1 / 25

Energy-Aware Modeling and Scheduling of Real-Time Tasks for Dynamic Voltage Scaling

Energy-Aware Modeling and Scheduling of Real-Time Tasks for Dynamic Voltage Scaling. Xiliang Zhong and Cheng-Zhong Xu Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engg. Wayne State University Detroit, Michigan http://www.cic.eng.wayne.edu. Outline. Introduction and Related Work

evita
Download Presentation

Energy-Aware Modeling and Scheduling of Real-Time Tasks for Dynamic Voltage Scaling

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Energy-Aware Modeling and Scheduling of Real-Time Tasks for Dynamic Voltage Scaling Xiliang Zhong and Cheng-Zhong Xu Dept. of Electrical & Computer Engg. Wayne State University Detroit, Michigan http://www.cic.eng.wayne.edu

  2. Outline • Introduction and Related Work • A Filtering Model for DVS • Time-invariant Scaling • Time-variant Scaling • Statistical Deadline Guarantee • Evaluation • Conclusion

  3. Motivation • Mobile/Embedded devices power critical • Energy-Performance tradeoff • Processor speed designed for peak performance • Slowdown the processor when not fully utilized (DVS) • Challenges • Maximize energy saving while providing deadline guarantee • Real-time tasks could be periodic/aperiodic w/ highly variable execution time • Aperiodic tasks have irregular release times, which calls for online decision making

  4. Related Work • Intensive studies for periodical tasks • Algorithms for aperiodic tasks • Offline (Yao et al’95, Quan & Hu’01) • Online: all timing information known only after job releases • Soft real-time: improve responsiveness (Aydin & Yang’04) • Occasionally uncontrollable deadline misses (Sinha & Chakrabarty’01) • Hard real-time w/complex admission control (Hong et al ’98) • Maximize energy saving w/ frequency scaling(Qadi et al ’03, DVSST) • On-line slack management for a general input (Lee & Shin ’04,OLDVS) • Objectives of this paper: • Hard/statistical deadline guarantee for general input w/o assumptions of task periodicity • Unified, online solutions for both WCET based scheduling and slack management

  5. Independent tasks, preemptive w/ dynamic priorities Job releases (requests) to system are characterized by a compound process in a discrete time domain: wi(t)is the size (WCET) of ith jobs arrived during time [t-1,t) n(t) stands for number of jobs arrived, each w/deadline td Task Model Input arrivals w1(1) w1(2) w2(3) … time 2 1 0

  6. System Model • Processor Model • Support a continuous range of speed levels • Energy Model • t: scheduling time slot, f(t): speed at time [t, t+1) • l(t): load, #cycle allocated to all jobs during [t, t+1) • P(l(t)): power as a function of load • E(S): energy consumed according to a schedule S

  7. Request Size Output load Job Arrivals g s h A Filtering Model of Speed Scaling • Allocation function denotes the # cycles allocated to one job wi(t) during [t, t+1) • Decomposition of allocation function • g(), the impact of job sizes (WCETs) on scheduling • h(), scaling function • s(), the load’ feedback to scheduling

  8. A Filtering Model (cont.) • Load Function l(t) is a sum of allocation to all jobs • Each job should be finished in td time g(wi(t))=wi(t) • Non-adaptive to load s(l(t)) = 1

  9. A Filtering Model (cont.) • The load function becomes a convolution of compounded input request process and scaling function, • Scaling function h(t): Portion of resource allocated at each scheduling epoch from the arrival time ts to finish time ts+td • Design of scaling algorithm in a fitlerng system

  10. Time-Invariant Scheduling • Treat h(t) as a time-invariant scaling function • The optimal policy is to find an allocation where • The optimality is determined by the covariance matrix Ω of the input process w(t) in the order of deadline td • The optimization has a unique, closed form solution

  11. Example Solutions with Different Input Auto-Correlations of Traffic • Two multimedia traffic patterns (Krunz’00) • Shifted Exponential Scene-length Distribution (ACFExp) • Subgeometric scene-length distribution (ACFSubgeo) • Fractional Gaussian Noise (FGN) process with Hurst para. H=0.89 • Simpsons MPEG Video Trace of 20,000 frames

  12. Example Solution (td=10) • Higher degree of input autocorrelation has a more convexed scaling function • The uniform distributed allocation is a generalization of several existing algorithms for • Periodic tasks • Sporadic tasks • Aperiodic tasks

