Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling

Operating System Concepts Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Chapter 5: Outline

Basic Concepts
Scheduling Criteria

Scheduling Algorithms
Thread Scheduling
Multi-Processor Scheduling

Real-Time CPU Scheduling

Operating Systems Examples
Algorithm Evaluation

Operating System Concepts 2 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Objectives

Describe various CPU scheduling algorithms

Assess CPU scheduling algorithms based on scheduling criteria

Explain the issues related to multiprocessor and multicore scheduling

Describe various real-time scheduling algorithms
Describe the scheduling algorithms used in the Windows, Linux, and
Solaris operating systems

Apply modeling and simulations to evaluate CPU scheduling

algorithms
Design a program that implements several different CPU scheduling
algorithms

Operating System Concepts 3 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Basic Concepts

Almost all computer resources

are scheduled before use
Maximum CPU utilization
obtained with multiprogramming
CPU–I/O Burst Cycle – Process
execution consists of a cycle of
CPU execution and I/O wait
CPU burst followed by I/O burst

CPU burst distribution is of main

concern

Operating System Concepts 4 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Histogram of CPU-burst Times

Generally, frequency curve shows

Large number of short bursts

Small number of longer bursts

Operating System Concepts 5 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 CPU Scheduler

The CPU scheduler selects one Scheduling under 1 and 4 is

process from among the nonpreemptive
processes in ready queue, and
 No choice in terms of
allocates the CPU core to it scheduling
 Queue may be ordered in
various ways: FIFO, priority,
All other scheduling is
tree, linked list preemptive, and can result in
race conditions
CPU scheduling decisions may
Consider access to shared
take place when a process:
data
1. switches from running to
Consider preemption while in
waiting state
kernel mode
2. switches from running to
ready state Consider interrupts occurring
during crucial OS activities
3. switches from waiting to ready
4. terminates

Operating System Concepts 6 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Dispatcher

Dispatcher module gives control of the

CPU to the process selected by the short-
term scheduler; this involves:
switching context
 The number of context switches can be
obtained by using the #vmstat command or
the /proc file system for a given process

switching to user mode

jumping to the proper location in the user

program to resume that program

Dispatch latency – time it takes for the

dispatcher to stop one process and start
another running #vmstat

Operating System Concepts 7 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Scheduling Criteria

CPU utilization – keep the CPU as busy as possible

Throughput – number of processes that complete their execution per
time unit

Turnaround time – amount of time to execute a particular process

Waiting time – amount of time a process spends waiting in the ready
queue
Response time – amount of time it takes from when a request was
submitted until the first response is produced, not outputting the
response (for time-sharing environment or in an interactive system)

#top

Operating System Concepts 8 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Scheduling Algorithm Optimization Criteria

Max CPU utilization

Max Throughput
Min Turnaround time
Min Waiting time
Min Response time

In most cases, it is necessary to optimize the average measure

For interactive systems (such as a PC desktop or laptop system), it is

more important to minimize the variance in the response time
Note: For next examples of the comparison of various CPU-scheduling
algorithms
 Consider only one CPU burst (in milliseconds) per process
 The measure of comparison: average waiting time

Operating System Concepts 9 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 First-Come, First-Served (FCFS) Scheduling

Motivation: for simplicity, consider FIFO-like policy

Process Burst Time (ms)
P1 24
P2 3
P3 3
Suppose that the processes arrive at time 0 in the order: P1 , P2 , P3
The Gantt Chart for the schedule is:
P1 P2 P3
0 24 27 30

Waiting time for P1 = 0; P2 = 24; P3 = 27

Average waiting time = (0 + 24 + 27)/3 = 17

Operating System Concepts 10 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 FCFS Scheduling (Cont.)

Suppose that the processes arrive in the order: P2 , P3 , P1

The Gantt chart for the schedule is:
P2 P3 P1
0 3 6 30

Waiting time for P1 = 6; P2 = 0; P3 = 3

Average waiting time = (6 + 0 + 3)/3 = 3

Much better than previous case

Convoy effect – short processes behind a long process, all the other
processes wait for the one big process to get off the CPU
Consider one CPU-bound and many I/O-bound processes

Result in lower CPU and device utilization

Operating System Concepts 11 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Shortest-Job-First (SJF) Scheduling

Motivation: Moving a short process before a long one decreases the

waiting time of the short process more than it increases the waiting
time of the long process
The shortest-next-CPU-burst algorithm

Associate with each process the length of its next CPU burst
When the CPU is available, it is assigned to the process that has the
smallest next CPU burst
FCFS scheduling is used if the next CPU bursts of two processes are the
same

SJF is provably optimal – gives minimum average waiting time for a

given set of processes
The difficulty is how to know the length of the next CPU request
Could ask the user
Operating System Concepts 12 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018
 Example of SJF scheduling

Processiv Burst Time (ms)

P1 0.0 6

P2 2.0 8
P3 4.0 7
P4 5.0 3

SJF scheduling Gantt chart

P4 P1 P3 P2
0 3 9 16 24

Average waiting time = (3 + 16 + 9 + 0) / 4 = 7

Operating System Concepts 13 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Determining Length of Next CPU Burst

Can only estimate the length – should be similar to the previous one
Then pick process with shortest predicted next CPU burst

Can be done by using exponential averaging of the measured lengths

of previous CPU bursts as follows

1. t n = actual length of n th CPU burst

2.  n +1 = predicted value for the next CPU burst
3.  , 0    1
4. Define :  n =1 =  t n + (1 −  ) n .

Commonly, α controls the relative weight of recent and past history in

the prediction and sets to ½
Preemptive version called Shortest-Remaining-Time-First (SRTF)

Operating System Concepts 14 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Prediction of the Length of the Next CPU Burst

An exponential average with ⍺ = 1/2 and τ0 = 10

Operating System Concepts 15 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Examples of Exponential Averaging

=0
n+1 = n
Recent history does not count

 =1
Since both  and (1 - ) are
n+1 = tn less than or equal to 1, each
Only the actual last CPU burst successive term has less
counts weight than its predecessor
If we expand the formula, we get:
n+1 =  tn + (1 - ) tn -1 + …
+ (1 -  )j  tn -j + …
+ (1 -  )n +1 0.

Operating System Concepts 16 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Shortest-Remaining-Time-First (SRTF)

Motivation: now, we add the concepts of varying arrival times and

preemption to the analysis
Process Arrival Time Burst Time (ms)
P1 0 8
P2 1 4
P3 2 9
P4 3 5
Preemptive SJF Gantt Chart

P1 P2 P4 P1 P3
0 1 5 10 17 26

Average waiting time = [(10-1)+(1-1)+(17-2)+(5-3)]/4 = 6.5

The value for nonpreemptive SJF scheduling?

Operating System Concepts 17 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018
 Round Robin (RR) Scheduling

Motivation: try scheduling algorithm similar to FCFS scheduling, but

preemption is added to enable the system to switch between
processes
Each process gets a small unit of CPU time (time quantum q), usually
10-100 milliseconds. After this time has elapsed, the process is
preempted and added to the end of the ready 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
Timer interrupts every quantum to schedule next process
Performance
q large  FIFO
q small  q must be large with respect to context switch, otherwise
overhead is too high

Operating System Concepts 18 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Example of RR with Time Quantum q = 4

Process Burst Time

P1 24
P2 3
P3 3
The Gantt chart is:

P1 P2 P3 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1
0 4 7 10 14 18 22 26 30

Average waiting time = ?

Typically, higher average turnaround than SJF, but better response

q should be large compared to context switch time
q usually 10ms to 100ms, context switch < 10𝜇sec
Operating System Concepts 19 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018
 Time Quantum and Context Switch Time

Operating System Concepts 20 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Turnaround Time Varies With The Time
Quantum

80% of CPU
bursts should be
shorter than q

Operating System Concepts 21 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Priority Scheduling

Motivation: A priority number (integer) is associated with each

process
The CPU is allocated to the process with the highest priority
(smallest integer  highest priority). Equal-priority processes are
scheduled in FCFS or RR
Preemptive

Nonpreemptive

SJF is priority scheduling where priority is the inverse of predicted

next CPU burst time
Problem  Starvation – low priority processes may never execute
Solution  Aging – as time progresses, increase the priority of the
process

Operating System Concepts 22 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Example of Priority Scheduling

ProcessA ari Burst TimeT Priority

P1 10 3

P2 1 1
P3 2 4
P4 1 5

P5 5 2
Priority scheduling Gantt Chart

Average waiting time = 8.2

Operating System Concepts 23 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Priority Scheduling w/ Round-Robin

ProcessA arri Burst TimeT Priority

P1 4 3
P2 5 2
P3 8 2
P4 7 1
P5 3 3
Run the process with the highest priority. Processes with the same
priority run Round-Robin

Gantt Chart with time quantum q = 2 ms

Average waiting time = ?

Operating System Concepts 24 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018
 Multilevel Queue

Motivation: with priority scheduling, have separate queues for each

priority
Schedule the process in the highest-priority queue!

Operating System Concepts 25 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Example of Multilevel Queue

Prioritization based upon process type

Operating System Concepts 26 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Multilevel Feedback Queue

Motivation: A process can move between the various queues; aging

can be implemented this way
Multilevel-feedback-queue scheduler defined by the following
parameters:
number of queues
scheduling algorithms for each queue
method used to determine when to upgrade a process
method used to determine when to demote a process
method used to determine which queue a process will enter when that
process needs service
This scheme leaves I/O-bound and interactive processes — which
are typically characterized by short CPU bursts — in the higher-
priority queues and a process that waits too long in a lower-priority
queue may be moved to a higher-priority queue
Operating System Concepts 27 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018
 Example of Multilevel Feedback Queue

Three queues: Scheduling

 Q0 – RR with time quantum 8 A new job enters queue Q0
milliseconds which is served FCFS
 Q1 – RR with time quantum 16  When it gains CPU, job
milliseconds receives 8 milliseconds
 Q2 – FCFS  If it does not finish in 8
milliseconds, job is moved to
queue Q1
At Q1 job is again served
FCFS and receives 16
additional milliseconds
 If it still does not complete, it is
preempted and moved to
queue Q2

Operating System Concepts 28 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Thread Scheduling

Distinction between user-level and kernel-level threads

When threads supported, threads scheduled, not processes

Many-to-one and many-to-many models, thread library schedules

user-level threads to run on Light-Weight Process (LWP)
Known as Process-Contention Scope (PCS) since scheduling
competition is within the process

Typically done via priority set by programmer

Kernel thread scheduled onto available CPU is System-Contention

Scope (SCS) – competition among all threads in system

Operating System Concepts 29 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 POSIX Pthread Scheduling

API allows specifying either PCS or SCS during thread creation

PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS schedules threads using PCS
scheduling

PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM schedules threads using SCS scheduling

Can be limited by OS – Linux and macOS only allow

PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM
Pthread IPC (Inter-process Communication) provides two functions
for setting
pthread attr setscope(pthread attr t *attr, int scope)

pthread attr getscope(pthread attr t *attr, int

*scope)

Operating System Concepts 30 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Pthread Scheduling API

#include <pthread.h> int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {

#include <stdio.h> int i, scope;

pthread_t tid[NUM THREADS];
#define NUM_THREADS 5
pthread_attr_t attr;

/* get the default attributes */

pthread_attr_init(&attr);

/* first inquire on the current scope */

if (pthread_attr_getscope(&attr, &scope) != 0)

fprintf(stderr, "Unable to get scheduling scope\n");

else {

if (scope == PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS)

printf("PTHREAD_SCOPE_PROCESS");

else if (scope == PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM)

printf("PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM");

else
fprintf(stderr, "Illegal scope value.\n");

}
Operating System Concepts 31 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018
 Pthread Scheduling API (Cont.)

/* set the scheduling algorithm to PCS or SCS */

pthread_attr_setscope(&attr, PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM);

/* create the threads */

for (i = 0; i < NUM_THREADS; i++)

pthread_create(&tid[i],&attr,runner,NULL);

/* now join on each thread */

for (i = 0; i < NUM_THREADS; i++)

pthread_join(tid[i], NULL);

/* Each thread will begin control in this function */

void *runner(void *param)

{

/* do some work ... */

pthread_exit(0);

Operating System Concepts 32 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Multiple-Processor Scheduling

CPU scheduling more complex when multiple CPUs are available

Multiprocessor may be any one of the following architectures:
Multicore CPUs

Multithreaded cores

NUMA systems

Heterogeneous multiprocessing

Multiprocessor scheduling
There is no one best solution

Operating System Concepts 33 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Multiple-Processor Scheduling (Cont.)

Symmetric multiprocessing (SMP) is where each processor is self-

scheduling
Two possible strategies
All threads may be in a common ready queue (Fig. a)

Each processor may have its own private queue of threads (Fig. b)

Operating System Concepts 34 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Multicore Processors

Recent trend to place multiple processor cores on same physical chip

Faster and consumes less power

Multiple threads per core also growing

Takes advantage of memory stall to make progress on another thread
while memory retrieve happens

Operating System Concepts 35 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Multithreaded Multicore System

Each core has > 1 hardware threads.

If one thread has a memory stall, switch to another thread!

Operating System Concepts 36 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Multithreaded Multicore System

Chip-multithreading (CMT)
assigns each core multiple
hardware threads (Intel
refers to this as
hyperthreading)
Each hardware thread
maintains its architectural
state, such as instruction
pointer and register set
On a quad-core system
with 2 hardware threads
per core (e.g., Intel i7), the
operating system sees 8
logical processors

Operating System Concepts 37 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Multithreaded Multicore System

Two levels of
scheduling:

1. The operating
system deciding
which software
thread to run on a
logical CPU

2. How each core

decides which
hardware thread to
run on the physical
core.

Operating System Concepts 38 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Multiple-Processor Scheduling – Load Balancing

If SMP, need to keep all CPUs loaded for efficiency

Load balancing attempts to keep workload evenly distributed

Push migration – periodic task checks load on each processor, and if

found, pushes task from overloaded CPU to other CPUs
Pull migration – idle processors pulls waiting task from busy
processor

Operating System Concepts 39 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Multiple-Processor Scheduling – Processor Affinity

When a thread has been running on one processor, the cache

contents of that processor stores the memory accesses by that
thread.
We refer to this as a thread having affinity for a processor (i.e.
“processor affinity”)

Load balancing may affect processor affinity as a thread may be

moved from one processor to another to balance loads, yet that
thread loses the contents of what it had in the cache of the processor
it was moved off of.
Soft affinity – the operating system attempts to keep a thread running
on the same processor, but no guarantees.
Hard affinity – allows a process to specify a set of processors it may
run on.

Operating System Concepts 40 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 NUMA and CPU Scheduling

If the operating system is NUMA-aware, it will assign

memory closes to the CPU the thread is running on.

Operating System Concepts 41 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Real-Time CPU Scheduling

Can present obvious challenges

Soft real-time systems – Critical real-time tasks have the highest
priority, but no guarantee as to when tasks will be scheduled

Hard real-time systems – task must be serviced by its deadline

Operating System Concepts 42 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Types of Latencies

Event latency – the amount of time that elapses from when an event
occurs to when it is serviced.
Two types of latencies affect performance
1. Interrupt latency – time from arrival of interrupt to start of routine that
services interrupt

2. Dispatch latency – time for schedule to take current process off CPU and
switch to another

Operating System Concepts 43 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Interrupt Latency

Operating System Concepts 44 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Dispatch Latency

Conflict phase of
dispatch latency:
1. Preemption of any
process running in
kernel mode

2. Release by low-
priority process of
resources needed
by high-priority
processes

Operating System Concepts 45 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Priority-based Scheduling

For real-time scheduling, scheduler must support preemptive, priority-

based scheduling
But only guarantees soft real-time

For hard real-time, it must also provide ability to meet deadlines

Processes have new characteristics: periodic ones require CPU at
constant intervals
Has processing time t, deadline d, period p
0≤t≤d≤p
Rate of periodic task is 1/p

Operating System Concepts 46 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Rate Monotonic Scheduling

A priority is assigned based on the inverse of its period

Shorter periods = higher priority;

Longer periods = lower priority

P1 is assigned a higher priority than P2.

