Chapter 5: CPU Scheduling

Basic Concepts
 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 distribution

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.2 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Alternating Sequence of CPU And I/O Bursts

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.3 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Histogram of CPU-burst Times

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.4 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 CPU Scheduler
 Selects from among the processes in memory that are ready to
execute, and allocates the CPU to one of them
 CPU scheduling decisions may take place when a process:
1. Switches from running to waiting state
2. Switches from running to ready state
3. Switches from waiting to ready
4. Terminates
 Scheduling under 1 and 4 is nonpreemptive
 All other scheduling is preemptive

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.5 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Dispatcher

 Dispatcher module gives control of the CPU to the process

selected by the short-term scheduler; this involves:
 switching context
 switching to user mode
 jumping to the proper location in the user program to restart
that program
 Dispatch latency – time it takes for the dispatcher to stop one
process and start another running

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.6 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Scheduling Criteria
 CPU utilization – keep the CPU as busy as possible
 Throughput – # 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 has been 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 output (for time-sharing environment)

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.7 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Optimization Criteria

 Max CPU utilization

 Max throughput
 Min turnaround time
 Min waiting time
 Min response time

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.8 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 First-Come, First-Served (FCFS) Scheduling

Process Burst Time

P1 24
P2 3
P3 3
 Suppose that the processes arrive 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 – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.9 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 FCFS Scheduling (Cont.)

Suppose that the processes arrive in the order

P 2 , P3 , P 1
 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 process behind long process

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.10 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Shortest-Job-First (SJR) Scheduling
 Associate with each process the length of its next CPU burst. Use
these lengths to schedule the process with the shortest time
 Two schemes:
 nonpreemptive – once CPU given to the process it cannot be
preempted until completes its CPU burst
 preemptive – if a new process arrives with CPU burst length
less than remaining time of current executing process,
preempt. This scheme is know as the
Shortest-Remaining-Time-First (SRTF)
 SJF is optimal – gives minimum average waiting time for a given
set of processes

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.11 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Example of Non-Preemptive SJF

Process Arrival Time Burst Time

P1 0.0 7
P2 2.0 4
P3 4.0 1
P4 5.0 4
 SJF (non-preemptive)
P1 P3 P2 P4

0 3 7 8 12 16

 Average waiting time = (0 + 6 + 3 + 7)/4 = 4

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.12 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Example of Preemptive SJF

Process Arrival Time Burst Time

P1 0.0 7
P2 2.0 4
P3 4.0 1
P4 5.0 4
 SJF (preemptive)

P1 P2 P3 P2 P4 P1

0 2 4 5 7 11 16

 Average waiting time = (9 + 1 + 0 +2)/4 = 3

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.13 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Determining Length of Next CPU Burst

 Can only estimate the length

 Can be done by using the length of previous CPU bursts, using
exponential averaging

1. t n actual lenght 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 .

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.14 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Prediction of the Length of the Next CPU Burst

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.15 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Examples of Exponential Averaging
  =0
 n+1 = n
 Recent history does not count
  =1
 n+1 =  tn
 Only the actual last CPU burst counts
 If we expand the formula, we get:
n+1 =  tn+(1 - ) tn -1 + …
+(1 -  )j  tn -j + …
+(1 -  )n +1 0

 Since both  and (1 - ) are less than or equal to 1, each

successive term has less weight than its predecessor

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.16 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Priority Scheduling
 A priority number (integer) is associated with each process
 The CPU is allocated to the process with the highest priority
(smallest integer  highest priority)
 Preemptive
 nonpreemptive
 SJF is a priority scheduling where priority is the 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 – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.17 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Round Robin (RR)

 Each process gets a small unit of CPU time (time quantum),

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.
 Performance
 q large  FIFO
 q small  q must be large with respect to context switch,
otherwise overhead is too high

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.18 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Example of RR with Time Quantum = 20

Process Burst Time

P1 53
P2 17
P3 68
P4 24
 The Gantt chart is:

P1 P2 P3 P4 P1 P3 P4 P1 P3 P3

0 20 37 57 77 97 117 121 134 154 162

 Typically, higher average turnaround than SJF, but better response

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.19 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Time Quantum and Context Switch Time

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.20 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Turnaround Time Varies With The Time Quantum

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.21 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Multilevel Queue
 Ready queue is partitioned into separate queues:
foreground (interactive)
background (batch)
 Each queue has its own scheduling algorithm
 foreground – RR
 background – FCFS
 Scheduling must be done between the queues
 Fixed priority scheduling; (i.e., serve all from foreground then
from background). Possibility of starvation.
 Time slice – each queue gets a certain amount of CPU time
which it can schedule amongst its processes; i.e., 80% to
foreground in RR
 20% to background in FCFS

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.22 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Multilevel Queue Scheduling

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.23 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Multilevel Feedback Queue

 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

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.24 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Example of Multilevel Feedback Queue
 Three queues:
 Q0 – RR with time quantum 8 milliseconds
 Q1 – RR time quantum 16 milliseconds
 Q2 – FCFS
 Scheduling
 A new job enters queue Q0 which is served FCFS. When it
gains CPU, job receives 8 milliseconds. 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 – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.25 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Multilevel Feedback Queues

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.26 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Multiple-Processor Scheduling

 CPU scheduling more complex when multiple CPUs are

available
 Homogeneous processors within a multiprocessor
 Load sharing
 Asymmetric multiprocessing – only one processor
accesses the system data structures, alleviating the need
for data sharing
 Symmetric multiprocessing – each processor is self-
scheduling
 Processor Affinity
 Load Balancing
 Symmetric Multithreading

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.27 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
 Algorithm Evaluation

 Deterministic modeling – takes a particular

predetermined workload and defines the performance of
each algorithm for that workload
 Queueing models
 Implementation

Operating System Concepts – 7th Edition, Feb 2, 2005 5.28 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2005
End of Chapter 5