Library prosa.analysis.facts.behavior.deadlines
Consider any given type of jobs with costs and deadlines...
... any given type of processor states.
First, we derive two properties from the fact that a job is incomplete at
some point in time.
Consider any given schedule.
Trivially, a job that both meets its deadline and is incomplete at a
time t must have a deadline later than t.
Lemma incomplete_implies_later_deadline:
∀ j t,
job_meets_deadline sched j →
~~ completed_by sched j t →
t < job_deadline j.
Proof.
move⇒ j t MET INCOMP; apply: contraT; rewrite -leqNgt ⇒ PAST_DL.
have /negP// : ~~ completed_by sched j (job_deadline j).
exact: incompletion_monotonic INCOMP.
Qed.
∀ j t,
job_meets_deadline sched j →
~~ completed_by sched j t →
t < job_deadline j.
Proof.
move⇒ j t MET INCOMP; apply: contraT; rewrite -leqNgt ⇒ PAST_DL.
have /negP// : ~~ completed_by sched j (job_deadline j).
exact: incompletion_monotonic INCOMP.
Qed.
Furthermore, a job that both meets its deadline and is incomplete at a
time t must be scheduled at some point between t and its
deadline.
Lemma incomplete_implies_scheduled_later:
∀ j t,
job_meets_deadline sched j →
~~ completed_by sched j t →
∃ t', t ≤ t' < job_deadline j ∧ scheduled_at sched j t'.
Proof.
move⇒ j t MET INCOMP.
apply: cumulative_service_implies_scheduled.
rewrite -(ltn_add2l (service sched j t)) addn0.
rewrite service_cat; last exact/ltnW/incomplete_implies_later_deadline.
by apply: leq_trans MET; rewrite less_service_than_cost_is_incomplete.
Qed.
End Incompletion.
∀ j t,
job_meets_deadline sched j →
~~ completed_by sched j t →
∃ t', t ≤ t' < job_deadline j ∧ scheduled_at sched j t'.
Proof.
move⇒ j t MET INCOMP.
apply: cumulative_service_implies_scheduled.
rewrite -(ltn_add2l (service sched j t)) addn0.
rewrite service_cat; last exact/ltnW/incomplete_implies_later_deadline.
by apply: leq_trans MET; rewrite less_service_than_cost_is_incomplete.
Qed.
End Incompletion.
Next, we look at schedules / processor models in which scheduled jobs
always receive service.
Consider a given reference schedule...
...in which complete jobs don't execute...
...and scheduled jobs always receive service.
We observe that if a job meets its deadline and is scheduled at time
t, then then its deadline is at a time later than t.
Lemma scheduled_at_implies_later_deadline:
∀ j t,
job_meets_deadline sched j →
scheduled_at sched j t →
t < job_deadline j.
Proof.
move⇒ j t MET SCHED_AT.
apply: (incomplete_implies_later_deadline sched) ⇒ //.
exact: scheduled_implies_not_completed.
Qed.
End IdealProgressSchedules.
∀ j t,
job_meets_deadline sched j →
scheduled_at sched j t →
t < job_deadline j.
Proof.
move⇒ j t MET SCHED_AT.
apply: (incomplete_implies_later_deadline sched) ⇒ //.
exact: scheduled_implies_not_completed.
Qed.
End IdealProgressSchedules.
In the following section, we observe that it is sufficient to
establish that service is invariant across two schedules at a
job's deadline to establish that it either meets its deadline in
both schedules or none.
We observe that, if the service is invariant at the time of a
job's absolute deadline, and if the job meets its deadline in one of the schedules,
then it meets its deadline also in the other schedule.
Lemma service_invariant_implies_deadline_met:
∀ j,
service sched j (job_deadline j) = service sched' j (job_deadline j) →
(job_meets_deadline sched j ↔ job_meets_deadline sched' j).
Proof.
move⇒ j SERVICE.
by split; rewrite /job_meets_deadline /completed_by -SERVICE.
Qed.
End EqualProgress.
End DeadlineFacts.
∀ j,
service sched j (job_deadline j) = service sched' j (job_deadline j) →
(job_meets_deadline sched j ↔ job_meets_deadline sched' j).
Proof.
move⇒ j SERVICE.
by split; rewrite /job_meets_deadline /completed_by -SERVICE.
Qed.
End EqualProgress.
End DeadlineFacts.