Partitioning-Based Scheduling of OpenMP Task Systems With Tied Tasks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OpenMP is a popular programming framework in both general and high-performance computing and has recently drawn much interest in embedded and real-time computing. Although the execution semantics of OpenMP are similar to the DAG task model, the constraints posed by the OpenMP specification make them significantly more challenging to analyze. A tied task is an important feature in OpenMP that must execute on the same thread throughout its entire life cycle. A previous work [1] succeeded in analyzing the real-time scheduling of tied tasks by modifying the Task Scheduling Constraints (TSCs) in OpenMP specification. In this article, we also study the real-time scheduling of OpenMP task systems with tied tasks but without changing the original TSCs. In particular, we propose a partitioning-based algorithm, P-EDF-omp, by which the tied constraint can be automatically guaranteed as long as an OpenMP task system can be successfully partitioned to a multiprocessor platform. Furthermore, we conduct comprehensive experiments with both synthetic workloads and established OpenMP benchmarks to show that our approach consistently outperforms the work in [1] -even without modifying the TSCs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".