MFP Job Execution Control for CPU Load Management

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Image forming apparatuses, such as MFPs, face challenges in maintaining smooth user interface operations when CPU processing ability is insufficient, leading to degraded responsiveness and increased user stress due to high CPU utilization, which existing techniques fail to address effectively without temporarily stopping job processing.

Innovation Solution

The apparatus employs a CPU management system that prioritizes job execution based on a job management table, calculates CPU utilization, and restricts operating conditions to prevent excessive CPU usage, allowing jobs to be executed smoothly without impairing user interface performance by delaying processing latency or adjusting network transfer rates.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If a high-performance CPU with high processing ability is attached to the MFP, then job processing capability is improved, but cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvejob processing capabilityVSAvoidcost

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameter of CPU utilization by dynamically adjusting job execution permission based on current CPU utilization rates. When CPU utilization exceeds a predetermined threshold, the system restricts job execution to maintain CPU utilization within optimal ranges, allowing the use of lower-cost CPUs while maintaining smooth operation

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements dynamic control of job execution permission based on real-time CPU utilization monitoring. The job execution control portion dynamically adjusts whether to permit job execution depending on current CPU load conditions, enabling adaptive resource management without requiring high-performance hardware

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

2Ease of operation

If CPU utilization is suppressed to 80-90% to maintain smooth UI operation, then UI responsiveness is improved, but job processing efficiency deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

ImproveUI responsivenessVSAvoidjob processing efficiency

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameter of CPU utilization threshold dynamically. Instead of fixed suppression to 80-90%, the system adjusts job execution permission based on calculated CPU utilization, allowing CPU utilization to reach higher levels when appropriate while maintaining UI responsiveness through selective job execution control

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies partial action by selectively permitting job execution based on CPU utilization conditions. Rather than always suppressing CPU utilization to maintain UI responsiveness, the system permits job execution when CPU utilization is within acceptable ranges, applying control only when necessary

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

3Ease of operation

If priority is placed on UI operation, then user experience is improved, but job processing is temporarily stopped

Engineering Contradiction:

ImproveUI operation smoothnessVSAvoidjob processing continuity

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial action by selectively controlling job execution rather than completely stopping jobs. The system permits job execution when CPU utilization is within acceptable ranges, maintaining partial job processing continuity while ensuring UI operation smoothness during high-load conditions

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the parameter of job execution permission dynamically based on CPU utilization conditions. Instead of fixed priority allocation, the system adjusts whether jobs can execute based on real-time CPU load, maintaining both UI smoothness and job processing continuity under different conditions

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

4Productivity

If a high load is applied to the CPU to process high-load jobs, then job processing capability is improved, but UI responsiveness deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvejob processing capabilityVSAvoidUI responsiveness

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameter of CPU utilization by dynamically adjusting job execution permission. When CPU utilization exceeds a predetermined threshold, the system restricts job execution to prevent UI responsiveness deterioration, allowing high-load jobs to be processed only when CPU resources are available

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS8863142B2Image forming apparatus

Publication Date: 2014.10.14 SHARP KK

AI summary

An MFP is provided with a main CPU for controlling operation of the MFP according an operating condition set to the MFP, a job management table for sequentially registering input jobs by priority, and a job execution control portion for determining whether or not to permit execution of the job according to the order of registration from a job with high priority that is registered in the job management table. The job execution control portion calculates, based on a job condition of a job intended for permission determination, utilization of the CPU associated with execution of the job, then restricts an operating condition of the MFP in a case where the calculated CPU utilization exceeds a predetermined value, and permits execution of the job according to the restricted operating condition in a case where the CPU utilization when the operating condition is restricted becomes the predetermined value or lower.