Operating System Concepts 47 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Missed Deadlines with Rate Monotonic Scheduling

Process P2 misses finishing its deadline at time 80

Operating System Concepts 48 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Earliest Deadline First Scheduling (EDF)

Priorities are assigned according to deadlines:

the earlier the deadline, the higher the priority;

the later the deadline, the lower the priority

Operating System Concepts 49 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Proportional Share Scheduling

T shares are allocated among all processes in the system

An application receives N shares where N < T

This ensures each application will receive N / T of the total processor

time

Operating System Concepts 50 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 POSIX Real-Time Scheduling

The POSIX.1b standard

API provides functions for managing real-time threads

Defines two scheduling classes for real-time threads:

SCHED_FIFO – threads are scheduled using a FCFS strategy with a
FIFO queue. There is no time-slicing for threads of equal priority

SCHED_RR – similar to SCHED_FIFO except time-slicing occurs for

threads of equal priority

Defines two functions for getting and setting scheduling policy:

pthread_attr_getsched_policy(pthread_attr_t *attr, int
*policy)

pthread_attr_setsched_policy(pthread_attr_t *attr, int

policy)

Operating System Concepts 51 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 POSIX Real-Time Scheduling API

#include <pthread.h> int main(int argc, char *argv[])

#include <stdio.h> {

#define NUM_THREADS 5 int i, policy;

pthread_t_tid[NUM_THREADS];

pthread_attr_t attr;

/* get the default attributes */

pthread_attr_init(&attr);

/* get the current scheduling policy */

if (pthread_attr_getschedpolicy(&attr, &policy) != 0)

fprintf(stderr, "Unable to get policy.\n");

else {

if (policy == SCHED_OTHER) printf("SCHED_OTHER\n");

else if (policy == SCHED_RR) printf("SCHED_RR\n");

else if (policy == SCHED_FIFO) printf("SCHED_FIFO\n");

Operating System Concepts 52 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 POSIX Real-Time Scheduling API (Cont.)

/* set the scheduling policy - FIFO, RR, or OTHER */

if (pthread_attr_setschedpolicy(&attr, SCHED_FIFO) != 0)

fprintf(stderr, "Unable to set policy.\n");

/* create the threads */

for (i = 0; i < NUM_THREADS; i++)

pthread_create(&tid[i],&attr,runner,NULL);

/* now join on each thread */

for (i = 0; i < NUM_THREADS; i++)

pthread_join(tid[i], NULL);

/* Each thread will begin control in this function */

void *runner(void *param)

{

/* do some work ... */

pthread_exit(0);

Operating System Concepts 53 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Operating System Examples

Linux scheduling

Windows scheduling

Solaris scheduling

Operating System Concepts 54 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Linux Scheduling Through Version 2.5

Prior to kernel version 2.5, ran variation of standard UNIX scheduling

algorithm
Version 2.5 moved to constant order O(1) scheduling time
Preemptive, priority based
Two priority ranges: time-sharing and real-time
Real-time range from 0 to 99 and nice value from 100 to 140
Map into global priority with numerically lower values indicating higher priority
Higher priority gets larger q
Task runnable as long as time left in time slice (active)
If no time left (expired), not runnable until all other tasks use their slices
All runnable tasks tracked in per-CPU run-queue data structure
 Two priority arrays (active, expired)
 Tasks indexed by priority
 When no more active, arrays are exchanged
Worked well, but poor response times for interactive processes

Operating System Concepts 55 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Linux Scheduling in Version 2.6.23 +

Completely Fair Scheduler (CFS)

Scheduling classes
Each has specific priority

Scheduler picks highest priority task in highest scheduling class

Rather than quantum based on fixed time allotments, based on

proportion of CPU time

2 scheduling classes included, others can be added

 default

 real-time

Operating System Concepts 56 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Linux Scheduling in Version 2.6.23 +

Quantum calculated based on nice value from -20 to +19

Lower value is higher priority

Calculates target latency – interval of time during which task should run
at least once

Target latency can increase if say number of active tasks increases

CFS scheduler maintains per task virtual run time in variable

vruntime
Associated with decay factor based on priority of task – lower priority is
higher decay rate

Normal default priority yields virtual run time = actual run time

To decide next task to run, scheduler picks task with lowest virtual
run time

Operating System Concepts 57 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 CFS Performance

Operating System Concepts 58 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Linux Real-time Scheduling

Real-time scheduling according to POSIX.1b

Real-time tasks have static priorities

Real-time plus normal map into global priority scheme

Nice value of -20 maps to global priority 100
Nice value of +19 maps to priority 139

Operating System Concepts 59 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Linux Scheduling (Cont.)

