EE5900 Advanced Embedded

System For Smart Infrastructure

RMS and EDF Scheduling

1
Priority-driven Preemptive Scheduling
Assumptions & Definitions
• Tasks are periodic
• No aperiodic or sporadic tasks
• Job (instance) deadline = end of period
• No resource constraints
• Tasks are preemptable
C’i
• Laxity (Slack) of a Task
t di
• Ti = di – (t + ci’)
where di: deadline; Laxity

t : current time;
ci’ : remaining computation time.
2
Rate Monotonic Scheduling (RMS)
• Schedulability check (off-line)
- A set of n tasks is schedulable on a uniprocessor
by the RMS algorithm if the processor utilization
(utilization test)

ci is the execution time and pi is the period,

The term n(21/n -1) approaches ln 2, (0.69 as n 
).
- This condition is sufficient, but not necessary.

3
RMS (cont.)
• Schedule construction (online)
- Task with the smallest period is assigned the
highest priority (static priority).
- At any time, the highest priority task is
executed.

4
RMS Scheduler - Example 1
Task set: Ti = (ci, pi) [computation time, period]
T1 = (2,4) and T2 = (1,8)

Schedulability check:
2/4 + 1/8 = 0.5 + 0.125 = 0.625 ≤ 2(√2 -1) = 0. 82

Active Active
Active Tasks : Tasks :
Tasks : {T2} {T1}
{T1, T2}

T11 T21 T12

0 2 3 4 6 8

5
RMS scheduler – Example 2
Task set: Ti = (ci, pi)
T1 = (2,4) and T2 = (4,8)
Schedulability check:
2/4 + 4/8 = 0.5 + 0.5 = 1.0 > 2(√2 -1) = 0. 82

Active Active Active

Active Tasks : Tasks : Tasks :
Tasks : {T2} {T2, T1} {T2}
{T1, T2}

T11 T21 T12 T21

0 2 3 4 6 8

Some task sets that FAIL the utilization-based schedulability test are also
schedulable under RMS

6
RMS is not optimal
• T1=(1,2) and T2=(2.5,5)

7
Earliest Deadline First (EDF)
• Schedulability check (off-line)
- A set of n tasks is schedulable on a
uniprocessor by the EDF algorithm if the
processor utilization.

• This condition is both necessary and sufficient.

- Least Laxity First (LLF) algorithm has the

same schedulability check.
8
EDF/LLF (cont.)
• Schedule construction (online)
– EDF/LLF: Task with the smallest deadline/laxity is
assigned the highest priority (dynamic priority).
– At any time, the highest priority task is executed.
• It is optimal (i.e., whenever there is a feasible
schedule, EDF can always compute it) when
preemption is allowed and no resource constraint is
considered.
– Given any two tasks in a feasible schedule, if
they are not scheduled in the order of earliest
deadline, you can always swap them and still
generate a feasible schedule.

9
EDF scheduler - Example
Task set: Ti = (ci, pi, di)
T1 = (1,3,3) and T2 = (4,6,6)

Schedulability check:
1/3 + 4/6 = 0.33 + 0.67 = 1.0

Active Active Active

Active Tasks : Tasks : Tasks :
Tasks : {T2} {T2, T1} {T1}
{T1, T2}

T11 T21 T21 T12

0 1 3 5 6

Unlike RMS, Only those task sets which pass the schedulability test are
schedulable under EDF

10
 Comparison of RMS and EDF
Process Period, T WCET, C
T1 5 2
EDF schedule T2 7 4

T1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

T2
0 7 14 21 28 35

RMS schedule

T1
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Deadline miss

T2
0 7 14 21 28 35
11
Resource sharing

• Periodic tasks
• Task can have resource access
• Semaphore is used for mutual exclusion
• RMS scheduling

12
Background – Task State diagram

• Ready State: waiting in ready queue

• Running State: CPU executing the task
• Blocked: waiting in the semaphore
queue until the shared resource is free

• Semaphore types – mutex (binary

semaphore), counting semaphore

13
 Task State Diagram

scheduling

Activate Termination
READY RUN

Preemption

Signal Wait on
free busy
resource resource
WAITING

Process/Task state diagram with resource constraints

14
Priority Inversion Problem

Priority inversion is an undesirable situation in

which a higher priority task gets blocked (waits
for CPU) for more time than that it is supposed
to, by lower priority tasks.

Example:
• Let T1 , T2 , and T3 be the three periodic tasks
with decreasing order of priorities.
• Let T1 and T3 share a resource S.

15
Priority Inversion - Example
• T3 obtains a lock on the semaphore S and enters its
critical section to use a shared resource.

• T1 becomes ready to run and preempts T3. Then, T1

tries to enter its critical section by first trying to lock S.
But, S is already locked by T3 and hence T1 is blocked.

• T2 becomes ready to run. Since only T2 and T3 are

ready to run, T2 preempts T3 while T3 is in its critical
section.

Ideally, one would prefer that the highest priority task (T1)
be blocked no longer than the time for T3 to complete
its critical section. However, the duration of blocking is,
in fact, unpredictable because task T2 got executed in
between.

16
 Priority Inversion example
Makes a
request for
A higherResource S is
available and T1
priority task
resource S and waits for ais scheduled
gets blocked lower priority here
T1 task
Highest T1 T1
priority
T2 completes

L1
Preempted by
higher priority T3 completes
T2 T3 is the T2
task T1
Medium only
priority active Preempted by
task higher K3
priority
K1 K2 task T2
T3 T3 T3 T3
Least
priority 0

T1 and T3
share
resource Total blocking time for task T1 = (K2+K3) + (L1)
S
17
Priority Inheritance Protocol
Priority inheritance protocol solves the
problem of priority inversion.

Under this protocol, if a higher priority task TH

is blocked by a lower priority task TL, because
TL is currently executing critical section
needed by TH, TL temporarily inherits the
priority of TH.
When blocking ceases (i.e., TL exits the critical
section), TL resumes its original priority.
Unfortunately, priority inheritance may lead to
deadlock.
18
Resource access control - example

Task Ti ci pi cix ci y ciz

T1 2 8 2 0 0
T2 4 12 0 4 0
T3 2 6 1 1 0

T2 and T3 have access to a shared resource R

cix : Task duration before entering the critical section
ciy : Critical section duration
ciz : Task duration after the critical section
ci = cix + ciy + ciz
By RMS, T3 > T1 > T2

19
 Schedules
Locks R
RMS Schedule Direct blocking of T3 by T2
Preempted by T3 Release R

T3 T1 T2 T3 T2 T1 T2 T3 T3 T2
0 2 4 6 7 8 10 11 12 14 16

Task Ti ci pi cix ciy ci z Priority inversion of T3 by T1

T1 2 8 2 0 0
T2 4 12 0 4 0 RMS Schedule with Priority Inheritance Protocol
T3 2 6 1 1 0 Direct blocking of T3 by T2

T3 T1 T2 T3 T2 T3 T1 T3 T2

Inheritance blocking of T1 by T2

20
Priority Inheritance Protocol – Deadlock
Assume T2 has higher priority than T1

21
Priority Ceiling Protocol
• Priority ceiling protocol solves the priority inversion
problem without getting into deadlock.
• For each semaphore, a priority ceiling is defined,
whose value is the highest priority of all the tasks
that may lock it.
• When a task Ti attempts to execute one of its critical
sections, it will be suspended unless its priority is
higher than the priority ceiling of all semaphores
currently locked by tasks other than Ti.
• If task Ti is unable to enter its critical section for this
reason, the task that holds the lock on the
semaphore with the highest priority ceiling is said to
be blocking Ti and hence inherits the priority of Ti.

22
Priority Ceiling Protocol - properties

• This protocol is the same as the priority

inheritance protocol, except that a task Ti can
also be blocked from entering a critical section
if any other task is currently holding a
semaphore whose priority ceiling is greater
than or equal to the priority of task Ti.

23
Priority Celiling Protocol - Example
• For the previous example, the priority ceiling for
both CS1 and CS2 is the priority of T2.

• From time t0 to t2, the operations are the same

as before.

• At time t3, T2 attempts to lock CS1, but is blocked

since CS2 (which has been locked by T1) has a
priority ceiling equal to the priority of T2.

• Thus T1 inherits the priority of T2 and proceeds

to completion, thereby preventing deadlock
situation.

24
 Scheduling tasks with precedence relations
Conventional task
set
{T1, T2} Scheduler

task set with

precedence
T1 T2 constraints

Modify task parameters

in order to respect Scheduler
precedence constraints

25
Modifying the task parameters for RMS
• While using the RMS scheduler the task
parameters (ready time) need to be
modified in order to respect the
precedence constraints
Ti Tj

• Rj* ≥ Max (Rj, Ri*) where Ri* is the

modified ready time of the task Ti
• Priority Prioi ≥ Prioj

26
Modifying ready times for RMS: example

T1 T2
1 2

Initial Task Parameters

Task Ri Ci Di
T3 T4
2 1 T1 0 1 5
T2 5 2 7
T3 0 2 5
T5 T4 0 1 10
3
T5 0 3 12

27
 Modifying the Ready times for RMS

R1 = 0 R2 = 5
T1 T2
1 2
R4’ = max(R1, R2,R4)

R3’ = Initial Task Parameters

max(R1, R3) R3 = 0
R3’ = 0 R4 = 0
Task Ri Ci Di
T3 T4 R4’ = 5
2 1 T1 0 1 5
T2 5 2 7
T3 0 2 5
T5 R5 = 0 T4 0 1 10
R5’ = 5
3
T5 0 3 12
R5’ = max(R3’, R4’,R5)

28
Modified Ready times for RMS

R1 = 0 R2 = 5
T1 T2
1 2

Modified Task Parameters

R3’ = 0 Task Ri Ci Di
T3 T4 R4’ = 5
2 1 T1 0 1 5
T2 5 2 7
T3 0 2 5
T5 T4 5 1 10
R5’ = 5
3
T5 5 3 12

29
Assigning task priorities for RMS

Assume all tasks of a

R1 = 0 R2 = 5 connected component
T1 T2
have the same period.
Therefore, as per RMS
1 2
all tasks will have a tie.
We assign priorities to
break the ties.
R3’ = 0
T3 T4 R4’ = 5 Modified Task Parameters
2 1
Task Ri Ci Di Priority
T1 0 1 5 3
T2 5 2 7 4
T5
R5’ = 5
3 T3 0 2 5 2
T4 5 1 10 1
T5 5 3 12 0

30
Modifying task parameters for EDF
• While using the EDF scheduler the task
parameters need to be modified in order
to respect the precedence constraints

Ti Tj

• Rj* ≥ Max (Rj, (Ri* + Ci))

• Di* ≥ Min (Di, (Dj* – Cj))

31
Modifying the Ready times for EDF

R1 = 0 R2 = 5
T1 T2
R4’ = max(R1+C1, R2+C2,R4)
1 2
R3’ = max(R1 + C1, R3)
Initial Task Parameters
R3 = 0
R3’ = 1 R4 = 0
Task Ri Ci Di
T3 T4 R4’ = 7
2 1 T1 0 1 5
T2 5 2 7
T3 0 2 5
T5 R5 = 0 T4 0 1 10
R5’ = 8
3
T5 0 3 12
R5’ = max(R3’+C3,
R4’+C4,R5)

32
Modifying the Ready times for EDF

R1 = 0 R2 = 5
T1 T2
1 2

Modified Task Parameters

R3’ = 1 Task Ri Ci Di
T3 T4 R4’ = 7
2 1 T1 0 1 5
T2 5 2 7
T3 1 2 5
T5 T4 7 1 10
R5’ = 8
3
T5 8 3 12

33
Modifying the Deadlines for EDF
D2’ = Min( (D4’ – C4), (D3’ – C3), D1)

D1 = 5 D2 = 7
D1’ = 3 D2’ = 7
T1 T2 D2’ = Min( (D4’ – C4), D2)
1 2

Modified Task Parameters

D3 = 5 Task Ri Ci Di
T3 D3’ = 5 T4 D4 = 10
D4’ = 9 T1 0 1 5
2 1
T2 5 2 7
T3 1 2 5
T5 T4 7 1 10
D5 = 12
3
T5 8 3 12

D3’ = Min( (D5 – C5), D3) D4’ = Min( (D5 – C5), D4)

34
Modifying the Deadlines for EDF

D1’ = 3 D2’ = 7
T1 T2
1 2

Modified Task Parameters

Task Ri Ci Di
T3 D3’ = 5 T4 D4’ = 9 T1 0 1 3
2 1
T2 5 2 7
T3 1 2 5
T5 T4 7 1 9
D5 = 12
3
T5 8 3 12

35