Chapter 7: Process Synchronization

1. Background
2. The Critical-Section Problem
3. Synchronization Hardware
4. Semaphores
5. Classical Problems of Synchronization
6. Critical Regions
7. Monitors
8. Synchronization in Solaris 2 & Windows 2000

Operating System Concepts 7.1 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Background

Concurrent access to shared data may result in data
inconsistency.

Maintaining data consistency requires mechanisms to ensure
the orderly execution of cooperating processes.

Shared-memory solution to bounded-buffer problem (Chapter
4) allows at most (n – 1) items in buffer at the same time. A
solution, where all N buffers are used is not simple.
 Suppose that we modify the producer-consumer code by adding
a variable counter, initialized to 0 and incremented each time a
new item is added to the buffer

Operating System Concepts 7.2 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Bounded-Buffer

Shared data

#define BUFFER_SIZE 10
typedef struct {
...
} item;
item buffer[BUFFER_SIZE];
int in = 0;
int out = 0;
int counter = 0;

Operating System Concepts 7.3 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Bounded-Buffer

Producer process
Consumer process

item nextConsumed;
item nextProduced;
while (1) {
while (1) { while (counter == 0)
while (counter == BUFFER_SIZE) ; /* do nothing */
; /* do nothing */ nextConsumed = buffer[out];
buffer[in] = nextProduced; out = (out + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
counter--;
in = (in + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
}
counter++;
}

The statements : counter++ and counter--;

must be performed atomically.

Atomic operation means an operation that completes in its entirety
without interruption.

Operating System Concepts 7.4 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Bounded Buffer

The statement “count++”
The statement “count—” may
may be implemented in be implemented as:
machine language as:
register2 = counter
register1 = counter
register2 = register2 – 1
register1 = register1 + 1 counter = register2
counter = register1

If both the producer and consumer attempt to update the buffer

concurrently, the assembly language statements may get
interleaved.

Interleaving depends upon how the producer and consumer
processes are scheduled.

Operating System Concepts 7.5 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Bounded Buffer

Assume counter is initially 5. One interleaving of statements is:
producer: register1 = counter (register1 = 5)
producer: register1 = register1 + 1 (register1 = 6)
consumer: register2 = counter (register2 = 5)
consumer: register2 = register2 – 1 (register2 = 4)
producer: counter = register1 (counter = 6)
consumer: counter = register2 (counter = 4)

The value of count may be either 4 or 6, where the correct result
should be 5.

Race condition: The situation where several processes access

– and manipulate shared data concurrently. The final value of the
shared data depends upon which process finishes last.

To prevent race conditions, concurrent processes must be
synchronized

Operating System Concepts 7.6 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 2. The Critical-Section Problem

n processes all competing to use some shared data

Each process has a code segment, called critical section,
in which the shared data is accessed.

Problem – ensure that when one process is executing in
its critical section, no other process is allowed to execute
in its critical section.

Operating System Concepts 7.7 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 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 7.8 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Initial Attempts to Solve Problem

Only 2 processes, P0 and P1

General structure of process Pi (other process Pj)
do {
entry section
critical section
exit section
reminder section
} while (1);

Processes may share some common variables to
synchronize their actions.

Operating System Concepts 7.9 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 2.1. Two Process Solutions
2.1.1. Algorithm 1

Shared variables:
 int turn;
initially turn = 0
 turn - i ⇒ Pi can enter its critical section

Process Pi
do {
while (turn != i) ;
critical section
turn = j;
remainder section
} while (1);

Satisfies mutual exclusion, but not progress

Operating System Concepts 7.10 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 2.1.2. Algorithm 2

Shared variables
 boolean flag[2];
initially flag [0] = flag [1] = false.
 flag [i] = true ⇒ Pi ready to enter its critical section

Process Pi
do {
flag[i] := true;
while (flag[j]) ;
critical section
flag [i] = false;
remainder section
} while (1);

Satisfies mutual exclusion, but not progress requirement.

Operating System Concepts 7.11 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 2.1.3. Algorithm 3

Combined shared variables of algorithms 1 and 2.

Process Pi
do {
flag [i]:= true;
turn = j;
while (flag [j] and turn = j) ;
critical section
flag [i] = false;
remainder section
} while (1);

Meets all three requirements; solves the critical-section
problem for two processes.

Operating System Concepts 7.12 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 2.2. Multiple Process Solutions
Bakery Algorithm
Critical section for n processes

Before entering its critical section, process receives a
number. Holder of the smallest number enters the critical
section.

If processes Pi and Pj receive the same number, if i < j,
then Pi is served first; else Pj is served first.

The numbering scheme always generates numbers in
increasing order of enumeration; i.e., 1,2,3,3,3,3,4,5...

Operating System Concepts 7.13 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Bakery Algorithm

Notation <≡ lexicographical order (ticket #, process id #)

 (a,b) < (c,d) if a < c or if a = c and b < d
 max (a0,E, an-1) is a number, k, such that k ≥ ai for i - 0,
E, n – 1

Shared data
boolean choosing[n];
int number[n];
Data structures are initialized to false and 0 respectively

Operating System Concepts 7.14 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Bakery Algorithm

do {
choosing[i] = true;
number[i] = max(number[0], number[1], ;, number [n – 1])+1;
choosing[i] = false;
for (j = 0; j < n; j++) {
while (choosing[j])
;
while ((number[j] != 0) && (number[j,j] < number[i,i]))
;
}
critical section
number[i] = 0;
remainder section
} while (1);

Operating System Concepts 7.15 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 7.3. Synchronization Hardware

Test and modify the content of a word atomically

.
boolean TestAndSet(boolean &target) {
boolean rv = target;
tqrget = true;

return rv;
}

Operating System Concepts 7.16 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Mutual Exclusion with Test-and-Set

Shared data:
boolean lock = false;

Process Pi
do {
while (TestAndSet(lock)) ;
critical section
lock = false;
remainder section
}

Operating System Concepts 7.17 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Mutual Exclusion with Swap

Atomically swap two variables.
void Swap(boolean &a, boolean &b) {
boolean temp = a;
a = b;
b = temp;
}

Shared data (initialized to false):
boolean lock;
boolean waiting[n];

Process Pi
do {
key = true;
while (key == true)
Swap(lock,key);
critical section
lock = false;
remainder section
}

Operating System Concepts 7.18 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 7.4. Semaphores

Synchronization tool that does not require busy waiting.

Semaphore S – integer variable

can only be accessed via two indivisible (atomic) operations
wait (S):
while S≤ 0 do no-op;
S--;
signal (S):
S++;

Can be used for restricted order of operations (synchronization)
s1 wait (synch);
signal (synch); s2;

If synch is initialized by 0, then s1 will be executed before s2.

Operating System Concepts 7.19 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Critical Section of n Processes

Shared data:
semaphore mutex; //initially mutex = 1

Process Pi:

do {
wait(mutex);
critical section
signal(mutex);
remainder section
} while (1);

Operating System Concepts 7.20 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 4.2. Semaphore Implementation

The busy waiting problem, the process will be using the CPU while
waiting. This type of semaphores called spinlock

Suitable for multiprocessors systems, no context switching.

Define a semaphore as a record

typedef struct {
int value;
struct process *L;
} semaphore;

Assume two simple operations:

 block suspends the process that invokes it.
 wakeup(P) resumes the execution of a blocked process P.

Operating System Concepts 7.21 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Implementation

Semaphore operations now defined as

wait(S):
S.value--;
if (S.value < 0) {
add this process to S.L;
block;
}

signal(S):
S.value++;
if (S.value <= 0) {
remove a process P from S.L;
wakeup(P);
}

Operating System Concepts 7.22 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 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);
M M
signal(S); signal(Q);
signal(Q) signal(S);

Starvation – indefinite blocking. A process may never be
removed from the semaphore queue in which it is suspended.

Operating System Concepts 7.23 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Two Types of Semaphores

Counting semaphore – integer value can range over

an unrestricted domain.

Binary semaphore – integer value can range only
between 0 and 1; can be simpler to implement.

Can implement a counting semaphore S as a binary
semaphore.

Operating System Concepts 7.24 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Implementing S as a Binary Semaphore

Data structures: binary-semaphore S1, S2;
int C:

Initialization: S1 = 1
S2 = 0
C = initial value of semaphore S

WAIT OPERATION SIGNAL OPERATION

wait(S1); wait(S1);
C--; C ++;
if (C < 0) { if (C <= 0)
signal(S1); signal(S2);
wait(S2); else
} signal(S1);
signal(S1);

Operating System Concepts 7.25 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 5. Classical Problems of Synchronization

Bounded-Buffer Problem

Readers and Writers Problem

Dining-Philosophers Problem

Operating System Concepts 7.26 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 5.1. Bounded-Buffer Problem

Shared data: semaphore full, empty, mutex;
Initially: full = 0, empty = n, mutex = 1
PRODUCER PROCESS CONSUMER PROCESS
do { do {
; wait(full)
produce an item in nextp wait(mutex);
;
;
wait(empty);
remove an item from buffer to nextc
wait(mutex);
; ;
add nextp to buffer signal(mutex);
; signal(empty);
signal(mutex); ;
signal(full); consume the item in nextc
} while (1); ;
} while (1);

Operating System Concepts 7.27 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 5.2. Readers-Writers Problem

Shared data: semaphore mutex, wrt;
Initially: mutex = 1, wrt = 1, readcount = 0
WRITER PROCESS READER PROCESS
wait (mutex);
readcount++;
wait(wrt); if (readcount == 1)
; wait (wrt);
signal (mutex);
writing is performed
E
;
reading is performed
signal(wrt); E
wait (mutex);
readcount--;
if (readcount == 0)
signal (wrt);
signal (mutex):

Operating System Concepts 7.28 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 5.3. Dining-Philosophers Problem

Shared data
semaphore chopstick[5];
Initially all values are 1

Philosopher i:
do {
wait(chopstick[i])
wait(chopstick[(i+1) % 5])
; This solution may cause Deadlock.
eat Solutions:
;
Allow at most 4 Philosophers.
signal(chopstick[i]);

Pick only when the 2 chopstick are
signal(chopstick[(i+1) % 5]); available
;
Use asymmetric solution (old
think Philosopher pick first).
;
} while (1);

Operating System Concepts 7.29 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 6. Critical Regions

High-level synchronization construct

A shared variable v of type T, is declared as:
v: shared T

Variable v accessed only inside statement
region v when B do S
where B is a boolean expression.

While statement S is being executed, no other process can

access variable v.

Regions referring to the same shared variable exclude each
other in time.

When a process tries to execute the region statement, the
Boolean expression B is evaluated. If B is true, statement S is
executed. If it is false, the process is delayed until B becomes
true and no other process is in the region associated with v.

Operating System Concepts 7.30 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Example – Bounded Buffer

Shared data:
struct buffer {
int pool[n];
int count, in, out;
}

Producer process inserts nextp into the shared buffer

region buffer when( count < n) {
pool[in] = nextp;
in:= (in+1) % n;
count++;
}

Consumer process removes an item from the shared
buffer and puts it in nextc
region buffer when (count > 0) {
nextc = pool[out];
out = (out+1) % n;
count--;
}
Operating System Concepts 7.31 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
 Implementation region x when B do S

Associate with the shared variable x, the following

variables:
semaphore mutex, first-delay, second-delay;
int first-count, second-count;

Mutually exclusive access to the critical section is

provided by mutex.

If a process cannot enter the critical section because the

Boolean expression B is false, it initially waits on the
first-delay semaphore; moved to the second-delay
semaphore before it is allowed to reevaluate B.

Operating System Concepts 7.32 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Implementation

Keep track of the number of processes waiting on first-

delay and second-delay, with first-count and second-
count respectively.

The algorithm assumes a FIFO ordering in the queuing of

processes for a semaphore.

For an arbitrary queuing discipline, a more complicated

implementation is required.

Operating System Concepts 7.33 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 7. Monitors

High-level synchronization construct that allows the safe sharing
of an abstract data type among concurrent processes.

monitor monitor-name
{
shared variable declarations
procedure body P1 (;) {
...
}
procedure body P2 (;) {
...
}
procedure body Pn (;) {
...
}
{
initialization code
}
}
Operating System Concepts 7.34 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
 Monitors

To allow a process to wait within the monitor, a

condition variable must be declared, as
condition x, y;

Condition variable can only be used with the
operations wait and signal.
 The operation
x.wait();
means that the process invoking this operation is
suspended until another process invokes
x.signal();
 The x.signal operation resumes exactly one suspended
process. If no process is suspended, then the signal
operation has no effect.

Operating System Concepts 7.35 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Schematic View of a Monitor

Operating System Concepts 7.36 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Monitor With Condition Variables

Operating System Concepts 7.37 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Dining Philosophers Example
monitor dp
{
enum {thinking, hungry, eating} state[5];
condition self[5];
void pickup(int i) // following slides
void putdown(int i) // following slides
void test(int i) // following slides
void init() {
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
state[i] = thinking;
}
}

Philosopher i must invoke the following sequence:

dp.pickup(i)
E..
eat
EE
dp.putdown(i)

Operating System Concepts 7.38 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Dining Philosophers
void pickup(int i) {
state[i] = hungry;
test[i];
if (state[i] != eating)
self[i].wait();
}
void putdown(int i) {
state[i] = thinking;
// test left and right neighbors
test((i+4) % 5);
test((i+1) % 5);
}
void test(int i) {
if ( (state[(I + 4) % 5] != eating) &&
(state[i] == hungry) &&
(state[(i + 1) % 5] != eating)) {
state[i] = eating;
self[i].signal();
}
}

Operating System Concepts 7.39 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Monitor Implementation Using Semaphores

Variables
semaphore mutex; // (initially = 1)
semaphore next; // (initially = 0)
int next-count = 0;

Each external procedure F will be replaced by

wait(mutex);
E
body of F;
E
if (next-count > 0)
signal(next)
else
signal(mutex);

Mutual exclusion within a monitor is ensured.

Operating System Concepts 7.40 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Monitor Implementation

For each condition variable x, we have:

semaphore x-sem; // (initially = 0)
int x-count = 0;

The operation x.wait can be implemented as:

x-count++;
if (next-count > 0)
signal(next);
else
signal(mutex);
wait(x-sem);
x-count--;

Operating System Concepts 7.41 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Monitor Implementation

The operation x.signal can be implemented as:

if (x-count > 0) {
next-count++;
signal(x-sem);
wait(next);
next-count--;
}

Operating System Concepts 7.42 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 Monitor Implementation

Conditional-wait construct: x.wait(c);
 c – integer expression evaluated when the wait operation is
executed.
 value of c (a priority number) stored with the name of the
process that is suspended.
 when x.signal is executed, process with smallest
associated priority number is resumed next.

Check two conditions to establish correctness of system:
 User processes must always make their calls on the monitor
in a correct sequence.
 Must ensure that an uncooperative process does not ignore
the mutual-exclusion gateway provided by the monitor, and
try to access the shared resource directly, without using the
access protocols.

Operating System Concepts 7.43 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 8.1. Solaris 2 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.

Uses condition variables and 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.

Operating System Concepts 7.44 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002

 8.2. Windows 2000 Synchronization

Uses interrupt masks to protect access to global

resources on uniprocessor systems.

Uses spinlocks on multiprocessor systems.

Also provides dispatcher objects which may act as wither

mutexes and semaphores.

Dispatcher objects may also provide events. An event

acts much like a condition variable.

Operating System Concepts 7.45 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002