Real-Time Systems

, Volume 48, Issue 6, pp 716–749 | Cite as

Laxity dynamics and LLF schedulability analysis on multiprocessor platforms

Article

Abstract

LLF (Least Laxity First) scheduling, which assigns a higher priority to a task with a smaller laxity, has been known as an optimal preemptive scheduling algorithm on a single processor platform. However, little work has been made to illuminate its characteristics upon multiprocessor platforms. In this paper, we identify the dynamics of laxity from the system’s viewpoint and translate the dynamics into LLF multiprocessor schedulability analysis. More specifically, we first characterize laxity properties under LLF scheduling, focusing on laxity dynamics associated with a deadline miss. These laxity dynamics describe a lower bound, which leads to the deadline miss, on the number of tasks of certain laxity values at certain time instants. This lower bound is significant because it represents invariants for highly dynamic system parameters (laxity values). Since the laxity of a task is dependent of the amount of interference of higher-priority tasks, we can then derive a set of conditions to check whether a given task system can go into the laxity dynamics towards a deadline miss. This way, to the author’s best knowledge, we propose the first LLF multiprocessor schedulability test based on its own laxity properties. We also develop an improved schedulability test that exploits slack values. We mathematically prove that the proposed LLF tests dominate the state-of-the-art EDZL tests. We also present simulation results to evaluate schedulability performance of both the original and improved LLF tests in a quantitative manner.

Keywords

Schedulability analysis Laxity dynamics LLF (Least Laxity First) Multiprocessor platforms Real-time scheduling 

References

  1. Anderson JH, Srinivasan A (2000) Early-release fair scheduling. In: Proceedings of Euromicro conference on real-time systems (ECRTS), pp 35–43 Google Scholar
  2. Andersson B, Bletsas K (2008) Sporadic multiprocessor scheduling with few preemptions. In: Proceedings of Euromicro conference on real-time systems (ECRTS), pp 243–252 Google Scholar
  3. Andersson B, Tovar E (2006) Multiprocessor scheduling with few preemptions. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on embedded and real-time computing systems and applications (RTCSA), pp 322–334 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andersson B, Baruah S, Jonsson J (2001) Static-priority scheduling on multiprocessors. In: Proceedings of IEEE real-time systems symposium (RTSS), pp 193–202 Google Scholar
  5. Andersson B, Bletsas K, Baruah S (2008) Scheduling arbitrary-deadline sporadic task systems on multiprocessor. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on embedded and real-time computing systems and applications (RTCSA), pp 197–206 Google Scholar
  6. Baker TP (2005) Comparison of empirical success rates of global vs. partitioned fixed-priority and EDF scheduling for hand real time. Technical Report TR-050601, Dept. of Computer Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee Google Scholar
  7. Baker TP, Cirinei M (2006) A necessary and sometimes sufficient condition for the feasibility of sets of sporadic hard-deadline tasks. In: Proceedings of IEEE real-time systems symposium (RTSS), pp 178–190 Google Scholar
  8. Baker TP, Cirinei M, Bertogna M (2008) EDZL scheduling analysis. Real-Time Syst 40:264–289 MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Baruah S, Cohen NK, Plaxton CG, Varvel DA (1996) Proportionate progress: a notion of fairness in resource allocation. Algorithmica 15(6):600–625 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Baruah S, Bonifaci V, Marchetti-Spaccamela A, Stiller S (2009) Implementation of a speedup-optimal global EDF schedulability test. In: Proceedings of Euromicro conference on real-time systems (ECRTS), pp 259–268 Google Scholar
  11. Bertogna M, Cirinei M, Lipari G (2005) Improved schedulability analysis of EDF on multiprocessor platforms. In: Proceedings of Euromicro conference on real-time systems (ECRTS), pp 209–218 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bertogna M, Cirinei M, Lipari G (2009) Schedulability analysis of global scheduling algorithms on multiprocessor platforms. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 20:553–566 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burns A, Baruah S (2008) Sustainability in real-time scheduling. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 2(1):74–97 Google Scholar
  14. Cho S, Lee S-K, Ahn S, Lin K-J (2002) Efficient real-time scheduling algorithms for multiprocessor systems. IEICE Trans Commun E85-B(12):2859–2867 Google Scholar
  15. Cho H, Ravindran B, Jensen ED (2006) An optimal real-time scheduling algorithm for multiprocessors. In: Proceedings of IEEE real-time systems symposium (RTSS), pp 101–110 Google Scholar
  16. Davis R, Burns A (2011) Improved priority assignment for global fixed priority pre-emptive scheduling in multiprocessor real-time systems. Real-Time Syst 47(1):1–40 MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davis RI, Burns A (2011) FPZL schedulability analysis. In: Proceedings of IEEE real-time technology and applications symposium (RTAS), pp 245–256 Google Scholar
  18. Davis RI, Burns A (2011) A survey of hard real-time scheduling for multiprocessor systems. ACM Comput Surv 43(4):35 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dertouzos ML, Mok AK (1989) Multiprocessor on-line scheduling of hard-real-time tasks. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 15:1497–1506 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Easwaran A, Shin I, Lee I (2009) Optimal virtual cluster-based multiprocessor scheduling. Real-Time Syst 43(1):25–59 MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fisher N, Goossens J, Baruah S (2010) Joël goossens, and sanjoy baruah. Optimal online multiprocessor scheduling of sporadic real-time tasks is impossible. Real-Time Syst 45:26–71 MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Funaoka K, Kato S, Yamasaki N (2008) Work-conserving optimal real-time scheduling on multiprocessors. In: Proceedings of Euromicro conference on real-time systems (ECRTS), pp 13–22 Google Scholar
  23. Kalyanasundaram B, Pruhs KR, Torng E (2000) Errata: A new algorithm for scheduling periodic, real-time tasks. Algorithmica 28:269–270 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee SK (1994) On-line multiprocessor scheduling algorithms for real-time tasks. In: IEEE region 10’s ninth annual international conference, pp 607–611 Google Scholar
  25. Lee J, Easwaran A, Shin I (2010) LLF schedulability analysis on multiprocessor platforms. In: Proceedings of IEEE real-time systems symposium (RTSS), pp 25–36 Google Scholar
  26. Lee J, Easwaran A, Shin I, Lee I (2010) Multiprocessor real-time scheduling considering concurrency and urgency. ACM SIGBED Rev 7(1) Google Scholar
  27. Lee J, Easwaran A, Shin I (2011) Maximizing contention-free executions in multiprocessor scheduling. In: Proceedings of IEEE real-time technology and applications symposium (RTAS), pp 235–244 Google Scholar
  28. Lee J, Easwaran A, Shin I, Lee I (2011) Zero-laxity based real-time multiprocessor scheduling. J Syst Softw 84(12):2324–2333 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leung JY-T (1989) A new algorithm for scheduling periodic, real-time tasks. Algorithmica 4:209–219 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leung JYT, Whitehead J (1982) On the complexity of fixed-priority scheduling of periodic real-time tasks. Perform Eval 2:237–250 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Levin G, Funk S, Sadowski C, Pye I, Brandt S (2010) DP-FAIR: A simple model for understanding optimal multiprocessor scheduling. In: Proceedings of Euromicro conference on real-time systems (ECRTS), pp 3–13 Google Scholar
  32. Liu CL, Layland J (1973) Scheduling algorithms for multi-programming in a hard-real-time environment. J ACM 20(1):46–61 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mok A (1983) Fundamental design problems of distributed systems for the hard-real-time environment. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Google Scholar
  34. Park M, Han S, Kim H, Cho S, Cho Y (2005) Comparison of deadline-based scheduling algorithms for periodic real-time tasks on multiprocessor. IEICE Trans Inf Syst E 88-D:658–661 Google Scholar
  35. Phillips CA, Stein C, Torng E, Wein J (2002) Optimal time-critical scheduling via resource augmentation. Algorithmica 32:163–200 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Srinivasan A, Baruah S (2002) Deadline-based scheduling of periodic task systems on multiprocessors. Inf Process Lett 84(2):93–98 MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceKAISTYuseong, DaejeonSouth Korea
  2. 2.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceThe University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  3. 3.Cister Research UnitPolytechnic Institute of PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations