Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2509.01245

Towards Agentic OS: An LLM Agent Framework for Linux Schedulers

Yusheng Zheng·Yanpeng Hu·Wei Zhang·Andi Quinn
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Operating system schedulers suffer from a fundamental semantic gap, where kernel policies fail to understand application-specific needs, leading to suboptimal performance. We introduce SchedCP, the first framework that enables fully autonomous Large Language Model (LLM) agents to safely and efficiently optimize Linux schedulers without human involvement. Our core insight is that the challenge is not merely to apply a better LLM, but to architect a decoupled control plane that separates the AI's role of semantic reasoning ("what to optimize") from the system's role of execution ("how to observe and act"), thereby separating the optimization problem into two stages: goal-inference and policy-synthesis. Implemented as Model Context Protocol(MCP) server, SchedCP provides a stable interface with three key services: a Workload Analysis Engine, an evolving Scheduler Policy Repository, and an Execution Verifier that validates all AI-generated code and configure before deployment with static and dynamic analysis. We demonstrate this architecture's power with sched-agent, a multi-agent system that autonomously analyzes workloads, synthesizes custom eBPF scheduling policies, and deploys them via the sched\_ext infrastructure. Our evaluation shows that SchedCP achieves up to an 1.79x performance improvement, and a 13x cost reduction compared to naive agentic approaches, all while maintaining high success rate. By bridging the semantic gap, SchedCP democratizes expert-level system optimization and represents a step towards creating truly self-optimizing, application-aware operating systems. The code is open-sourced in https://github.com/eunomia-bpf/schedcp

Explore related subjects

cs.AIcs.MAcs.OS

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yusheng Zheng, Yanpeng Hu, Wei Zhang, Andi Quinn. 2025-09-01. Towards Agentic OS: An LLM Agent Framework for Linux Schedulers. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.01245

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