Submitted:
18 February 2025
Posted:
20 February 2025
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Heterogeneous Computing: Promises and Challenges
3. Scheduling Strategies
3.1. Dynamic Load Balancing
- Flexibility and Knowledge Impact: the paper examines how factors such as task migration, pre-emption, and partial graph knowledge influence scheduling efficiency and the algorithm's lower bounds.
- Competitive Algorithm: The authors propose a competitive algorithm, called QA, and refine its analysis to achieve better performance.
- Generalization to Multiple Processor Types: The authors extend their results to the case of platforms with multiple types of processors, adapting the lower bounds and the online algorithm accordingly.
- Heuristic Approach: The authors propose a simple heuristic based on the QA algorithm and the system-oriented heuristic EFT. This heuristic is both competitive and performs well in practice.
3.2. Workload Partitioning
3.3. Memory Access Scheduling:
- Request Source Isolation: To prevent interference between CPU and GPU memory requests, a new memory request queue is created based on the request source. This isolation ensures that GPU requests do not interfere with CPU requests and vice versa, enhancing overall memory access performance.
- Dynamic Bank Partitioning: For the CPU request queue, a dynamic bank partitioning strategy is implemented. It dynamically maps the CPU requests to different bank sets based on the memory characteristics of the applications. By considering the access behavior and characteristics of multiple parallel applications, this strategy eliminates memory request interference among CPU applications without affecting bank-level parallelism.
- Criticality-Aware Scheduling: The GPU request queue incorporates the concept of criticality to measure the difference in memory access latency among GPU cores. A criticality-aware memory scheduling approach is implemented, prioritizing requests based on their criticality level. This strategy balances the locality and criticality of application access, effectively reducing memory access latency differences among GPU cores.
3.4. Prefetch and Co-Design Strategies
3.4.1. Context Switching Strategies
3.4.2. Hardware and Algorithm Co-Design
3.4.3. Prefetching Mechanisms
3.4.4. Fine-Grained Warp Scheduling
3.5. Energy-Aware Job Scheduling Techniques
3.6. Memory Latency Tolerance
3.7. Dynamic Task Scheduling
- Load-Aware Scheduling Strategy:
- 2.
- Genetic Algorithm-Based Scheduling Strategy:
3.8. Adaptive Scheduling
- Off-line-Tuned Static and Dynamic Scheduling Strategies:
- 2.
- Adaptive Heterogeneous Scheduling Strategies:
- 3.
- Increasing Abstraction Level of the Programming Model:
3.9. Task Graph Scheduling
3.10. Hybrid Scheduling
3.11. Pipelined Scheduling
3.12. Power Aware/Deadline Aware Scheduling
3.13. Batch Job Scheduling
4. Review of Design and Implementation Methodologies
5. Summary of the Review
6. Future Scope
- Hybrid Scheduling Algorithms: One key avenue is the development of hybrid scheduling algorithms that integrate artificial intelligence with traditional methods. By leveraging machine learning techniques, these algorithms can dynamically adapt to workload variations and resource availability, enhancing efficiency and responsiveness in real-time scenarios.
- Scalability for Exascale Workloads: As computational demands grow, enhancing the scalability of scheduling strategies is crucial. Future research should focus on developing algorithms capable of managing exascale workloads, ensuring that scheduling techniques can handle vast data sets and complex models without sacrificing performance.
- Emerging Hardware Technologies: The potential of emerging hardware technologies, such as neuromorphic and quantum processors, could transform scheduling approaches for deep learning. Research should explore how these novel architectures can be integrated into existing systems, optimizing scheduling to exploit their unique capabilities.
- Energy Efficiency and Sustainability: With rising concerns about energy consumption in computing, future work should prioritize energy-efficient scheduling techniques. Investigating methods that minimize power usage while maintaining performance will be vital for sustainable computing in deep learning applications.
- Robustness and Security: Tackling real-world deployment challenges, including fault tolerance and security, is essential. Future research should focus on developing scheduling techniques that ensure reliability in the face of hardware failures and security threats, particularly in critical applications such as autonomous systems and healthcare.
- Interoperability and Standardization: As heterogeneous computing environments become more common, establishing standardized frameworks for scheduling across different platforms will be beneficial. Future research could aim to create guidelines and protocols that improve interoperability, facilitating smoother integration of various processing units.
- Trends in Scheduling Techniques: Current trends indicate a shift towards adaptive and context-aware scheduling, which responds to real-time changes in workload and resource conditions. Future studies should investigate the effectiveness of these techniques in diverse scenarios, such as edge computing and federated learning, where resource constraints and latency are critical.
- Artificial Intelligence in Scheduling: The increasing use of AI in scheduling presents an opportunity for research into intelligent scheduling systems that can predict future workload patterns and optimize resource allocation accordingly. This could involve the application of reinforcement learning and predictive analytics to enhance scheduling decisions.
- Granularity and Precision in Scheduling: Future work should also explore fine-grained scheduling strategies that prioritize individual tasks based on their specific requirements. Investigating how to achieve optimal task granularity while minimizing overhead will be crucial for improving overall system performance.
- User-Centric Scheduling: Finally, there's a growing need for user-centric scheduling approaches that consider user preferences and requirements. Future research could explore how to incorporate user feedback into scheduling algorithms, enabling more personalized and effective resource management.
7. Conclusions
References
- Mittal, S.; Vetter, J.S. A Survey of CPU-GPU Heterogeneous Computing Techniques. ACM Comput. Surv. 2015, 47, 1–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, J.; Wang, M.; Wei, Z. A Memory Scheduling Strategy for Eliminating Memory Access Interference in Heterogeneous System. J. Supercomput. 2020, 76, 3129–3154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, X.; Fu, Z. CPU-GPU Utilization Aware Energy-Efficient Scheduling Algorithm on Heterogeneous Computing Systems. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 58948–58958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; et al. Enabling Latency-Aware Data Initialization for Integrated CPU/GPU Heterogeneous Platform. IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst. 2020, 39, 3433–3444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roeder, J.; Rouxel, B.; Altmeyer, S.; Grelck, C. Energy-aware Scheduling of Multi-version Tasks on Heterogeneous Real-time Systems. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, March 2021; pp. 501–510. [Google Scholar]
- Fang, J.; Zhang, J.; Lu, S.; Zhao, H. Exploration on task scheduling strategy for CPU-GPU heterogeneous computing system. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Computer Society Annual Symposium on VLSI (ISVLSI), 306-311, IEEE; 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Canon, L.-C.; Marchal, L.; Simon, B.; Vivien, F. Online scheduling of task graphs on heterogeneous platforms. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 2019, 31, 721–732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Constantinescu, D.-A.; Navarro, A.; Corbera, F.; Fernández-Madrigal, J.-A.; Asenjo, R. Efficiency and Productivity for Decision Making on Low-Power Heterogeneous CPU+GPU SoCs. J. Supercomput. 2021, 77, 44–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Z.; et al. Efficient Algorithms for Task Mapping on Heterogeneous CPU/GPU Platforms for Fast Completion Time. J. Syst. Archit. 2021, 114, 101936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grinsztajn, N.; et al. Readys: A Reinforcement Learning Based Strategy for Heterogeneous Dynamic Scheduling. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Cluster Computing (CLUSTER); IEEE; 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Seo, W.; et al. SLO-aware Inference Scheduler for Heterogeneous Processors in Edge Platforms. ACM Trans. Archit. Code Optim. 2021, 18, 1–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harichane, I.; Makhlouf, S.A.; Belalem, G. KubeSC-RTP: Smart Scheduler for Kubernetes Platform on CPU-GPU Heterogeneous Systems. Concurrency Comput. Pract. Exp. 2022, 34, e7108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asad, A.; Kaur, R.; Mohammadi, F. A Survey on Memory Subsystems for Deep Neural Network Accelerators. Future Internet 2022, 14, 146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, J.; et al. Resource Scheduling Strategy for Performance Optimization Based on Heterogeneous CPU-GPU Platform. 2022.
- Kaur, R.; Mohammadi, F. Power Estimation and Comparison of Heterogeneous CPU-GPU Processors. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE 25th Electronics Packaging Technology Conference (EPTC), 5 December 2023; IEEE; pp. 948–951. [Google Scholar]
- Albahar, H.; et al. SchedTune: A Heterogeneity-Aware GPU Scheduler for Deep Learning. In Proceedings of the 2022 22nd IEEE International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Internet Computing (CCGrid); IEEE, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- He, Z.; Sun, Y.; Wang, B.; Li, S.; Zhang, B. CPU-GPU Heterogeneous Computation Offloading and Resource Allocation Scheme for Industrial Internet of Things. IEEE Internet of Things J. 2023. [CrossRef]
- Hu, B.; Yang, X.; Zhao, M. Energy-Minimized Scheduling of Intermittent Real-Time Tasks in a CPU-GPU Cloud Computing Platform. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 2023, 34, 2391–2402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garcia-Hernandez, J.J.; Morales-Sandoval, M.; Elizondo-Rodríguez, E. A Flexible and General-Purpose Platform for Heterogeneous Computing. Computation 2023, 11, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.; Wu, Z.; Feng, D.; Zhang, M.; Wu, X.; Yao, X.; Yu, D.; Ma, Y.; Zhao, F.; Dou, D. Heterps: Distributed deep learning with reinforcement learning based scheduling in heterogeneous environments. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2023, 148, 106–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaur, R.; Mohammadi, F. Comparative Analysis of Power Efficiency in Heterogeneous CPU-GPU Processors. In Proceedings of the 2023 Congress in Computer Science, Computer Engineering, & Applied Computing (CSCE), 24 July 2023; IEEE; pp. 756–758. [Google Scholar]
- Kaur, R.; Saluja, N. Comparative Analysis of 1-bit Memory Cell in CMOS and QCA Technology. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Flexible Electronics Technology Conference (IFETC), Ottawa, ON, Canada; 2018; pp. 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Wu, H.; Xu, Y.; Wu, Y.; Zhong, H.; Zhang, W. Hydra: Deadline-aware and efficiency-oriented scheduling for deep learning jobs on heterogeneous GPUs. IEEE Trans. Comput. 2023, 72, 2224–2236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, X. Mixtran: an efficient and fair scheduler for mixed deep learning workloads in heterogeneous GPU environments. Cluster Comput. 2024, 27, 2775–2784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- A. Zou, J. Li, C. D. Gill, and X. Zhang, "RTGPU: Real-time GPU scheduling of hard deadline parallel tasks with fine-grain utilization," IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst., vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 1450-1465, 2023. [CrossRef]
- Hsu, K.-C.; Tseng, H.-W. Simultaneous and Heterogeneous Multithreading. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Microarchitecture; 2023. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, X. TAS: A Temperature-Aware Scheduling for Heterogeneous Computing. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 54773–54781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chun, C.-K.; Lai, K.-C. A Load Balance Scheduling Approach for Generative AI on Cloud-Native Environments with Heterogeneous Resources. In Proceedings of the 2024 10th International Conference on Applied System Innovation (ICASI); IEEE; 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, H.; Zhang, N.; Xiang, S.; Zeng, Z.; Dai, M.; Zhang, Z. Allo: A Programming Model for Composable Accelerator Design. Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2024, 8, PLDI, 593–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, W.; Gautam, G.; Alam, B.; Bhati, B. S. An Analytical Review and Performance Measures of State-of-Art Scheduling Algorithms in Heterogeneous Computing Environment. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2024, 1–23. [Google Scholar]
- Belkhiri, A.; Dagenais, M. Analyzing GPU Performance in Virtualized Environments: A Case Study. Future Internet 2024, 16, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xue, W.; Wang, H.; Roy, C.J. CPU-GPU heterogeneous code acceleration of a finite volume Computational Fluid Dynamics solver. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2024, 158, 367–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, Z.; Gao, W.; Hu, Q.; Sun, P.; Wang, X.; Luo, Y.; Zhang, T.; Wen, Y. Deep Learning Workload Scheduling in GPU Datacenters: A Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 2024, 56, 1–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tayeb, H.; Bramas, B.; Faverge, M.; Guermouche, A. Dynamic Tasks Scheduling with Multiple Priorities on Heterogeneous Computing Systems.2024.
- Tariq, U.U.; Ali, H.; Nadeem, M.S.; Jan, S.R.; Sabrina, F.; Grandhi, S.; Wang, Z.; Liu, L. Energy-aware Successor Tree Consistent EDF Scheduling for PCTGs on MPSoCs. IEEE Access 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwon, S.; Bahn, H. Enhanced Scheduling of AI Applications in Multi-Tenant Cloud Using Genetic Optimizations. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 4697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, Y.; Ren, Z.; Shao, E.; Ma, L.; Hu, Q.; Wang, L.; Tan, G. FILL: a heterogeneous resource scheduling system addressing the low throughput problem in GROMACS. CCF Trans. High Perform. Comput. 2024, 6, 17–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Liu, C.; Wong, D.; Kim, H. GCAPS: GPU Context-Aware Preemptive Priority-based Scheduling for Real-Time Tasks. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2406.05221. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, S.; Chen, S.; Shi, Y. GPARS: Graph predictive algorithm for efficient resource scheduling in heterogeneous GPU clusters. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2024, 152, 127–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, A.; Bhasi, V.M.; Singh, S.; Kesidis, G.; Kandemir, M.T.; Das, C.R. GPU Cluster Scheduling for Network-Sensitive Deep Learning. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2401.16492. [Google Scholar]
- Lannurien, V.; Slimani, C.; d'Orazio, L.; Barais, O.; Paquelet, S.; Boukhobza, J. HeROcache: Storage-Aware Scheduling in Heterogeneous Serverless Edge-The Case of IDS. In Proceedings of the 24th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster, Cloud and Internet Computing; 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Yan, K.; Song, Y.; Liu, T.; Tan, J.; Wei, X.; Fu, X. HSAS: Efficient task scheduling for large scale heterogeneous systolic array accelerator cluster. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2024, 154, 440–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shobaki, G.; Muyan-Özçelik, P.; Hutton, J.; Linck, B.; Malyshenko, V.; Kerbow, A.; Ramirez-Ortega, R.; Gordon, V.S. Instruction Scheduling for the GPU on the GPU. In Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Code Generation and Optimization (CGO), 435-447, IEEE; 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Mohammadjafari, A.; Khajouie, P. Optimizing Task Scheduling in Heterogeneous Computing Environments: A Comparative Analysis of CPU, GPU, and ASIC Platforms Using E2C Simulator. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2405.08187. [Google Scholar]
- Ndamlabin, E.; Bramas, B. RSCHED: An effective heterogeneous resources management for simultaneous execution of task-based applications. 2024.
- McGowen, J.; Dagli, I.; Dantam, N.T.; Belviranli, M.E. Scheduling for Cyber-Physical Systems with Heterogeneous Processing Units under Real-World Constraints. In Proceedings of the 38th ACM International Conference on Supercomputing, 2024; pp. 298–311. [Google Scholar]
- Verma, P.; Maurya, A.K.; Yadav, R.S. A survey on energy-efficient workflow scheduling algorithms in cloud computing. Softw. Pract. Exp. 2024, 54, 637–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fang, J.; Wei, Z.; Liu, Y.; Hou, Y. TB-TBP: a task-based adaptive routing algorithm for network-on-chip in heterogeneous CPU-GPU architectures. J. Supercomput. 2024, 80, 6311–6335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al Abdul Wahid, S.; Asad, A.; Mohammadi, F. A Survey on Neuromorphic Architectures for Running Artificial Intelligence Algorithms. Electronics 2024, 13, 2963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asad, A.; Kaur, R.; Mohammadi, F. Noise Suppression Using Gated Recurrent Units and Nearest Neighbor Filtering. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI), Las Vegas, NV, USA; 2022; pp. 368–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaur, R.; Asad, A.; Mohammadi, F. A Comprehensive Review of Processing-in-Memory Architectures for Deep Neural Networks. Computers 2024, 13, 174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, H.; Xue, Y.; Zhou, Y.E.; Li, S.; Huang, J. SkyByte: Architecting an Efficient Memory-Semantic CXL-based SSD with OS and Hardware Co-design. 2025 IEEE International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA), 2025, 1-23. [CrossRef]
- Kim, S.; Hsiao, R.; Nikolić, B.; Demmel, J.; Shao, Y.S. SuperNoVA: Algorithm-Hardware Co-Design for Resource-Aware SLAM. Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS ’25), 2025, 1-17. [CrossRef]
- Yüzügüler, A.C.; Zhuang, J.; Cavigelli, L. PRESERVE: Prefetching Model Weights and KV-Cache in Distributed LLM Serving. Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems (ASPLOS ’25), 2025, 1-16. [CrossRef]
- Tang, D.; Wu, Z.; Wang, Y.; Gu, Y.; Liu, F.; Qi, Z. gCom: Fine-grained Compressors in Graphics Memory of Mobile GPU. ACM Trans. Arch. Code Optim. 2025, 21, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hennessy, J.L.; Patterson, D.A. Computer Architecture: A Quantitative Approach; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2011. [Google Scholar]









| Paper | Scheduling Technique | Description | Focus | Flexibility | Advantages | Challenges |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [55] | Fine-grained warp scheduling | prioritizes threads | Thread execution optimization | High | Enhanced parallelism, reduced resource contention | Increased complexity, potential overhead |
| [4] | Memory latency tolerance | Overlaps memory access with computation | Memory access optimization | Medium | Reduced memory latency impact | Complexity in implementation |
| [2,24] | Memory bank parallelism | Boosts throughput | Memory throughput optimization | Medium | Improved memory access patterns | Potential conflicts in memory banks |
| [52] | Context switching | switches between warps | Resource utilization optimization | High | Reduced idle times, better utilization | Overhead and potential synchronization issues |
| [54] | Prefetching mechanisms | Anticipates and fetches data in advance | Data access optimization | Low | Reduced latency, improved data availability | Prediction overhead, redundancy risk |
| [7,10] | Dynamic load balancing | Redistributes workload | Workload distribution | High | Improved responsiveness, balanced resources. | Potential runtime overhead |
| [6,39] | Dynamic task scheduling | Real-time adaptation of task execution | Task execution optimization | High | Adaptability to workload changes | Higher runtime complexity |
| [16,17] | Adaptive scheduling | Adjusts policies dynamically | Workload adaptation | High | Better resource utilization | May incur frequent adjustments |
| [14,42] | Hybrid scheduling | Combines static and dynamic approaches | Mixed scheduling strategies | Medium | Flexibility, efficiency in diverse workloads | Requires careful design |
| [23] | Power-aware scheduling | Manages energy consumption | Energy efficiency | Medium | Reduced power usage | May compromise speed |
| [25,38] | Real-time GPU scheduling | Ensures deadlines. | Timing-critical applications | Medium | Ensures predictable performance | Limited to real-time systems |
| [33,36] | Batch job scheduling | Batches tasks | Resource optimization | Medium | High throughput | May cause latency for smaller tasks |
| [20] | Reinforcement learning-based scheduling | Optimizes allocation. | Intelligent task allocation | High | Optimized scheduling in uncertain environments | Training overhead, scalability |
| [29] | Composable schedules | Builds schedules | Hardware optimization | High | Flexibility in hardware design | Limited generalizability |
| [31,37] | Resource partitioning | Divides resources. | Resource allocation | Medium | Improved resource utilization | May require significant tuning |
| [41] | Storage-aware scheduling | Optimizes storage | Storage and task placement | Medium | Better QoS and reduced cold starts | Relies on caching performance |
| [8,27] | Temperature-aware scheduling | Adapts task schedules | Thermal optimization | Medium | Prolonged hardware lifespan, performance stability | Overhead of temperature monitoring |
| [40] | Network-sensitive scheduling | Minimizes communication delays | Communication overhead optimization | Medium | Reduced communication delays, faster completion | Complex job placement algorithms |
| [43] | Register-pressure-aware scheduling | Balances execution. | Instruction scheduling | Medium | Improved GPU instruction performance | Algorithm complexity |
| [18,44] | Task graph scheduling | Optimizes dependencies | Dependency management | Medium | Reduced completion times | High complexity for large workloads |
| [19,32] | Pipelined task scheduling | Overlaps task execution stages | Staged execution optimization | High | Faster task completion | Increased task management complexity |
| [35] | Energy-efficient scheduling | Uses successor tree consistency | Power optimization | Medium | Reduced energy usage | May impact real-time performance |
| [45,48] | Task-based routing | Plans resources | Network-on-Chip scheduling | Medium | Optimized resource allocation, reduced latency | High computational requirements |
| Ref No. | Scheduling Technique | Focus Area | Strategy Type | Key Features |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [2,55] | Warp Scheduling | Thread assignment to warps | Dynamic | Efficient resource allocation and thread management |
| [2] | Memory Latency Tolerance | Minimizing memory latency | Dynamic | Overlapping memory access and computation |
| [2,24] | Memory Bank Parallelism | Enhancing memory throughput | Dynamic | Exploiting parallel memory access capabilities |
| [52] | Context Switching | Optimizing resource usage | Dynamic | Efficient warp switching for resource optimization |
| [54] | Prefetching Mechanisms | Data access optimization | Dynamic | Anticipating and fetching data in advance |
| [55] | Fine-grained Scheduling | Individual thread prioritization | Dynamic | Enhancing parallelism and reducing contention |
| [46] | Workload Partitioning | CPU-GPU workload division | Static/Dynamic | Effective distribution based on workload and system conditions |
| [2,24] | Memory Access Scheduling | Memory latency optimization | Dynamic | Effective scheduling to reduce memory latency |
| [9,12,18,27,38,47,48] | Task Graph Scheduling | Task graph optimization | Dynamic | Dynamic redistribution based on task graph characteristics |
| [7,10,28] | Dynamic Load Balancing | Workload redistribution | Dynamic | Adapting workload distribution in real-time |
| [53] | Hardware-Algorithm Co-design | Optimization for specific algorithms | Dynamic | Co-design approaches for algorithm and hardware optimization |
| [6,18,26,37,39,45] | Dynamic Task Scheduling | Real-time task optimization | Dynamic | Adapting task priorities based on system load |
| [8,16,17,40] | Adaptive Scheduling Policies | Dynamic scheduling adjustments | Dynamic | Real-time policy changes based on workload and system state |
| [19,20,25,32] | Pipelined Task Scheduling | Task execution pipelining | Dynamic | Overlapping task execution stages for improved efficiency |
| [14,42,44] | Hybrid Scheduling Strategies | Combined scheduling approaches | Mixed | Utilizing a mix of static and dynamic scheduling techniques |
| [29,30,31,33,35,36] | Batch Job Scheduling | Job processing optimization | Static/Dynamic | Scheduling multiple jobs for optimized resource usage |
| [23,41,43] | Power-aware Scheduling | Energy-efficient task management | Dynamic | Adjusting scheduling based on power consumption considerations |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).