You are on page 1of 1

Example: RM Scheduling

UB test is only sufficient, not necessay!

{(20,100),(40,150),(100,350)}
20
0

20
100

20
200

20
300

Let U= Ci/Ti and B(n) = n*(21/n-1)


Three possible outcomes:

40

40
150

300

40

30

10

schedulable
no conclusion
overload

40

0<= U<= B(n):


B(n)<U<=1:
1< U :

Thus, the test may be too conservative


(exact test will be given later)

20
350
25

26

asdfsdf

Example: UB test is sufficient, not necessary

How to deal with tasks with the same period

12
10

15

18

15
12

20
18

10

0
27

Response times?
Worst case? First period?
W hy?

{(1,3),(1,5),(1,6),(2,10)}

Assume a task set: {(1,3),(1,5),(1,6),(2,10)}


CPU utilization U= 1/3+1/5+1/6+2/10=0.899
The utilization bound B(4)=0.756
The task set fails in the UB test due to U>B(4)
Question: is the task set schedulable?
Answer: YES

20

This is only for the first periods! But we will see that this is enough
to tell that the task set is schedullable.

28

RMS: Summary

What should we do if tasks have the same period?


Should we assign the same priority to the tasks?
How about the UB test? Is it still sufficient?
What happens at run time?

Task model:

Fixed-priority assignment:

29

priodic, independent, D=T, and a task= (Ci,Ti)

smaller periods = higher priorities

Run time scheduling: Preemptive HPF


Sufficient schedulability test: U<= n*(21/n-1)
Precise/exact schedulability test exists

30

You might also like