Real-Time Systems

, Volume 51, Issue 4, pp 440–483 | Cite as

Multiprocessor real-time scheduling with arbitrary processor affinities: from practice to theory

  • Arpan Gujarati
  • Felipe Cerqueira
  • Björn B. Brandenburg


Contemporary multiprocessor real-time operating systems, such as VxWorks, LynxOS, QNX, and real-time variants of Linux, allow a process to have an arbitrary processor affinity, that is, a process may be pinned to an arbitrary subset of the processors in the system. Placing such a hard constraint on process migrations can help to improve cache performance of specific multi-threaded applications, achieve isolation among applications, and aid in load-balancing. However, to date, the lack of schedulability analysis for such systems prevents the use of arbitrary processor affinities in predictable hard real-time systems. This paper presents the first analysis of multiprocessor scheduling with arbitrary processor affinities from a real-time systems perspective. It is shown that job-level fixed-priority scheduling with arbitrary processor affinities is strictly more general than global, clustered, and partitioned job-level fixed-priority scheduling combined. Concerning the more general case of job-level dynamic priorities, it is shown that global and clustered scheduling are equivalent to multiprocessor real-time scheduling with arbitrary processor affinities. The Linux push and pull scheduler is studied as a reference implementation and two approaches for the schedulability analysis of hard real-time tasks with arbitrary processor affinities are presented. In the first approach, the scheduling problem is reduced to “global-like” sub-problems to which existing global schedulability tests can be applied. The second approach is specifically based on response-time analysis and models the response-time computation as a linear optimization problem. The latter linear-programming-based approach has better runtime complexity than the former reduction-based approach. Schedulability experiments show the proposed techniques to be effective.


