M. Gonzlez Harbour, M.H. Klein, and J.P. Lehoczky, "Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority", in proceeding of Real-Time Systems Symposium, pp. 116-128, San Antonio (Texas), 1991.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....used in a transaction. While timing and scheduling constraints must be met as the system requires, minimizing the number of priority levels used both in a system and within a transaction reduces runtime overhead. To reduce the search space for neighbor selection, we apply the result from the [5], which states that the end to end system response time is not affected if priorities assigned to actions are changed to canonical form. In a canonical priority assignment to a transaction, succeeding actions have higher or equal priority than preceding ones. Our algorithm uses this result and ....

....last E moves. In our implementation, we set E to be 3 times the neighborhood (space) of a point in the search space. We use deadline monotonic priority assignment to actions as the starting point for the simulated annealing algorithm. For the schedulability analysis, we modify the approach in [5] to include the blocking delays due to synchronization between actions, overheads due to context switch and scheduling, and overheads due to communicating actions of differing priorities. The task set is constructed only after priorities of all actions are assigned. We then construct the tasks by ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. G. Harbour, M. H. Klein, and J. P. Lehoczky. Fixed priority scheduling periodic tasks with varying execution priority. Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, December 1991.

....task can arbitrarily preempt anylow priority task executing on the same processor. Requirement (ii) holds for most common scheduling policies, including RM, DM, and EDF scheduling and variations of these in which tasks are broken into phases that are allowed to have distinct priorities [33]. The only common scheduling policy that we know of that violates requirement (ii) is LLF scheduling [65] Under LLF scheduling, the priority of a task invocation can change during its execution. Observe that requirements (i) and (ii) expressly preclude the use of locking within a processor. In ....

M. G. Harbour, M. H. Klein, and J. P.Lehoczky. Fixed priorityscheduling of periodic tasks with varying execution priority.InProceedings of the Twelveth IEEE Symposium on Real-Time Systems, pages 116--128. IEEE, December 1991.

....and must adapt to accommodate workload changes and to counter uncertainties in the system and its environment. A simple instance of the asynchronous paradigm is the one developed around the ADA 95 [Whe96] language and associated implementation techniques, essentially RMA techniques [HKO 93,GKL91] The latter provide a collection of quantitative methods that allow to estimate response times of a system composed of periodic or sporadic tasks with xed priorities. In asynchronous implementations, tasks are granted resources according to criteria based on the use of priorities. This is ....

M. Gonzales, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed priority scheduling of periodic tasks with varying execution priorities. In Proc. RTSS 1991, 1991.

....database. Some processes are triggered periodically by external inputs (e.g. from sensors) while others are triggered by events from other (internal) processes. We model the architecture as a set of periodic tasks each consisting of a sequence of sub tasks with varying priorities [3, 4]. We perform a schedulability analysis to check whether a set of timing requirements expressed as deadlines are met. 1 Introduction PATH s Advanced Vehicle Control and Safety Systems (AVCSS) project involves the design and implementation of automated vehicle control applications on a variety of ....

....automated vehicle control system; we believe this architecture is suitable for many similar real time control applications. Second, to model this architecture and perform a schedulability analysis; for the analysis, we use existing results from real time scheduling theory (in particular [3, 4]) we believe the modeling and analysis methodology can also be re used in other similar systems. The AVCSS software architecture consists of a set of processes communicating through a publish subscribe middleware (P S) The latter is implemented in C on top of the operating system QNX [10] P S ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Harbour, M.H. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed priority scheduling of periodic tasks with varying execution priority. In IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1991.

....used for communications. The labels in parentheses next to the applications denote the types of machines on which those applications can execute. II. Related Work Many research e#orts in the literature concentrate on scheduling real time applications on a processor (e.g. 26] 27] 28] [29], 30] 31] 32] 33] 34] 35] 36] 37] 38] 39] 40] 41] The major ways in which our work di#ers from the works cited above are: a) the system environment of our research is very di#erent from most of the previous research (e.g. multitasking heterogeneous distributed machines ....

M. G. Harbour, M. H. Klein, and J. P. Lehoczky, "Fixed priority scheduling periodic tasks with varying execution priority," in 12th Real-Time Systems Symposium, pp. 116--128, Dec. 1991.

....the static mapping heuristics designed for the NSWC system. The details of the simulation experiments are given in Section 5. Section 6 concludes the paper. 2. Related Work Many research efforts in the literature concentrate on mapping real time applications on a uniprocessor (e.g. 4, 7, 12, 20, 23, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 43, 46] Even though these papers present good schemes to schedule realtime tasks on a uniprocessor, they could not be directly ap sensor actuator non blocking switch Figure 3. The hardware model. All machines have dedicated, full duplex Ethernet ....

....applications and two machines. The table in Figure 5 shows the C(a i , m j ) values. For all i, j, I(a i ) O(a i ) C j = I j = 0. Minmin maps a 0 and a 1 before mapping a 2 , while Max min utilization Max min mapping Min min mapping a 0 a 0 m 1 m 0 m 1 m 0 2 11 18 15 40 20 Figure 5. A scenario where Max min performs better than Min min. maps a 2 first. The host restriction aware Min min heuristic (HRA Min min) considers the fact that in many systems a given application may not be able to execute on all machines in the system. This may arise because the ....

M. G. Harbour, M. H. Klein, and J. P. Lehoczky. Fixed priority scheduling periodic tasks with varying execution priority. In 12th Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, Dec. 1991.

....which those applications can execute. described in Section VI, along with the experimental setup and the results for the evaluation of these heuristics. II. Related Work Many research e#orts in the literature concentrate on scheduling real time applications on a processor (e.g. 5] 8] 14] [24], 27] 33] 34] 35] 36] 37] 38] 39] 44] 49] 55] 56] The major ways in which our work di#ers from the works cited above are: a) the system environment of our research is very di#erent from most of the previous research (e.g. multitasking heterogeneous distributed machines ....

M. G. Harbour, M. H. Klein, and J. P. Lehoczky. Fixed priority scheduling periodic tasks with varying execution priority. In 12th Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, Dec. 1991.

....optimal assignment of priority and preemption threshold is designed based on these results. 1. Introduction Since the pioneering work of Liu and Layland [10] much work has been done in the area of real time scheduling theory, and in particular fixed priority preemptive scheduling theory (e.g. [4, 5, 8, 7, 11]) A common wisdom prevails that preemptive schedulers give better schedulability than non preemptive schedulers. However, it can be shown that in the context of fixed priority scheduling, preemptive schedulers do not dominate non preemptive schedulers, i.e. the schedulability of a task set under ....

....not schedulable under either preemptive or non preemptive policies. In this paper, we consider the problem of scheduling with preemption thresholds. We first develop schedulability analysis equations for this new model, by extending the traditional fixed priority worst case response time analysis [4, 5, 8, 7, 11]. We then develop an algorithm, which, given a periodic task set, optimally chooses the preemption thresholds and priorities for tasks such that if there exists any assignment that makes the task set schedulable, then the algorithm will find it. The rest of the paper is organized as follows. ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Harbour, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority. In Proceedings, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, December 1991.

....systems has received signi cant attention, however, few techniques have addressed the problem of guaranteeing inter task temporal dependencies such as relative timing constraints. Most real time scheduling techniques consider the scheduling of real time tasks with ready times and deadlines [10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17]. These constraints impose constant intervals in which a task must be executed. In contrast, in the presence of relative time constraints, the time window within which a task must execute may depend on the scheduling and execution parameters of the other tasks in the system. Some of the systems ....

M. G. Harbour, M. H. Klein, and J. P. Lehoczky. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority. In IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116-128, December 1991.

....in the area of real time scheduling, and in the analysis techniques to a priori predict schedulability of task sets under a particular scheduling discipline. In particular, significant progress has been made in schedulability analysis of task sets under fixed priority preemptive scheduling (e.g. [8, 9, 11, 12, 18]) The benefits of fixed priority preemptive scheduling include relatively low run time overheads (as compared to dynamic priority schemes, such as earliest deadline first) and ability to support tighter deadlines for urgent tasks (as compared to nonpreemptive scheduling) While preemptability is ....

