls ● Non-Preemptive o scheduling only when the current process terminates or not able to run further (due to IO, or voluntarily calling sleep() or yield()) ● Preemptive o scheduling can occur at any opportunity possible Some Simplifying Assumptions ●For the first few algorithms: oUni-processor oOne thread per process oPrograms are independant ●Execution Model: Processes alternate between bursts of CPU and IO ●Goal: deal out CPU time in a way that some parameters are optimized. CPU Scheduling Criteria ● Minimize waiting time: amount of time the process is waiting in ready queue.
  • COS 318: Operating Systems CPU Scheduling

    COS 318: Operating Systems CPU Scheduling

    COS 318: Operating Systems CPU Scheduling Jaswinder Pal Singh Computer Science Department Princeton University (http://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/cos318/) Today’s Topics u CPU scheduling basics u CPU scheduling algorithms 2 When to Schedule? u Process/thread creation u Process/thread exit u Process thread blocks (on I/O, synchronization) u Interrupt (I/O, clock) 3 Preemptive and Non-Preemptive Scheduling Terminate Exited (call scheduler) Scheduler dispatch Running Block for resource (call scheduler) Yield, Interrupt (call scheduler) Ready Blocked Create Resource free, I/O completion interrupt (move to ready queue) 4 Scheduling Criteria u Assumptions l One process per user and one thread per process l Processes are independent u Goals for batch and interactive systems l Provide fairness l Everyone makes some progress; no one starves l Maximize CPU utilization • Not including idle process l Maximize throughput • Operations/second (min overhead, max resource utilization) l Minimize turnaround time • Batch jobs: time to execute (from submission to completion) l Shorten response time • Interactive jobs: time response (e.g. typing on a keyboard) l Proportionality • Meets user’s expectations Scheduling Criteria u Questions: l What are the goals for PCs versus servers? l Average response time vs. throughput l Average response time vs. fairness Problem Cases u Completely blind about job types l Little overlap between CPU and I/O u Optimization involves favoring jobs of type “A” over “B” l Lots of A’s? B’s starve u Interactive process trapped
  • CPU Scheduling

    CPU Scheduling

    CPU Scheduling CSE 2431: Introduction to Operating Systems Instructor: Adam C. Champion, Ph.D. Reading: Chapter 5, [OSC] (except Sections 5.7.2, 5.8) 1 Contents • Why Scheduling? • Basic Concepts of Scheduling • Scheduling Criteria • A Basic Scheduling Algorithm (FCFS) • Scheduling Algorithms (SJF, RR, etc.) • Thread Scheduling 2 Why Scheduling? • Deciding which process/thread should occupy the resource (CPU, disk, etc.) (CPU (horsepower)) I want to ride it Whose turn is it? Process 1 Process 2 Process 3 3 Contents • Why Scheduling? • Basic Concepts of Scheduling • Scheduling Criteria • A Basic Scheduling Algorithm (FCFS) • Scheduling Algorithms (SJF, RR, etc.) • Thread Scheduling 4 When to Schedule? 5 Contents • Why Scheduling? • Basic Concepts of Scheduling • Scheduling Criteria • Basic Scheduling Algorithm (FCFS) • Scheduling Algorithms (SJF, RR, etc.) • Thread Scheduling 6 Scheduling Objectives • Fairness (nobody cries) • Priority (ladies first) • Efficiency (make best use of equipment) • Encourage good behavior (good boy/girl) • Support heavy loads (degrade gracefully) • Adapt to different environments (interactive, real-time, multimedia) 7 Performance Criteria • Fairness: No starvation • Efficiency: keep resources as busy as possible • Throughput: # of processes completed in unit time • Turnaround time (also called elapsed time): Amount of time to complete a certainprocess from its beginning • Waiting Time: Amount of time process has been waiting in ready queue • Response Time: Amount of time from when a request was first submitted until first response is produced. • Policy Enforcement: Enforcing that stated policy is carried out • Proportionality: Meet users' expectations 8 • Meeting Deadlines: Avoid losing data Different Systems, Different Foci • For all – Fairness, policy enforcement, resource balance • Batch Systems – Max throughput, min turnaround time, max CPU utilization • Interactive Systems – Min Response time, best proportionality • Real-Time Systems – predictability, meeting deadlines 9 Preemptive vs.
  • CS370: Operating Systems [Fall 2018] Dept. of Computer Science, Colorado State University

    CS370: Operating Systems [Fall 2018] Dept. of Computer Science, Colorado State University

    CS370: Operating Systems [Fall 2018] Dept. Of Computer Science, Colorado State University Frequently asked questions from the previous class survey CS 370: OPERATING SYSTEMS ¨ Could we record burst times in the PCB and use this to inform [CPU SCHEDULING] scheduling? ¨ Could a higher priority process starve? ¨ How is SJF implemented if we don’t know burst times? Shrideep Pallickara Computer Science Colorado State University CS370: Operating Systems [Fall 2018] October 9, 2018 L15.1 CS370: Operating Systems [Fall 2018] L15.2 Dept. Of Computer Science, Colorado State University October 9, 2018 Professor: SHRIDEEP PALLICKARA Dept. Of Computer Science, Colorado State University Topics covered in this lecture ¨ Scheduling Algorithms ¤ Wrap-up of SJF ¤ Priority Scheduling ¤ Round robin scheduling ¤ Lottery scheduling ¤ Multilevel feedback queues ¤ Multiprocessor/core Environments SHORTEST JOB FIRST (SJF) CS370: Operating Systems [Fall 2018] October 9, 2018 CS370: Operating Systems [Fall 2018] L15.3 October 9, 2018 L15.4 Dept. Of Computer Science, Colorado State University Professor: SHRIDEEP PALLICKARA Dept. Of Computer Science, Colorado State University Use of SJF in long term schedulers The SJF algorithm and short term schedulers ¨ Length of the process time limit ¨ No way to know the length of the next CPU burst ¤ Used as CPU burst estimate ¨ So try to predict it ¨ Motivate users to accurately estimate time limit ¨ Processes scheduled based on predicted CPU bursts ¤ Lower value will give faster response times ¤ Too low a value? n Time limit exceeded error n Requires resubmission! October 9, 2018 CS370: Operating Systems [Fall 2018] L15.5 October 9, 2018 CS370: Operating Systems [Fall 2018] L15.6 Professor: SHRIDEEP PALLICKARA Dept.