Firm real-time system scheduling based on a novel QoS constraint

Many real-time systems have firm real-time requirements which allow occasional deadline violations but discard tasks that are not finished by their deadlines. To measure the goodness of such a system, a quality of service (QoS) metric is needed. Examples of often used QoS metrics for firm real-time systems are average deadline miss rates and (m,k)-firm constraint. However, for certain applications, these metrics may not be adequate measures of system performance. This paper introduces a novel QoS constraint for networked feedback control systems. We show that this constraint can be directly related to the control system's performance. We then present three different scheduling approaches with respect to this QoS constraint. Experimental results are provided to compare these approaches.

[1]  Miron Livny,et al.  Earliest deadline scheduling for real-time database systems , 1991, [1991] Proceedings Twelfth Real-Time Systems Symposium.

[2]  Sang Hyuk Son,et al.  The case for feedback control real-time scheduling , 1998, Proceedings of 11th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems. Euromicro RTS'99.

[3]  Parameswaran Ramanathan,et al.  A Dynamic Priority Assignement Technique for Streams with (m, k)-Firm Deadlines , 1995, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[4]  Asawaree Kalavade,et al.  A tool for performance estimation of networked embedded end-systems , 1998, Proceedings 1998 Design and Automation Conference. 35th DAC. (Cat. No.98CH36175).

[5]  K. Shin,et al.  Performance Guarantees for Web Server End-Systems: A Control-Theoretical Approach , 2002, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst..

[6]  Parameswaran Ramanathan,et al.  Overload Management in Real-Time Control Applications Using (m, k)-Firm Guarantee , 1999, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst..

[7]  Petru Eles,et al.  Memory and time-efficient schedulability analysis of task sets with stochastic execution time , 2001, Proceedings 13th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems.

[8]  Alan Burns,et al.  Weakly Hard Real-Time Systems , 2001, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[9]  Chang-Gun Lee,et al.  Stochastic analysis of periodic real-time systems , 2002, 23rd IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, 2002. RTSS 2002..

[10]  S. K. Park,et al.  Random number generators: good ones are hard to find , 1988, CACM.

[11]  C. V. Ramamoorthy,et al.  Aspects of a Dynamically Adaptive Operating System , 1976, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[12]  Dennis Shasha,et al.  Skip-Over: algorithms and complexity for overloaded systems that allow skips , 1995, Proceedings 16th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium.

[13]  Michael D. Lemmon,et al.  Robust performance of soft real-time networked control systems with data dropouts , 2002, Proceedings of the 41st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, 2002..

[14]  Sang Hyuk Son,et al.  Feedback Control Real-Time Scheduling: Framework, Modeling, and Algorithms* , 2001, Real-Time Systems.

[15]  Jun Sun,et al.  Probabilistic performance guarantee for real-time tasks with varying computation times , 1995, Proceedings Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium.

[16]  G. Manimaran,et al.  Feedback control for real-time scheduling , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 American Control Conference (IEEE Cat. No.CH37301).

[17]  Sanjoy K. Baruah,et al.  Scheduling for Overload in Real-Time Systems , 1997, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[18]  Scott A. Brandt,et al.  A dynamic quality of service middleware agent for mediating application resource usage , 1998, Proceedings 19th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (Cat. No.98CB36279).

[19]  Gang Quan,et al.  Enhanced fixed-priority scheduling with (m,k)-firm guarantee , 2000, Proceedings 21st IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium.

[20]  Qiang Ling,et al.  Soft real-time scheduling of networked control systems with dropouts governed by a Markov chain , 2003, Proceedings of the 2003 American Control Conference, 2003..