Scheduling Real-Time Transactions Using Deferred Preemptive Technique

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 380)


Preemptions are necessary to obtain feasible schedule for real-time processing. A nonpreemptive scheduler can block higher priority transactions affecting schedulability of the system. This paper presents deferred preemptive technique scheduling algorithm using EDF to overcome the drawbacks of fully preemptive scheduler that substantially reduces number of preemptions in comparison with fully preemptive scheduling.


EDF Preemption Real-time Scheduling 


  1. 1.
    Liu, C.L., Layland, J.W.: Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming in a hard-real-time environment. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 20(1), 46–61 (1973)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker, T.P. Stack-based scheduling of real-time processes. Real-Time Syst.: Int. J. Time-Crit. Comput. 3 (1991)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mok, A.K.: Fundamental design problems of distributed systems for the hard-real-time environment. Ph.D. thesis, Laboratory for Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Available as Technical Report No. MIT/LCS/TR-297 (1983)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baruah, S., Mok, A.K., Rosier, L.E.: Preemptively scheduling hard-real-time sporadic tasks on one processor. In: Proceedings of the 11th Real-Time Systems Symposium. IEEE Computer Society Press, Orlando (1990)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Amdani, S.Y., Ali, M.S., Mundada, S.M.: Mathematical model for real time disk scheduling problem. in: Proceedings published in International Journal of Computer Applications® (IJCA) (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Amdani, S.Y., Ali, M.S.: An overview of real-time disk scheduling algorithms. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. 2(1), 126–130 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jeffay, K., Stanat, D., Martel, C.: On non-preemptive scheduling of periodic and sporadic tasks. In: Proceedings of the 12th Real-Time Systems Symposium, IEEE Computer Society Press, San Antonio, Dec 1991Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    George, L., Rivierre, N., Spuri, M.: Preemptive and nonpreemptive real-time uniprocessor scheduling. Tech. Rep. RR—2966, INRIA: Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et en Automatique (1996)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marinho, J., et al.: Limited pre-emptive global fixed task priority. In: IEEE 34th Real-Time Systems Symposium, pp. 182–191, Dec 2013Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baruah, S., Chakraborty, S.: Schedulability analysis of non-preemptive recurring real-time tasks. In: International Workshop on Parallel and Distributed Real-Time Systems (IPDPS), Rhodes, April 2006Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baruah, S.: The limited-preemption uniprocessor scheduling of sporadic task systems. In: Proceedings of the EuroMicro Conference on Real-Time Systems, IEEE Computer Society Press, Palma de Mallorca, July 2005Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang, Y., Saksena, M.: Scheduling fixed-priority tasks with preemption threshold. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Real-time Computing Systems and Applications, IEEE Computer Society (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Regehr, J.: Scheduling tasks with mixed preemption relations for robustness to timing faults. In: Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pp. 315–326. IEEE Computer Society, Cancun, Dec 2002Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Burns, A. Preemptive priority based scheduling: An appropriate engineering approach. In: Son, S. (ed.) Advances in Real-TimeSystems, pp. 225–248 (1994)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gopalakrishnan, R., Parulkar, G.: Bringing real-time scheduling theory and practice closer for multimedia computing. In: Proceedings of ACM Sigmetrics Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems, pp. 1–12, May, 1996Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bril, R., Lukkien, J., Verhaegh, W.: Worst-case response time analysis of real-time tasks under fixed-priority scheduling with deferred preemption revisited. In: ECRTS ’07: Proceedings of the 19th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems, pp. 269–279. Pisa (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Simonson, J., Patel, J.: Use of preferred preemption points in cache-based real-time systems. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Computer Performance and Dependability Symposium (IPDS), pp. 316–325, April 1995Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wu, Y., Bertogna, M.: Improving task responsiveness with limited preemptions. In: Proceedings of the 14th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation, ETFA’09. IEEE PressGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yao, G., Buttazzo, G., Bertogna, M.: Bounding the maximum length of non-preemptive regions under fixed priority scheduling. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Embedded and Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications (RTCSA), IEEE Computer Society Press, Beijing, May–June 2009Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Buttazzo, G., Yao, G., Bertogna, M.: Bounding the maximum length of non-preemptive regions under fixed priority scheduling. In: Proceedings of 15th IEEE International Conference Embedded Real-Time Computer System Applications (RTCSA’09), pp. 351–360. Beijing, 24–26 Aug 2009Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Baruah, S., Bertogna, M.: Limited preemption EDF scheduling of sporadic task systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 6(4), (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhu, Y.: Evaluation of scheduling algorithms for real-time disk I/O (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer India 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Babasaheb Naik College of EngineeringPusadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science & EngineeringProf. Ram Meghe Institute of Technology & ResearchBadneraIndia

Personalised recommendations