Linux SCHED截止日期vs. MARTOP-EDF

A. Stahlhofen, Dieter Zöbel
{"title":"Linux SCHED截止日期vs. MARTOP-EDF","authors":"A. Stahlhofen, Dieter Zöbel","doi":"10.1109/EUC.2015.28","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The theoretical background of real-time scheduling has been studied intensively by researchers in this community. A myriad of scheduling policies and sophisticated variations are principally available to be implemented at an operating system level or a middleware level. However, the number of implementations is far behind the number of publications and in the majority of cases they never reach a status beyond prototypes. This is a pitiful situation given that today there is a generation of processor boards waiting for adventurous developers to design and program time-critical embedded applications. The paragon here may be seen in the Raspberry Pi board, but several others also belong to this category (e.g. Cubietruck, Banana Pi). Offering a ready-to-use real-time programming framework is a basic concern of the MARTOP (Mapping real-time to POSIX) project. In order to address a broad range of platforms the approach is independent of a particular operating system only relying on POSIX as intermediate API. As there is another prominent approach to increase the availability of real-time scheduling we are going to compare both with each other. The already prominent one is the EDF-implementation for Linux called SCHED_DEADLINE which is part of the Linux standard kernel since version 3.14. The application scopes of both approaches are completely different. So, MARTOP principally allows any scheduling strategy and several fixed priority scheduling strategies are already available. However, the exciting is that both meet at the EDF-implementation and will be compared not only under the aspect of performance, but equally respecting overhead and robustness.","PeriodicalId":299207,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE 13th International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Linux SCHED DEADLINE vs. MARTOP-EDF\",\"authors\":\"A. Stahlhofen, Dieter Zöbel\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/EUC.2015.28\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The theoretical background of real-time scheduling has been studied intensively by researchers in this community. A myriad of scheduling policies and sophisticated variations are principally available to be implemented at an operating system level or a middleware level. However, the number of implementations is far behind the number of publications and in the majority of cases they never reach a status beyond prototypes. This is a pitiful situation given that today there is a generation of processor boards waiting for adventurous developers to design and program time-critical embedded applications. The paragon here may be seen in the Raspberry Pi board, but several others also belong to this category (e.g. Cubietruck, Banana Pi). Offering a ready-to-use real-time programming framework is a basic concern of the MARTOP (Mapping real-time to POSIX) project. In order to address a broad range of platforms the approach is independent of a particular operating system only relying on POSIX as intermediate API. As there is another prominent approach to increase the availability of real-time scheduling we are going to compare both with each other. The already prominent one is the EDF-implementation for Linux called SCHED_DEADLINE which is part of the Linux standard kernel since version 3.14. The application scopes of both approaches are completely different. So, MARTOP principally allows any scheduling strategy and several fixed priority scheduling strategies are already available. However, the exciting is that both meet at the EDF-implementation and will be compared not only under the aspect of performance, but equally respecting overhead and robustness.\",\"PeriodicalId\":299207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2015 IEEE 13th International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-10-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2015 IEEE 13th International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/EUC.2015.28\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 IEEE 13th International Conference on Embedded and Ubiquitous Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/EUC.2015.28","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

实时调度的理论背景已经引起了业界的广泛关注。大量的调度策略和复杂的变体主要可以在操作系统级别或中间件级别实现。然而,实现的数量远远落后于发布的数量,并且在大多数情况下,它们从未达到超出原型的状态。这是一个令人遗憾的情况,因为今天有一代处理器板等待冒险的开发人员设计和编程时间紧迫的嵌入式应用程序。这里的典范可以在树莓派板中看到,但其他几个也属于这一类(例如Cubietruck,香蕉派)。提供一个现成的实时编程框架是MARTOP(将实时映射到POSIX)项目的一个基本关注点。为了处理广泛的平台,该方法独立于特定的操作系统,仅依赖POSIX作为中间API。由于还有另一种突出的方法可以提高实时调度的可用性,我们将对这两种方法进行比较。已经很突出的一个是Linux上的edf实现,称为SCHED_DEADLINE,它从3.14版开始就是Linux标准内核的一部分。这两种方法的适用范围完全不同。因此,MARTOP主要支持任何调度策略,并且已有几种固定优先级的调度策略可用。然而,令人兴奋的是,两者都在edf实现中相遇,并且不仅在性能方面进行比较,而且在开销和健壮性方面进行比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Linux SCHED DEADLINE vs. MARTOP-EDF
The theoretical background of real-time scheduling has been studied intensively by researchers in this community. A myriad of scheduling policies and sophisticated variations are principally available to be implemented at an operating system level or a middleware level. However, the number of implementations is far behind the number of publications and in the majority of cases they never reach a status beyond prototypes. This is a pitiful situation given that today there is a generation of processor boards waiting for adventurous developers to design and program time-critical embedded applications. The paragon here may be seen in the Raspberry Pi board, but several others also belong to this category (e.g. Cubietruck, Banana Pi). Offering a ready-to-use real-time programming framework is a basic concern of the MARTOP (Mapping real-time to POSIX) project. In order to address a broad range of platforms the approach is independent of a particular operating system only relying on POSIX as intermediate API. As there is another prominent approach to increase the availability of real-time scheduling we are going to compare both with each other. The already prominent one is the EDF-implementation for Linux called SCHED_DEADLINE which is part of the Linux standard kernel since version 3.14. The application scopes of both approaches are completely different. So, MARTOP principally allows any scheduling strategy and several fixed priority scheduling strategies are already available. However, the exciting is that both meet at the EDF-implementation and will be compared not only under the aspect of performance, but equally respecting overhead and robustness.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Linux SCHED DEADLINE vs. MARTOP-EDF Context Aware Power Management Enhanced by Radio Wake Up in Body Area Networks A Holistic Approach for Advancing Robots in Ambient Assisted Living Environments A Self-Adaptive System for Vehicle Information Security Applications Automatic Design of Low-Power VLSI Circuits: Accurate and Approximate Multipliers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1