Multiprocessors Real-time systems Processor affinities  Schedulability analysis 


  1. Alfieri RA (1998) Apparatus and method for improved CPU affinity in a multiprocessor system. US Patent 5,745,778.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson JH, Bud V, Devi UC (2005) An EDF-based scheduling algorithm for multiprocessor soft real-time systems. In: Proceedings of the 17th Euromicro conference on real-time systems, ECRTS’05, pp 199–208Google Scholar
  3. Andersson B, Jonsson J (2000) Some insights on fixed-priority preemptive non-partitioned multiprocessor scheduling. In: Proceedings of the work-in-progress session of the 21st IEEE real-time systems symposium, RTSS’00Google Scholar
  4. Andersson B, Raravi G, Bletsas K (2010) Assigning real-time tasks on heterogeneous multiprocessors with two unrelated types of processors. In: Proceedings of the 31st IEEE real-time systems symposium, RTSS’10, pp 239–248Google Scholar
  5. Audsley NC, Burns A, Richardson MF, Wellings AJ (1991) Hard real-time scheduling: the deadline-monotonic approach. In: Proceedings of the 1991 IEEE workshop on real-time operating systems and software, pp. 133–137Google Scholar
  6. Audsley NC, Burns A, Richardson MF, Tindell K, Wellings AJ (1993) Applying new scheduling theory to static priority pre-emptive scheduling. Soft Eng J 8(5):284–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bado B, George L, Courbin P, Goossens J (2012) A semi-partitioned approach for parallel real-time scheduling. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on real-time and network systems, RTNS’12, pp. 151–160Google Scholar
  8. Baker TP, Baruah SK (2007) Schedulability analysis of multiprocessor sporadic task systems. In: Handbook of realtime and embedded systems, CRC Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Baruah SK (2004) Partitioning real-time tasks among heterogeneous multiprocessors. In: Proceddings of the international conference on parallel processing, ICPP’04, pp. 467–474Google Scholar
  10. Baruah SK (2007) Techniques for multiprocessor global schedulability analysis. In: Proceedings of the 28th IEEE real-time systems symposium, RTSS’07, pp. 119–128Google Scholar
  11. Baruah SK, Bini E (2008) Partitioned scheduling of sporadic task systems: an ILP-based approach. In: DASIP’08 Conference on design and architectures for signal and image processing, BruxellesGoogle Scholar
  12. Baruah SK, Brandenburg BB (2013) Multiprocessor feasibility analysis of recurrent task systems with specified processor affinities. In: RTSS’13, Proceedings of the 34th IEEE real-time systems symposium, pp. 160–169Google Scholar
  13. Baruah SK, Cohen NK, Plaxton CG, Varvel DA (1996) Proportionate progress: a notion of fairness in resource allocation. Algorithmica 15:600–625zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bastoni A, Brandenburg BB, Anderson JH (2011) Is semi-partitioned scheduling practical? In: ECRTS’11, Proceedings of the 23rd Euromicro conference on real-time systems, pp. 125–135Google Scholar
  15. Bertogna M, Cirinei M (2007) Response-time analysis for globally scheduled symmetric multiprocessor platforms. In: RTSS’07, Proceedings of the 28th IEEE real-time systems symposium, pp. 149–160Google Scholar
  16. Brandenburg BB (2011) Scheduling and locking in multiprocessor real-time operating systems. PhD thesis, University of North Carolina, CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  17. Burns A, Davis RI, Wang P, Zhang F (2012) Partitioned EDF scheduling for multiprocessors using a C=D task splitting scheme. Real-Time Syst 48:3–33zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Calandrino JM, Anderson JH, Baumberger DP (2007) A hybrid real-time scheduling approach for large-scale multicore platforms. In: ECRTS’07, Proceedings of the 19th Euromicro conference on real-time systems, pp. 247–258Google Scholar
  19. Davis RI, Burns A (2011a) Improved priority assignment for global fixed priority pre-emptive scheduling in multiprocessor real-time systems. Real-Time Syst 47(1):1–40zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Davis RI, Burns A (2011b) A survey of hard real-time scheduling for multiprocessor systems. ACM Comput Surv 43(4):35:1–35:44Google Scholar
  21. Dertouzos ML, Mok AK (1989) Multiprocessor online scheduling of hard-real-time tasks. IEEE Trans Soft Eng 15(12):1497–1506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dorin F, Yomsi PM, Goossens J, Richard P (2010) Semi-partitioned hard real-time scheduling with restricted migrations upon identical multiprocessor platforms. CoRR abs/1006.2637Google Scholar
  23. Easwaran A, Shin I, Lee I (2009) Optimal virtual cluster-based multiprocessor scheduling. Real-Time Syst 43(1):25–59zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Eisenbrand F, Rothvoß T (2008) Static-priority real-time scheduling: Response time computation is NP-hard. In: RTSS’08, Proceedings of the 29th IEEE real-time systems symposium, pp. 397–406Google Scholar
  25. Eisenbrand F, Rothvoß T (2010) EDF-schedulability of synchronous periodic task systems is coNP-hard. In: Proceedings of the 21st annual ACM-SIAM symposium on discrete algorithms, pp. 1029–1034Google Scholar
  26. Emberson P, Stafford R, Davis RI (2010) Techniques for the synthesis of multiprocessor tasksets. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Analysis Tools and Methodologies for Embedded and Real-time Systems, WATERS’10, pp 6–11.Google Scholar
  27. Fisher N, Goossens J, Baruah SK (2010) Optimal online multiprocessor scheduling of sporadic real-time tasks is impossible. Real-Time Systems 45(1–2):26–71zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Foong A, Fung J, Newell D (2004) An in-depth analysis of the impact of processor affinity on network performance. In: Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Networks, ICON’04, pp 244–250.Google Scholar
  29. Foong A, Fung J, Newell D, Abraham S, Irelan P, Lopez-Estrada A (2005) Architectural characterization of processor affinity in network processing. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Symposium on Performance Analysis of Systems and Software, pp 207–218.Google Scholar
  30. Funk SH (2004) EDF scheduling on heterogeneous multiprocessors. PhD thesis, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
  31. Gálvez JJ, Ruiz PM, Skarmeta AFG (2010) Heuristics for scheduling on restricted identical machines. University of Murcia, Spain, Tech. rep.Google Scholar
  32. Guan N, Stigge M, Yi W, Yu G (2009) New response time bounds for fixed priority multiprocessor scheduling. In: Proceedings of the 30th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, RTSS’09, pp 387–397.Google Scholar
  33. Gujarati A, Cerqueira F, Brandenburg BB (2013) Schedulability analysis of the linux push and pull scheduler with arbitrary processor affinities. In: Proceedings of the 25th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems, ECRTS’13, pp 69–79.Google Scholar
  34. Harbour M, Palencia JC (2003) Response time analysis for tasks scheduled under EDF within fixed priorities. In: Proceedings of the 24th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, RTSS’03, pp 200–209.Google Scholar
  35. Jang HC, Jin HW (2009) MiAMI: Multi-core aware processor affinity for TCP/IP over multiple network interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 17th IEEE Symposium on High Performance Interconnects, HOTI’13, pp 73–82.Google Scholar
  36. Joseph M, Pandya P (1986) Finding response times in a real-time system. The Computer Journal 29(5):390–395MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kato S, Yamasaki N, Ishikawa Y (2009) Semi-partitioned scheduling of sporadic task systems on multiprocessors. In: Proceedings of the 21st Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems, ECRTS’09, pp 249–258.Google Scholar
  38. Lelli J, Lipari G, Faggioli D, Cucinotta T (2011) An efficient and scalable implementation of global EDF in Linux. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Operating Systems Platforms for Embedded Real-Time Applications, OSPERT’11, pp 6–15.Google Scholar
  39. Leung JYT, Li CL (2008) Scheduling with processing set restrictions: A survey. International Journal of Production Economics 116(2):251–262MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Leung JYT, Whitehead J (1982) On the complexity of fixed-priority scheduling of periodic, real-time tasks. Performance evaluation 2(4):237–250zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lisper B, Mellgren P (2001) Response-time calculation and priority assignment with integer programming methods. In: Proceedings of the Work-in-Progress and Industrial Sessions of the 13th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems, ECRTS’01.Google Scholar
  42. Liu CL, Layland JW (1973) Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming in a hard-real-time environment. Journal of the ACM 20(1):46–61zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lundberg L (1998) Multiprocessor scheduling of age constraint processes. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications, RTCSA’98, pp 42–47.Google Scholar
  44. Markatos E, LeBlanc T (1992) Using processor affinity in loop scheduling on shared-memory multiprocessors. In: Proceedings of Supercomputing’92, pp 104–113.Google Scholar
  45. Mok AK (1983) Fundamental design problems of distributed systems for the hard-real-time environment. Tech. rep, Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
  46. Palencia J, Harbour MG (2005) Response time analysis of EDF distributed real-time systems. Journal of Embedded Computing 1(2):225–237Google Scholar
  47. Reddy D, Koufaty D, Brett P, Hahn S (2011) Bridging functional heterogeneity in multicore architectures. SIGOPS Operating Systems Review 45(1):21–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Salehi JD, Kurose JF, Towsley D (1995) Further results in affinity-based scheduling of parallel networking. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MAGoogle Scholar
  49. Zeng H, Di Natale M (2010) Improving real-time feasibility analysis for use in linear optimization methods. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems, ECRTS’10, pp 279–290.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arpan Gujarati
    • 1
  • Felipe Cerqueira
    • 1
  • Björn B. Brandenburg
    • 1
  1. 1.Max Planck Institute for Software Systems (MPI-SWS)KaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations