Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rate Monotonic vs. EDF: Judgment Day

  • Published:
Real-Time Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Since the first results published in 1973 by Liu and Layland on the Rate Monotonic (RM) and Earliest Deadline First (EDF) algorithms, a lot of progress has been made in the schedulability analysis of periodic task sets. Unfortunately, many misconceptions still exist about the properties of these two scheduling methods, which usually tend to favor RM more than EDF. Typical wrong statements often heard in technical conferences and even in research papers claim that RM is easier to analyze than EDF, it introduces less runtime overhead, it is more predictable in overload conditions, and causes less jitter in task execution.

Since the above statements are either wrong, or not precise, it is time to clarify these issues in a systematic fashion, because the use of EDF allows a better exploitation of the available resources and significantly improves system's performance.

This paper compares RM against EDF under several aspects, using existing theoretical results, specific simulation experiments, or simple counterexamples to show that many common beliefs are either false or only restricted to specific situations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdelzaher, T., Sharma, V., and Lu, C. 2004. A utilization bound for aperiodic tasks and priority driven scheduling. IEEE Transactions on Computers 53(3): 334-350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abeni, L., and Buttazzo, G. 1998. Integrating multimedia applications in hard real-time systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium. Madrid, Spain.

  • Abeni, L., and Buttazzo, G. 2004. Resource reservation in dynamic real-time systems. Real-Time Systems 27(2): 123-167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audsley, N. C., Burns, A., Richardson, M., Tindell, K., and Wellings, A. 1993. Applying new scheduling theory to static priority preemptive scheduling. Software Engineering Journal 8(5): 284-292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, T.P. 1991. Stack-based scheduling of real-time processes. Journal of Real-Time Systems 3(1): 76-100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baruah, S., Buttazzo, G., Gorinsky, S., and Lipari, G. 1999. Scheduling periodic task systems to minimize output jitter. In Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications, Hong Kong.

  • Baruah, S. K., Howell, R. R., and Rosier, L. E. 1990. Algorithms and complexity concerning the preemptive scheduling of periodic real-time tasks on one processor. Real-Time Systems 2.

  • Bini, E., Buttazzo, G. C., and Buttazzo, G. M. 2001. A hyperbolic bound for the rate monotonic algorithm. In Proceedings of the 13th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems. Delft, The Netherlands, pp. 59-66.

  • Bini, E., and Buttazzo, G. C. 2002. The space of rate monotonic schedulability. In Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium. Austin, Texas.

  • Buttazzo, G. C. 1993. HARTIK: A real-time kernel for robotics applications. In Proceedings of the 14th IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium. Raleigh-Durham.

  • Buttazzo, G. C. 2003. Rate monotonic vs. EDF: Judgment day. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Embedded Software. Philadelphia, PA, pp. 67-83.

  • Buttazzo, G., and Stankovic, J. 1995. Adding robustness in dynamic preemptive scheduling. In D. S. Fussell and M. Malek (eds.), Responsive Computer Systems: Steps Toward Fault-Tolerant Real-Time Systems. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttazzo, G., and Sensini, F. 1999. Optimal deadline assignment for scheduling soft a periodic tasks in hard real-time environments. IEEE Transactions on Computers 48(10).

  • Buttazzo, G., Lipari, G., Caccamo, M., and Abeni, L. 2002. Elastic scheduling for flexible workload management. IEEE Transactions on Computers 51(3): 289-302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervin, A. 2003. Integrated control and real-time scheduling, Doctoral Dissertation, ISRN LUTFD2/TFRT-1065-SE, Department of Automatic Control, Lund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cervin, A., Eker, J., Bernhardsson, B., and Arzen, K.-E. 2002. Feedback-feedforward scheduling of control tasks. Real-Time Systems 23(1): 25-53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M. I., and Lin, J. K. 1990. Dynamic priority ceilings: a concurrency control protocol for real-time systems. Journal of Real-Time Systems 2.

  • Dertouzos, M. L. 1974. Control robotics: the procedural control of physical processes. Information Processing 74.

  • Gai, P., Lipari, G., and Di Natale, M. 2001a. A flexible and configurable real-time Kernel for time predictability and minimal ram requirements, Technical Report, Scuola Superiore S. Anna, Pisa, RETIS TR2001-02.

  • Gai, P., Abeni, L., Giorgi, M., and Buttazzo, G. 2001b. A new kernel approach for modular real-time systems development. In Proceedings of the 13th Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems. Delft (NL).

  • Jeffay, K. 1992. Scheduling sporadic tasks with shared resources in hard-real-time systems. In Proceedings of IEEE Real-Time System Symposium, pp. 89-99.

  • Jeffay, K., Stone, D. L., and Poirier, D. 1992. YARTOS: Kernel support for efficient, predictable real-time systems, Real-Time Systems Newsletter 7(4): 8-13, (Republished in Halang, W., and Ramamritham, K. (eds.), Real-Time Programming, Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  • Joseph, M., and Pandya, P. 1986. Finding response times in a real-time system. The Computer Journal 29(5): 390-395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koren, G., and Shasha, D. 1995. Skip-over: algorithms and complexity for overloaded systems that allow skips. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium.

  • Kuo, T.-W., and Mok, A. K. 1991. Load adjustment in adaptive real-time systems. IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium.

  • Lehoczky, J. P., and Ramos-Thuel, S. 1992. An optimal algorithm for scheduling soft-aperiodic tasks in fixed-priority preemptive systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium.

  • Lehoczky, J. P., Sha, L., and Strosnider, J. K. 1987. Enhanced aperiodic responsiveness in hard real-time environments. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pp. 261-270.

  • Lehoczky, J. P., Sha, L., and Ding, Y. 1989. The rate-monotonic scheduling algorithm: exact characterization and average case behaviour. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium, pp. 166-171.

  • Liu, C. L., and Layland, J. W. 1973. Scheduling algorithms for multiprogramming in a hard real-time environment. Journal of the ACM 20(1): 40-61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, J. 1997. Designing real-time systems. In IEEE International Conference of Real-Time Computing Systems and Applications (RTCSA '97), Taiwan (Invited talk).

  • Marti, P., Fohler, G., Ramamritham, K., and Fuertes, J. M. 2002. Control performance of flexible timing constraints for Quality-of-Control Scheduling. In Proc. of the 23rd IEEE Real-Time System Symposium. Austin, TX, USA.

  • Mercer, C. W., Savage, S., and Tokuda, H. 1993. Processor capacity reserves for multimedia operating systems. Technical Report, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburg (PA), CMU-CS-93-157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rivas, M. A., and Harbour, M. G. 2001. POSIX-compatible application-defined scheduling in MaRTE OS. In Euromicro Conference on Real-Time Systems (WiP). Delft, The Netherlands.

  • Sha, L., Rajkumar, R., and Lehoczky, J. P. 1990. Priority inheritance protocols: an approach to real-time synchronization. IEEE Transactions on Computers 39(9): 1175-1185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sprunt, B., Sha, L., and Lehoczky, J. 1989. Aperiodic task scheduling for hard real-time system. Journal of Real-Time Systems 1: 27-60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spuri, M., and Buttazzo, G. C. 1994. Efficient aperiodic service under earliest deadline scheduling. In Proceedings of IEEE Real-Time System Symposium. San Juan, Portorico.

  • Spuri, M., and Buttazzo, G. C. 1996. Scheduling aperiodic tasks in dynamic priority systems. Real-Time Systems, 10(2).

  • Spuri, M., Buttazzo, G. C., and Sensini, F. 1995. Robust aperiodic scheduling under dynamic priority systems. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium. Pisa, Italy.

  • Stankovic, J., Ramamritham, K., Spuri, M., and Buttazzo, G. 1998. Deadline Scheduling for Real-Time Systems. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stankovic, J., and Ramamritham, K. 1987. The design of the spring kernel. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium.

  • Strosnider, J. K., Lehoczky, J. P., and Sha, L. 1995. The deferrable server algorithm for enhanced aperiodic responsiveness in hard real-time environments. IEEE Transactions on Computers 44(1).

  • Tia, T.-S., Liu, J. W.-S., and Shankar, M. 1996. Algorithms and optimality of scheduling aperiodic requests in fixed-priority preemptive systems. Journal of Real-Time Systems 10(1): 23-43.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Pavia, Italy

    Giorgio C. Buttazzo

Authors
  1. Giorgio C. Buttazzo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Buttazzo, G.C. Rate Monotonic vs. EDF: Judgment Day. Real-Time Systems 29, 5–26 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TIME.0000048932.30002.d9

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TIME.0000048932.30002.d9

Search

Navigation