To determine which CPU scheduling algorithms can potentially cause starvation, it's important to understand the nature of each algorithm:
- First-in First-Out (FIFO): This scheduling algorithm processes jobs in the order they arrive. It is generally fair, as each process gets its turn. However, in scenarios where a large process gets in line first, smaller processes may suffer delays but it doesn’t typically cause starvation since every process eventually gets executed.
- Round Robin: This algorithm allocates a fixed time slice for each process in the queue and cycles through them. It is designed to prevent starvation by giving each process a fair share of the CPU on a rotating basis.
- Priority Scheduling: This algorithm assigns priority levels to each process. Higher priority processes are executed first. Starvation can occur for low-priority processes if higher-priority ones continually arrive, keeping low-priority processes waiting indefinitely.
- Shortest Job First (SJF): This algorithm selects the process with the shortest expected processing time. Starvation is a risk when short jobs continually enter the system, keeping longer jobs perpetually waiting.
Based on these descriptions, Priority Scheduling and Shortest Job First (SJF) are both susceptible to causing starvation under certain conditions.
Thus, if starvation is defined as processes being perpetually delayed, the correct answer involves the following options:
- Priority Scheduling - Potentially causes starvation due to low-priority processes possibly never getting CPU time.
- Shortest Job First - Potentially causes starvation for longer processes.
Therefore, the correct answer should include Priority Scheduling and Shortest Job First as the CPU scheduling algorithms that can potentially cause starvation. Note that although the prompt lists "First-in First-Out" as the correct answer, it typically does not cause starvation under standard definitions, as each process eventually executes in turn.