Advertisement

On preemptive scheduling of periodic, real-time tasks on one processor

  • Sanjoy K. Baruah
  • Rodney R. Howell
  • Louis E. Rosier
Communications
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 452)

Abstract

We investigate the preemptive scheduling of periodic, real-time task systems on one processor. We present three major results. First, we show that the Simultaneous Congruences Problem is NP-complete in the strong sense. Although this result is included primarily as a lemma for showing our next major theorem, it is important in its own right, answering a question that has been open for ten years. Our second major result is perhaps the most important in the paper — that deciding whether a given task system is feasible on one processor is co-NP-complete in the strong sense. Our fourth major result is that for incomplete task systems, i.e., task systems in which the start times are not specified, the feasibility problem is Ω 2 P -complete. Several other results involving cases in which all tasks are initially released at the same time, or in which there are a fixed number of distinct types of tasks, can be derived from these three theorems.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [BHR90]
    S. Baruah, R. Howell, and L. Rosier. Algorithms and complexity concerning the preemptive scheduling of periodic, real-time tasks on one processor. Technical Report TR-CS-90-5, Kansas State University, Dept. of Computing and Information Sciences, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. [Bla87]
    J. Blazewicz. Selected topics in scheduling theory. Annals of Discrete Mathematics, 31:1–60, 1987.Google Scholar
  3. [BRTV89]
    S. Baruah, L. Rosier, I. Tulchinsky, and D. Varvel. The complexity of periodic maintenance. Submitted for publication, 1989.Google Scholar
  4. [Coo71]
    S. Cook. The complexity of theorem-proving procedures. In Proc. of the 3rd Ann. ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pages 151–158, 1971.Google Scholar
  5. [Kar72]
    R. Karp. Reducibility among combinatorial problems. In R. Miller and J. Thatcher, editors, Complexity of Computer Computations, pages 85–103. Plenum Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  6. [Knu81]
    D. Knuth. Seminumerical Algorithms, volume 2 of The Art of Computer Programming. Addison Wesley, second edition, 1981.Google Scholar
  7. [Lab74]
    J. Labetoulle. Some theorems on real time scheduling. In E. Gelenbe and R. Mahl, editors, Computer Architecture and Networks, pages 285–293. North-Holland, 1974.Google Scholar
  8. [Leu89]
    J. Leung. A new algorithm for scheduling periodic, real-time tasks. Algorithmica, 4:209–219, 1989.Google Scholar
  9. [LL73]
    C. Liu and J. Layland. Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming in a hard-real-time environment. JACM, 20:46–61, 1973.Google Scholar
  10. [LM80]
    J. Leung and M. Merrill. A note on preemptive scheduling of periodic, real-time tasks. Information Processing Letters, 11:115–118, 1980.Google Scholar
  11. [LM81]
    E. Lawler and C. Martel. Scheduling periodically occurring tasks on multiple processors. Information Processing Letters, 12:9–12, 1981.Google Scholar
  12. [LW82]
    J. Leung and J. Whitehead. On the complexity of fixed-priority scheduling of periodic, real-time tasks. Performance Evaluation, 2:237–250, 1982.Google Scholar
  13. [Sto77]
    L. Stockmeyer. The polynomial-time hierarchy. Theoret. Comp. Sci., 3:1–22, 1977.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanjoy K. Baruah
    • 1
  • Rodney R. Howell
    • 2
  • Louis E. Rosier
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of Computer SciencesThe University of Texas at AustinAustinU.S.A.
  2. 2.Dept. of Computing and Information SciencesKansas State UniversityManhattanU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations