Operating System ch-5
Operating System ch-5
Synchronization
6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.6 - 6.6.1
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
● A cooperating process is one that can affect or be affected by
other processes executing in the system.
● Cooperating processes can either
● directly share a logical address space (that is, both code and
data)--- threads
● allowed to share data only through files or messages
● Concurrent access to shared data may result in data inconsistency
● various mechanisms to ensure the orderly execution of cooperating
processes that share a logical address space, so that data consistency
is maintained
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.2 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Background
● Processes can execute concurrently
● May be interrupted at any time, partially completing execution
● Concurrent access to shared data may result in data inconsistency
● Maintaining data consistency requires mechanisms to ensure the
orderly execution of cooperating processes
● Illustration of the problem:
Suppose that we wanted to provide a solution to the
consumer-producer problem that fills all the buffers. We can do so
by having an integer counter that keeps track of the number of full
buffers. Initially, counter is set to 0. It is incremented by the
producer after it produces a new buffer and is decremented by the
consumer after it consumes a buffer.
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.3 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Producer
while (true) {
/* produce an item in next produced */
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.4 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Consumer
while (true) {
while (counter == 0)
; /* do nothing */
next_consumed = buffer[out];
out = (out + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
counter--;
/* consume the item in next consumed */
}
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.5 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Race Condition
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.6 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Critical Section Problem
● Consider system of n processes {p0, p1, … pn-1}
● Each process has critical section segment of code
● Process may be changing common variables, updating table,
writing file, etc
● When one process in critical section, no other may be in its
critical section
● Critical section problem is to design protocol to solve this
● Each process must ask permission to enter critical section in entry
section, may follow critical section with exit section, then
remainder section
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.7 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Critical Section
P C
CS CS
Exit Exit
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.8 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Solution to Critical-Section Problem
1. Mutual Exclusion - If process Pi is executing in its critical section,
then no other processes can be executing in their critical sections
2. Progress - If no process is executing in its critical section and there
exist some processes that wish to enter their critical section, then the
selection of the processes that will enter the critical section next
cannot be postponed indefinitely
3. Bounded Waiting - A bound must exist on the number of times that
other processes are allowed to enter their critical sections after a
process has made a request to enter its critical section and before that
request is granted
⚫ Assume that each process executes at a nonzero speed
⚫ No assumption concerning relative speed of the n processes
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.9 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
● At a given point in time, many kernel-mode processes may be
active in the operating system. As a result, the code
implementing an operating system (kernel code) is subject to
several possible race conditions. Consider as an example a
kernel data structure that maintains a list of all open files in the
system. This list must be modified when a new file is opened
or closed (adding the file to the list or removing it from the
list). If two processes were to open file simultaneously, the
separate updates to this list could result in a race condition.
Other kernel data structures that are prone to possible race
conditions include structures for maintaining memory
allocation, for maintaining process lists, and for interrupt
handling. It is up to kernel developers to ensure that the
operating system is free from such race conditions
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.10 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Critical-Section Handling in OS
Two approaches depending on if kernel is preemptive or non-
preemptive
● Preemptive – allows preemption of process when running in
kernel mode
● Non-preemptive – runs until exits kernel mode, blocks, or
voluntarily yields CPU
4 Essentially free of race conditions in kernel mode
● Obviously, a nonpreemptive kernel is essentially free from race
conditions on kernel data structures, as only one process is active in
the kernel at a time
● Preemptive kernels are especially difficult to design for SMP
architectures,since in these environments it is possible for two
kernel-mode processes to run simultaneously on different processors
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.11 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
● A preemptive kernel may be more responsive,
since there is less risk that a kernel-mode
process will run for an arbitrarily long period
before relinquishing the processor to waiting
processes.
● preemptive kernel is more suitable for
real-time programming, as it will allow a
real-time process to preempt a process
currently running in the kernel
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.12 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Algorithm for Process Pi
do { do {
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.13 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.14 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Pi
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.15 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
● t0 Pi flag = i
● T1 Pj flag = j
● T3 pi while (flag<>j)
● T4 pj while (flag <>i)
● t0 pi while (flag<>j)
● T1 pj while (flag <>i)
● T3 Pi flag = i
● T4 Pj flag = j
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.16 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Peterson’s Solution
● Good algorithmic description of solving the problem
● Two process solution
● Assume that the load and store machine-language instructions
are atomic; that is, cannot be interrupted
● The two processes share two variables:
● int turn;
● Boolean flag[2]
● The variable turn indicates whose turn it is to enter the critical section
● The flag array is used to indicate if a process is ready to enter the
critical section. flag[i] = true implies that process Pi is ready!
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.17 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Algorithm for Process Pi
do {
flag[i] = true;
turn = j;
while (flag[j] && turn = = j);
critical section
flag[i] = false;
remainder section
} while (true);
do {
flag[j] = true;
turn = i;
while (flag[i] && turn = = i);
critical section
flag[j] = false;
remainder section
} while (true);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.18 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Peterson’s Solution (Cont.)
● Provable that the three CS requirement are met:
1. Mutual exclusion is preserved
Pi enters CS only if:
either flag[j] = false or turn = i
2. Progress requirement is satisfied
3. Bounded-waiting requirement is met
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.19 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Synchronization Hardware
● Many systems provide hardware support for implementing the critical
section code.
● All solutions below based on idea of locking
● Protecting critical regions via locks
● Uniprocessors – could disable interrupts
● Currently running code would execute without preemption
● Generally too inefficient on multiprocessor systems
4 Operating systems using this not broadly scalable
● Modern machines provide special atomic hardware instructions
4 Atomic = non-interruptible
● Either test memory word and set value
● Or swap contents of two memory words
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.20 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Solution to Critical-section Problem Using Locks
do {
acquire lock
critical section
release lock
remainder section
} while (TRUE);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.21 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
test_and_set Instruction
Definition:
boolean test_and_set (boolean *target)
{
boolean rv = *target;
*target = TRUE;
return rv:
}
1. Executed atomically
2. Returns the original value of passed parameter
3. Set the new value of passed parameter to “TRUE”.
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.22 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Solution using test_and_set()
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.23 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
compare_and_swap Instruction
Definition:
int compare _and_swap(int *value, int expected, int new_value) {
int temp = *value;
if (*value == expected)
*value = new_value;
return temp;
}
1. Executed atomically
2. Returns the original value of passed parameter “value”
3. Set the variable “value” the value of the passed parameter “new_value” but
only if “value” ==“expected”. That is, the swap takes place only under this
condition.
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.24 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Solution using compare_and_swap
● Shared integer “lock” initialized to 0;
● Solution:
do {
while (compare_and_swap(&lock, 0, 1) != 0)
; /* do nothing */
/* critical section */
lock = 0;
/* remainder section */
} while (true);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.25 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Bounded-waiting Mutual Exclusion with test_and_set
do {
waiting[i] = true;
key = true;
while (waiting[i] && key)
key = test_and_set(&lock);
waiting[i] = false;
/* critical section */
j = (i + 1) % n;
while ((j != i) && !waiting[j])
j = (j + 1) % n;
if (j == i)
lock = false;
else
waiting[j] = false;
/* remainder section */
} while (true);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.26 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Mutex Locks
● Previous solutions are complicated and generally inaccessible to
application programmers
● OS designers build software tools to solve critical section problem
● Simplest is mutex lock
● Protect a critical section by first acquire() a lock then
release() the lock
● Boolean variable indicating if lock is available or not
● Calls to acquire() and release() must be atomic
● Usually implemented via hardware atomic instructions
● But this solution requires busy waiting
● This lock therefore called a spinlock
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.27 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
acquire() and release()
● acquire() {
while (!available)
; /* busy wait */
available = false;
}
● release() {
available = true;
}
● do {
acquire lock
critical section
release lock
remainder section
} while (true);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.28 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Semaphore
● Synchronization tool that provides more sophisticated ways (than Mutex locks) for
process to synchronize their activities.
● Semaphore S – integer variable
● Can only be accessed via two indivisible (atomic) operations
● wait() and signal()
4 Originally called P() and V()
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.29 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Semaphore Usage
● Counting semaphore – integer value can range over an unrestricted domain
● Binary semaphore – integer value can range only between 0 and 1
● Same as a mutex lock
● Can solve various synchronization problems
● Consider P1 and P2 that require S1 to happen before S2
Create a semaphore “synch” initialized to 0
P1:
S1;
signal(synch);
P2:
wait(synch);
S2;
● Can implement a counting semaphore S as a binary semaphore
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.30 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Semaphore Implementation
● Must guarantee that no two processes can execute the wait() and
signal() on the same semaphore at the same time
● Thus, the implementation becomes the critical section problem where
the wait and signal code are placed in the critical section
● Could now have busy waiting in critical section implementation
4 But implementation code is short
4 Little busy waiting if critical section rarely occupied
● Note that applications may spend lots of time in critical sections and
therefore this is not a good solution
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.31 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Semaphore Implementation with no Busy waiting
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.32 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Implementation with no Busy waiting (Cont.)
wait(semaphore *S) {
S->value--;
if (S->value < 0) {
add this process to S->list;
block();
}
}
signal(semaphore *S) {
S->value++;
if (S->value <= 0) {
remove a process P from S->list;
wakeup(P);
}
}
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.33 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Deadlock and Starvation
● Deadlock – two or more processes are waiting indefinitely for an event that
can be caused by only one of the waiting processes
● Let S and Q be two semaphores initialized to 1
P0 P1
wait(S); wait(Q);
wait(Q); wait(S);
... ...
signal(S); signal(Q);
signal(Q); signal(S);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.34 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Classical Problems of Synchronization
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.35 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Bounded-Buffer Problem
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.36 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Bounded Buffer Problem (Cont.)
do {
...
/* produce an item in next_produced */
...
wait(empty);
wait(mutex);
...
/* add next produced to the buffer */
...
signal(mutex);
signal(full);
} while (true);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.37 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Bounded Buffer Problem (Cont.)
● The structure of the consumer process
Do {
wait(full);
wait(mutex);
...
/* remove an item from buffer to next_consumed */
...
signal(mutex);
signal(empty);
...
/* consume the item in next consumed */
...
} while (true);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.38 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Readers-Writers Problem
● A data set is shared among a number of concurrent processes
● Readers – only read the data set; they do not perform any updates
● Writers – can both read and write
● Problem – allow multiple readers to read at the same time
● Only one single writer can access the shared data at the same time
● Several variations of how readers and writers are considered – all involve some
form of priorities
● Shared Data
● Data set
● Semaphore rw_mutex initialized to 1
● Semaphore mutex initialized to 1
● Integer read_count initialized to 0
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.39 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Readers-Writers Problem (Cont.)
do {
wait(rw_mutex);
...
/* writing is performed */
...
signal(rw_mutex);
} while (true);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.40 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Readers-Writers Problem (Cont.)
● The structure of a reader process
do {
wait(mutex);
read_count++;
if (read_count == 1)
wait(rw_mutex);
signal(mutex);
...
/* reading is performed */
...
wait(mutex);
read count--;
if (read_count == 0)
signal(rw_mutex);
signal(mutex);
} while (true);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.41 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Readers-Writers Problem Variations
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.42 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Dining-Philosophers Problem
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.43 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Dining-Philosophers Problem Algorithm
● The structure of Philosopher i:
do {
wait (chopstick[i] );
wait (chopStick[ (i + 1) % 5] );
// eat
signal (chopstick[i] );
signal (chopstick[ (i + 1) % 5] );
// think
} while (TRUE);
● What is the problem with this algorithm?
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.44 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Dining-Philosophers Problem Algorithm (Cont.)
● Deadlock handling
● Allow at most 4 philosophers to be sitting simultaneously
at the table.
● Allow a philosopher to pick up the forks only if both are
available (picking must be done in a critical section.
● Use an asymmetric solution -- an odd-numbered
philosopher picks up first the left chopstick and then the
right chopstick. Even-numbered philosopher picks up first
the right chopstick and then the left chopstick.
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.45 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Problems with Semaphores
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.46 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Monitors
● A high-level abstraction that provides a convenient and effective mechanism for
process synchronization
● Abstract data type, internal variables only accessible by code within the procedure
● Only one process may be active within the monitor at a time
● But not powerful enough to model some synchronization schemes
monitor monitor-name
{
// shared variable declarations
procedure P1 (…) { …. }
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.47 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Schematic view of a Monitor
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.48 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Condition Variables
● condition x, y;
● Two operations are allowed on a condition variable:
● x.wait() – a process that invokes the operation is suspended
until x.signal()
● x.signal() – resumes one of processes (if any) that invoked
x.wait()
4 If no x.wait() on the variable, then it has no effect on the
variable
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.49 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Monitor with Condition Variables
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.50 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Condition Variables Choices
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.51 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Monitor Solution to Dining Philosophers
monitor DiningPhilosophers
{
enum { THINKING; HUNGRY, EATING) state [5] ;
condition self [5];
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.52 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Solution to Dining Philosophers (Cont.)
void test (int i) {
if ((state[(i + 4) % 5] != EATING) &&
(state[i] == HUNGRY) &&
(state[(i + 1) % 5] != EATING) ) {
state[i] = EATING ;
self[i].signal () ;
}
}
initialization_code() {
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
state[i] = THINKING;
}
}
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.53 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Solution to Dining Philosophers (Cont.)
DiningPhilosophers.pickup(i);
EAT
DiningPhilosophers.putdown(i);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.54 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Monitor Implementation Using Semaphores
● Variables
wait(mutex);
…
body of F;
…
if (next_count > 0)
signal(next)
else
signal(mutex);
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.55 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Monitor Implementation – Condition Variables
x_count++;
if (next_count > 0)
signal(next);
else
signal(mutex);
wait(x_sem);
x_count--;
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.56 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Monitor Implementation (Cont.)
if (x_count > 0) {
next_count++;
signal(x_sem);
wait(next);
next_count--;
}
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.57 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Resuming Processes within a Monitor
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.58 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Single Resource allocation
● Allocate a single resource among competing processes using priority
numbers that specify the maximum time a process plans to use the
resource
R.acquire(t);
...
access the resurce;
...
R.release;
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.59 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
A Monitor to Allocate Single Resource
monitor ResourceAllocator
{
boolean busy;
condition x;
void acquire(int time) {
if (busy)
x.wait(time);
busy = TRUE;
}
void release() {
busy = FALSE;
x.signal();
}
initialization code() {
busy = FALSE;
}
}
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.60 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Synchronization Examples
● Solaris
● Windows
● Linux
● Pthreads
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.61 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Solaris Synchronization
● Implements a variety of locks to support multitasking, multithreading
(including real-time threads), and multiprocessing
● Uses adaptive mutexes for efficiency when protecting data from short code
segments
● Starts as a standard semaphore spin-lock
● If lock held, and by a thread running on another CPU, spins
● If lock held by non-run-state thread, block and sleep waiting for signal of lock
being released
● Uses condition variables
● Uses readers-writers locks when longer sections of code need access to data
● Uses turnstiles to order the list of threads waiting to acquire either an
adaptive mutex or reader-writer lock
● Turnstiles are per-lock-holding-thread, not per-object
● Priority-inheritance per-turnstile gives the running thread the highest of the
priorities of the threads in its turnstile
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.62 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Windows Synchronization
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.63 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Linux Synchronization
● Linux:
● Prior to kernel Version 2.6, disables interrupts to implement
short critical sections
● Version 2.6 and later, fully preemptive
● Linux provides:
● Semaphores
● atomic integers
● spinlocks
● reader-writer versions of both
● On single-cpu system, spinlocks replaced by enabling and
disabling kernel preemption
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.64 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Pthreads Synchronization
● Pthreads API is OS-independent
● It provides:
● mutex locks
● condition variable
● Non-portable extensions include:
● read-write locks
● spinlocks
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.65 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Alternative Approaches
● Transactional Memory
● OpenMP
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.66 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Transactional Memory
● A memory transaction is a sequence of read-write operations to
memory that are performed atomically.
void update()
{
/* read/write memory */
}
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.67 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
OpenMP
● OpenMP is a set of compiler directives and API that support parallel
progamming.
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.68 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
Functional Programming Languages
● Functional programming languages offer a different paradigm than
procedural languages in that they do not maintain state.
● Variables are treated as immutable and cannot change state once they
have been assigned a value.
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 5.69 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
End of Chapter 5
Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013