....pure preemptive and non preemptive scheduling, and systematically allocating feasible scheduling attributes (priority and preemption threshold) to task sets. We begin with developing the response time analysis for the new model based on well know technique using critical instants and busy periods [8, 9, 11, 12, 18]. We then develop an algorithm for assignment of task priorities and preemption thresholds. Our solution comes in two steps. First, given an assignment of priorities, we develop an efficient algorithm that computes an optimal set of preemption thresholds using a search space of ### # # (instead ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Harbour, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority. In Proceedings, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, December 1991.

....scheduling. In our previous work, which is presented in [10] we derived some necessary theoretical results for the application of preemption threshold. We first showed how to compute worst case response times of tasks under this scheme using the well known level i busy period analysis [3, 4, 6, 7, 9]. We then addressed the problem of determining a feasible assignment of task priorities and preemption thresholds. Our solution came in two steps. First, given an assignment of priorities, we developed an efficient algorithm that computed an optimal set of preemption thresholds using a search ....

M. Harbour, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority. In Proceedings, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, December 1991.

....issues is considered an essential aspect of real time system design, but has not been possible until recently due to the lack of a sound mathematical basis that could support it. The maturity of schedulability analysis techniques, and in particular those based on fixed priority scheduling theory [11, 10, 7, 18] has facilitated the introduction of timing analysis in the early stages of real time system design [3, 6, 19] One prominent and representative example is HRT HOOD that extends the HOOD design method for hard real time systems. HRT HOOD provides design abstractions that are motivated by the ....

M. Harbour, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority. In Proceedings, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, December 1991.

....geared towards soft real time (e.g. 17] most of them claim support for hard real time. Many of these claims are mostly based on the assumption that real time scheduling theory can be used to perform schedulability analysis. Unfortunately, traditional real time scheduling theory results (e.g. [12, 11, 7, 19]) can be directly applied only when the object models are restricted to look like the tasking models employed in real time scheduling theory, as has been done in [4, 8] In other cases, either the claims are unsupported (e.g. 5] or based on less sophisticated analysis (e.g. 1, 6] To the ....

....our Approach Schedulability analysis in our system is carried out by computing response times of actions. The response time of an action I G is derived relative to the arrival of the external event that triggers the transaction . We use the well known critical instant busy period analysis [12, 11, 7] developed for fixed priority scheduling, but adapt it to our computational model. In our model, events (and therefore actions) have fixed priorities. Moreover, event priorities reflect real application priorities. A thread may or may not have a fixed priority depending on the implementation ....

M. Harbour, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority. In Proceedings, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, December 1991.

....issues is considered an essential aspect of real time system design, but has not been possible until recently due to the lack of a sound mathematical basis that could support it. The maturity of schedulability analysis techniques, and in particular those based on fixed priority scheduling theory [11, 10, 7, 18] has facilitated the introduction of timing analysis in the early stages of real time system design [3, 6, 19] One prominent and representative example is HRT HOOD that extends the HOOD design method for hard real time systems. HRT HOOD provides design abstractions that are motivated by the ....

M. Harbour, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority. In Proceedings, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, December 1991.

.... 6 G3HXI D a 8ZB 0 DN LKMK 157 158 159 dce 0 D ( 4.2.2. Calculating Response Times We use a modified busy period analysis to compute the worst case response time of an action 01 . A worst case phasing can be created based on arrival of external events, in a manner similar to [7]. However, the construction of the busy period must account for the dual priority scheme used in our implementation model. In effect, each action may be viewed as two sequentially composed sub actions: the first sub action executes at the nominal priority of the action, 0 , and only ....

....we first assign an intermediate deadline to each action as the smallest of all deadlines that the action is part of. The nominal priorities of actions are then assigned in a deadline monotonic manner, that is, the smaller the deadline, the higher the priority. While the approach is not optimal [7], it serves as a good first heuristic to assigning event priorities. The preemption thresholds are then assigned based on equation 1 and set to the minimum value that satisfies the constraint. 4.3.2. Mapping Events Actions to Threads With event priorities already assigned, we proceed to generate ....

M. Harbour, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority. In Proceedings, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, December 1991.