Linux supports load balancing, but is also NUMA-aware

Scheduling domain is a set of CPU cores that can be balanced
against one another

Domains are organized by what they share (i.e., cache memory.)

Goal is to keep threads from migrating between domains

Operating System Concepts 60 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Windows Scheduling

Windows uses priority-based preemptive scheduling

Highest-priority thread runs next
Dispatcher is scheduler
Thread runs until (1) blocks, (2) uses time slice, (3) preempted by
higher-priority thread
Real-time threads can preempt non-real-time
32-level priority scheme
Variable class is 1-15, real-time class is 16-31
Priority 0 is memory-management thread
Queue for each priority
If no run-able thread, runs idle thread

Operating System Concepts 61 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Windows Priority Classes

Win32 API identifies several priority classes to which a process can

belong
 REALTIME_PRIORITY_CLASS, HIGH_PRIORITY_CLASS,
ABOVE_NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLASS, NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLASS,
BELOW_NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLASS, IDLE_PRIORITY_CLASS

 All are variable except REALTIME

A thread within a given priority class has a relative priority

 TIME_CRITICAL, HIGHEST, ABOVE_NORMAL, NORMAL,
BELOW_NORMAL, LOWEST, IDLE

Priority class and relative priority combine to give numeric priority

Base priority is NORMAL within the class
If quantum expires, priority lowered, but never below base

Operating System Concepts 62 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Windows Priority Classes (Cont.)

If wait occurs, priority boosted depending on what was waited for

Foreground window given 3x priority boost

Windows 7 added user-mode scheduling (UMS)

Applications create and manage threads independent of kernel

For large number of threads, much more efficient

UMS schedulers come from programming language libraries like

C++ Concurrent Runtime (ConcRT) framework

Operating System Concepts 63 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Windows Priorities

Operating System Concepts 64 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Solaris

Priority-based scheduling
Six classes available
Time sharing (default) (TS)
Interactive (IA)
Real time (RT)
System (SYS)
Fair Share (FSS)
Fixed priority (FP)
Given thread can be in one class at a time
Each class has its own scheduling algorithm
Time sharing is multi-level feedback queue
Loadable table configurable by sysadmin
Operating System Concepts 65 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018
 Solaris Dispatch Table

Operating System Concepts 66 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Solaris Scheduling

Operating System Concepts 67 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Solaris Scheduling (Cont.)

Scheduler converts class-specific priorities into a per-thread global

priority
Thread with highest priority runs next

Runs until (1) blocks, (2) uses time slice, (3) preempted by higher-priority
thread

Multiple threads at same priority selected via RR

Operating System Concepts 68 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Algorithm Evaluation

How to select CPU-scheduling algorithm for an OS?

Determine criteria, then evaluate algorithms

Deterministic modeling
Type of analytic evaluation

Takes a particular predetermined workload and defines the performance

of each algorithm for that workload

Consider 5 processes arriving at time 0:

Operating System Concepts 69 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Deterministic Evaluation

For each algorithm, calculate minimum average waiting time

Simple and fast, but requires exact numbers for input, applies only to
those inputs
FCS is 28ms:

Non-preemptive SFJ is 13ms:

RR is 23ms:

Operating System Concepts 70 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Queueing Models

Describes the arrival of processes, and CPU and I/O bursts

probabilistically
Commonly exponential, and described by mean

Computes average throughput, utilization, waiting time, etc

Computer system described as network of servers, each with queue

of waiting processes
Knowing arrival rates and service rates

Computes utilization, average queue length, average wait time, etc

Operating System Concepts 71 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Little’s Formula

n = average queue length

W = average waiting time in queue

λ = average arrival rate into queue

Little’s law – in steady state, processes leaving queue must equal

processes arriving, thus:
n=λxW
Valid for any scheduling algorithm and arrival distribution

For example, if on average 7 processes arrive per second, and

normally 14 processes in queue, then average wait time per process
= 2 seconds

Operating System Concepts 72 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Simulations

Queueing models limited

Simulations more accurate
Programmed model of computer system

Clock is a variable

Gather statistics indicating algorithm performance

Data to drive simulation gathered via

 Random number generator according to probabilities

 Distributions defined mathematically or empirically

 Trace tapes record sequences of real events in real systems

Operating System Concepts 73 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Evaluation of CPU Schedulers by Simulation

Operating System Concepts 74 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Implementation

Even simulations have limited accuracy

Just implement new scheduler and test in real systems
High cost, high risk

Environments vary

Most flexible schedulers can be modified per-site or per-system

Or APIs to modify priorities

But again environments vary

Operating System Concepts 75 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Summary

CPU scheduling is the task of selecting a waiting process from the

ready queue and allocating the CPU to it. The CPU is allocated to the
selected process by the dispatcher.
Scheduling algorithms may be either preemptive (where the CPU can
be taken away from a process) or nonpreemptive (where a process
must voluntarily relinquish control of the CPU). Almost all modern
operating systems are preemptive.

Scheduling algorithms can be evaluated according to the following

five criteria: (1) CPU utilization, (2) throughput, (3) turnaround time,
(4) waiting time, and (5) response time.
First-come, first-served (FCFS) scheduling is the simplest scheduling
algorithm, but it can cause short processes to wait for very long
processes.

Operating System Concepts 76 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Summary (Cont.)

Shortest-job-first (SJF) scheduling is provably optimal, providing the

shortest average waiting time. Implementing SJF scheduling is
difficult, how- ever, because predicting the length of the next CPU
burst is difficult.
Round-robin (RR) scheduling allocates the CPU to each process for a
time quantum. If the process does not relinquish the CPU before its
time quantum expires, the process is preempted, and another
process is scheduled to run for a time quantum.
Priority scheduling assigns each process a priority, and the CPU is
allocated to the process with the highest priority. Processes with the
same priority can be scheduled in FCFS order or using RR
scheduling.

Operating System Concepts 77 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Summary (Cont.)

Multilevel queue scheduling partitions processes into several

separate queues arranged by priority, and the scheduler executes the
processes in the highest-priority queue. Different scheduling
algorithms may be used in each queue.
Multilevel feedback queues are similar to multilevel queues, except
that a process may migrate between different queues.
Multicore processors place one or more CPUs on the same physical
chip, and each CPU may have more than one hardware thread. From
the perspective of the operating system, each hardware thread
appears to be a logical CPU.
Load balancing on multicore systems equalizes loads between CPU
cores, although migrating threads between cores to balance loads
may invalidate cache contents and therefore may increase memory
access times.

Operating System Concepts 78 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Summary (Cont.)

Soft real-time scheduling gives priority to real-time tasks over non-

real- time tasks. Hard real-time scheduling provides timing
guarantees for real- time tasks,
Rate-monotonic real-time scheduling schedules periodic tasks using
a static priority policy with preemption.

Earliest-deadline-first (EDF) scheduling assigns priorities according to

deadline. The earlier the deadline, the higher the priority; the later the
deadline, the lower the priority.
Proportional share scheduling allocates T shares among all
applications. If an application is allocated N shares of time, it is
ensured of having N∕T of the total processor time.

Operating System Concepts 79 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 Summary (Cont.)

Linux uses the completely fair scheduler (CFS), which assigns a

proportion of CPU processing time to each task. The proportion is
based on the virtual runtime (vruntime) value associated with each
task.
Windows scheduling uses a preemptive, 32-level priority scheme to
determine the order of thread scheduling.
Solaris identifies six unique scheduling classes that are mapped to a
global priority. CPU-intensive threads are generally assigned lower
priorities (and longer time quantums), and I/O-bound threads are
usually assigned higher priorities (with shorter time quantums.)
Modeling and simulations can be used to evaluate a CPU scheduling
algorithm.

Operating System Concepts 80 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018

 End of Chapter 5

Operating System Concepts Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2018