In operating system the decisions which CPU scheduler makes regarding the sequence and length of time the task may run are not easy ones, as the scheduler has only a limited amount of information about the tasks. A good scheduler should be fair, maximizes throughput, and minimizes response time of system. A scheduler with multilevel queue scheduling partitions the ready queue into multiple queues. While assigning priorities, higher level queues always get more priorities over lower level queues. Unfortunately, sometimes lower priority tasks get starved, as the scheduler assures that the lower priority tasks may be scheduled only after the higher priority tasks. While making decisions scheduler is concerned only with one factor, that is, priority, but ignores other factors which may affect the performance of the system. With this concern, we propose a 2-layered architecture of multilevel queue scheduler based on vague set theory (VMLQ). The VMLQ scheduler handles the impreciseness of data as well as improving the starvation problem of lower priority tasks. This work also optimizes the performance metrics and improves the response time of system. The performance is evaluated through simulation using MatLab. Simulation results prove that the VMLQ scheduler performs better than the classical multilevel queue scheduler and fuzzy based multilevel queue scheduler. 1. Introduction In multitasking operating systems, multiple tasks need to be executed concurrently. Therefore, CPU scheduler plays a pivot role in operating system as it shares the CPU time among different tasks. For making the decision of scheduling next task for CPU, scheduler runs scheduling algorithm. Hence, the performance of system varies very much with scheduling algorithm used. Multilevel queue (MLQ) scheduling algorithm is among one of the preferable algorithms by OS designers [1, 2]. The kernel of operating system divides the CPU time among different queues depending on its requirement of I/O and CPU. But this share is fixed; it cannot be changed dynamically with variations in usage, since kernel is not aware of the exact parameters of task, like priority of task. However, in case of MLQ, priority plays a key role in decisions of scheduler. Recent evolutions in MLQ schedulers have contributed towards improvement of MLQ approach, but no significant enhancements to the approach which considers uncertainty factors [3]. There is one approach in literature that adapts the variations using fuzzy logic [4]. This paper concentrates on the dealing of uncertainty and impreciseness of task’s
References
[1]
A. Silberschatz and P. B. Galvin, Operating System Concepts, John Wiley & Sons, New Delhi, India, 6th edition, 2008.
[2]
W. Stallings, Operating Systems Internal and Design Principles, Pearson Education, 6th edition, 2006.
[3]
M. V. Panduranga Rao and K. C. Shet, “Analysis of new multi-level feedback queue scheduler for real time kernel,” International Journal of Computational Cognition, vol. 8, pp. 5–16, 2010.
[4]
V. Chahar and S. Raheja, “Fuzzy based multilevel queue scheduling algorithm,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI '13), pp. 115–120, August 2013.
[5]
S. Lim and S.-B. Cho, “Intelligent OS process scheduling using fuzzy inference with user models,” in New Trends in Applied Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4570 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 725–734, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2007.
[6]
Kadhim and K. M. AI-Aubidy, Design and Evaluation of a Fuzzy Based CPU Scheduling Algorithm, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2011.
[7]
N. Bin, D. Jianqiang, X. Guoliang, L. Hongning, Y. Riyue, and W. Quan, “A new operating system scheduling algorithm,” in Advanced Research on Electronic Commerce, Web Application, and Communication, vol. 143, pp. 92–96, Springer, 2011.
[8]
D. Shukla, S. Ojha, and S. Jain, “Data model approach and Markov Chain based analysis of multi- level queue scheduling,” Journal of Applied Computer Science Mathematics, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 50–56, 2010.
[9]
N. Nasser, L. Karim, and T. Taleb, “Dynamic multilevel priority packet scheduling scheme for wireless sensor network,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1448–1459, 2013.
[10]
S. N. M. Shah, A. K. B. Mahmood, and A. Oxley, “Dynamic multilevel dual queue scheduling algorithms for grid computing,” in Software Engineering and Computer Systems, vol. 179 of Communications in Computer and Information Science, pp. 425–440, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2011.
[11]
L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets,” Information and Control, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 338–353, 1965.
[12]
L. A. Zadeh, “Making computers think like people,” IEEE Spectrum, vol. 8, pp. 26–32, 1983.
[13]
R. E. Bellman and L. A. Zadeh, “Decision making in a fuzzy environment,” Management Science, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 141–164, 1970.
[14]
L. A. Zadeh, “Is there a need for fuzzy logic?” Information Sciences, vol. 178, no. 13, pp. 2751–2779, 2008.
[15]
A. A. Aburas and V. Miho, “Fuzzy logic based algorithm for uniprocessor scheduling,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer and Communication Engineering (ICCCE '08), pp. 499–504, IEEE, May 2008.
[16]
S. Raheja, R. Dhadich, and S. Rajpal, “An optimum time quantum using linguistic synthesis for round robin scheduling algorithm,” International Journal of Soft Computing, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 57–66, 2012.
[17]
A. Rezaee, A. M. Rahmani, and S. Adabi, “A fuzzy algorithm for adaptive multilevel queue management with QoS feedback,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on High Performance Computing and Simulation (HPCS '11), pp. 121–127, IEEE, Istanbul, Turky, July 2011.
[18]
W.-L. Gau and D. J. Buehrer, “Vague sets,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 610–614, 1993.
[19]
A. Lu and W. Ng, Vague Sets or Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets for Handling Vague Data: Which One Is Better?vol. 3716 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, 2005.
[20]
H. Bustince and P. Burillo, “Vague sets are intuitionistic fuzzy sets,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 79, no. 3, pp. 403–405, 1996.
[21]
S. Raheja and R. Dhadich, “Many valued logics for modeling vagueness,” International Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 61, no. 7, pp. 35–39, 2013.
[22]
S. Raheja, R. Dhadich, and S. Rajpal, “Designing of 2-stage CPU scheduler using vague logic,” Advances in Fuzzy Systems, vol. 2014, Article ID 841976, 10 pages, 2014.
[23]
R. J. Matarneh, “Self-adjustment time quantum in round Robin algorithm depending on burst time of the now running processes,” American Journal of Applied Sciences, vol. 6, no. 10, pp. 1531–1537, 2009.
[24]
M. Park, H. J. Yoo, J. Chae, and C.-K. Kim, “Quantum-based fixed priority scheduling,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE '08), pp. 64–68, Phuket, Thailand, December 2008.