  13. Running queue 1 l1(t) Dispatcher Input jobs Running queue 2 Output load l(t) + l2(t) … Running queue td ltd(t) Time-Variant Scaling • Energy consumption can be reduced if the scaling function h(t) is adaptive in response to change of input load • Make td runnable queues. Jobs with deadline j are put to queue j

  14. Time-Variant Scaling • Minimize energy consumption is to subject to: where qj(t) is the backlog of queue j at time t. • The optimization has a unique solution: Resource cap of queue j at time t Committed resource for jobs in queue j at time t

  15. S5(0)=11 L(t)=0 12 9 7 5 Illustration • Determine cap of queue 5 at time 0: S5(0) load • First determine current committed resource • Distribute the job as late as possible • The job is distributed to early slots as its size increases 0 1 2 3 4 5 time slot

  16. Example Solution for a Sporadic Task InputJ(WCET): J1(1) released at 0, 5, J2(2) at 1, 7, J3 (1) at 3, 9. Deadline of all jobs: 4. Ji,j: jth instance of task i 1. Schduling using EDF w/o scaling 2. Schduling using the Time Variant Scaling Using a square energy function: 35% more energy saving compared to EDF. 8% to DVSST

  17. Statistical Deadline Guarantee • Worst case scenario schedulability test • Conservative • pi: minimum interarrival • Statistical guarantee • Overload probability v=prob(l(t) > fmax) cumulative probability 1 v F(x) fmax worst case f

  18. cumulative probability 1 v F(x) b1 b2 bmin bmax br-1 f’max Statistical Deadline Guarantee (cont.) • Load tail distribution • A general bound w/ load mean and variance • Tight bounds based on load distribution • Exact output distribution if input distribution known • Estimate output distribution using a histogram fmax

  19. Evaluation • Objectives • Effectiveness in energy savings • Effectiveness of the deadline miss bound • Scheduling based on WCET • No-DVS: run jobs with the maximum speed. • Offline: Offline optimal algorithm of Yao:95 et a. • DVSST: On-line algorithm for sporadic tasks Qadi:RTSS03 et al. • TimeInvar: Time-invariant voltage scaling. • TimeVar: Time-variant voltage scaling. • On-line slack management • DVSST+CC (Cycle-conserving EDF): Worst case schedule using DVSST with the reclaiming algorithm of Pillai and Shin (SOSP01). • TimeVar+OLDVS: The time-variant voltage scaling and the reclaiming algorithm of Lee and Shin:RTSS2004. • TimeVar+TimeVar: A unified solution.

  20. 11% Energy Savings • Energy consumption with the Robotic Highway Safety Marker application; A scenario in which robot keeps moving DVSST TimeVariant Offline • TimeVar is energy-efficient, close to Offline (5%); 7-11% better than DVSST

  21. Energy Savings w/ Workload Variation • #tasks=30; Interarrival ~ exp(50 ms) WCET ~ n(100, 10)K • Workload variation characterized by actual execution time over worst case (BCET/WCET) TimeVariant adapts with workload variation effectively

  22. Computation Speed Configuration Required speed (MHz) • Target deadline guarantee: 99% Mean Interarrival time (ms) • Computation requirement based on a general bound is better than worst case with mean interarrivals > 60 ms • Tight bounds reduce the computation speed in half as interarrivals > 40 ms

  23. No deadline misses under bound derived based on a general input: 100MHz Statistics of TimeVar/TimeInvar under a tight bound: 40MHz Overload handling: reject new jobs or serve unfinished jobs in a best-effort mode Target deadline guarantee 99% Statistical Deadline Guarantee Deadline miss rate is effectively bounded

  24. Conclusion • Voltage/Speed scaling for a general task model • A Filtering Model for DVS • Two online policies to minimize energy usage • Time-invariant : A generalization of several existing approaches • Time-variant : Optimal in the sense it is online w/o future task timing information. Also effective for on-line slack management • Statistical deadline guarantee based on computation speed configuration. • Future work • System-wide energy savings, e.g., wireless communication and its interaction with CPU

  25. Energy-Aware Modeling and Scheduling of Real-Time Tasks for Dynamic Voltage Scaling Thank you!

More Related