....in the area of real time scheduling, and in the analysis techniques to a priori predict schedulability of task sets under a particular scheduling discipline. In particular, significant progress has been made in schedulability analysis of task sets under fixed priority preemptive scheduling (e.g. [8, 9, 11, 12, 18]) The benefits of fixed priority preemptive scheduling include relatively low run time overheads (as compared to dynamic priority schemes, such as earliest deadline first) and ability to support tighter deadlines for urgent tasks (as compared to nonpreemptive scheduling) While preemptability is ....

....pure preemptive and non preemptive scheduling, and systematically allocating feasible scheduling attributes (priority and preemption threshold) to task sets. We begin with developing the response time analysis for the new model based on well know technique using critical instants and busy periods [8, 9, 11, 12, 18]. We then develop an algorithm for assignment of task priorities and preemption thresholds. Our solution comes in two steps. First, given an assignment of priorities, we develop an efficient algorithm that computes an optimal set of preemption thresholds using a search space of ) ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. Harbour, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority. In Proceedings, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pages 116--128, December 1991.

....become: R i = C i Gamma C i Delta max k2lp(k) C k ) X j2hp(i) R i T j C j R i = R i C i Although in general non preemption reduces schedulability, it is possible to define task sets that can only be scheduled by the cooperative approach. It has been shown [5], theoretically, that when tasks have their priority raised during execution they become more schedulable. Making the last stage of a task s execution non preemptive has the effect of raising its priority and hence increased schedulability may result. ....

M. Harbour, M. Klein, and J. Lehoczky. Fixed priority scheduling of periodic tasks with varying execution priority. In Proceedings 12th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1991.

No context found.

M. Gonzlez Harbour, M.H. Klein, and J.P. Lehoczky. "Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority". Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1991, pp. 116-128

No context found.

M. Gonzlez Harbour, M.H. Klein, and J.P. Lehoczky. "Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority". Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1991, pp. 116-128

.... of the worst case response time of tasks in single processor real time systems, including the effects of task synchronization [9] the presence of aperiodic tasks, the effects of deadlines before, at or after the periods of the tasks [3] precedence constraints and tasks with varying priorities [1], etc. However current RMA cannot provide exact solutions to the response times in multiprocessor and distributed hard real time systems. The general worst case analysis of a distributed system is still an open issue, but one approach that can be used is to analyze each processing and ....

M. Gonzlez Harbour, M.H. Klein, and J.P. Lehoczky. "Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority". Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1991, pp. 116-128.

.... of the worst case response time of tasks in single processor real time systems, including the effects of task synchronization [8] the presence of aperiodic tasks, the effects of deadlines before, at or after the periods of the tasks [2] precedence constraints and tasks with varying priorities [4], overhead analysis, etc. However, there are two related areas in which current RMA cannot provide exact solutions to the response times: distributed hard real time systems, and systems in which tasks suspend themselves. Current techniques for these systems are based on the assumption that all ....

M. Gonzlez Harbour, M.H. Klein, and J.P. Lehoczky. "Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority". Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, December 1991, pp. 116-128.

....articulates the key points for how to think about this ABAS in terms of a formal performance analysis. The analysis issue for this ABAS is how to reason about the incremental processing of inputs, where each increment can be made by a different process, each executing at its own fixed priority [Gonzalez 91] To calculate the latency of a message traversing the i th pipeline, you must determine the preemptive effects of the other pipelines. The key to determining these preemptive effects is to first identify the lowest priority process in the i th pipeline. In brief, the following steps can be ....

Gonzalez Harbour, M.; Klein, M.; & Lehoczky, J. "Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority, "116-128. Proceedings of IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, IEEE Computer Society Press, 1991.

No context found.

M. Gonzlez Harbour, M.H. Klein, and J.P. Lehoczky, "Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority", in proceeding of Real-Time Systems Symposium, pp. 116-128, San Antonio (Texas), 1991.

No context found.

Harbour, M. G., Klein, M. H., Lehoczky, J. P., Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Executing Priority, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, 1991.

No context found.

M.G. Harbour, M.H. Klein, and J.P. Lehoczky, Fixed Priority Scheduling of Periodic Tasks with Varying Execution Priority, IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium 1991, pp. 116-128.

First 50 documents  Next 50

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC