Bilkent University

Department of Computer Engineering

CS342 Operating Systems

Lecture 6
Process Synchronization
(chapter 6)

Dr. İbrahim Körpeoğlu

http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~korpe

CS342 Operating Systems 1 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 References

• The slides here are adapted/modified from the textbook and its slides:
Operating System Concepts, Silberschatz et al., 7th & 8th editions,
Wiley.

REFERENCES
• Operating System Concepts, 7th and 8th editions, Silberschatz et al.
Wiley.
• Modern Operating Systems, Andrew S. Tanenbaum, 3rd edition, 2009.

CS342 Operating Systems 2 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Outline

• Background
• The Critical-Section Problem

• Peterson’s Solution
• Synchronization Hardware

• Semaphores

• Classic Problems of Synchronization

• Monitors

• Synchronization Examples from operating systems

CS342 Operating Systems 3 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Objectives

• To introduce the critical-section problem, whose solutions can be used

to ensure the consistency of shared data
• To present both software and hardware solutions of the critical-section
problem

CS342 Operating Systems 4 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 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 Data

Can be a shared memory

variable, a global variable
in a multi-thread program or
a file; or a kernel variable

Concurrent Threads or Processes

CS342 Operating Systems 5 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Producer Consumer Problem Revisited

• 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 count that keeps track of the number of full buffers. Initially,
count 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.
also a shared variable

count

Producer Consumer

Shared Buffer

at most BUFFER_SIZE items

CS342 Operating Systems 6 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Producer and Consumer Code

Producer ConSUMER

while (true) { while (true) {

/* produce an item and while (count == 0)
put in nextProduced */ ; // do nothing

while (count == BUFFER_SIZE) nextConsumed = buffer[out];

; // do nothing out = (out + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
count--;
buffer [in] = nextProduced;
in = (in + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE; /* consume the item
count++; in nextConsumed */
} }

CS342 Operating Systems 7 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 a possible Problem: race condition

• Assume we had 5 items in the buffer

• Then:
– Assume producer has just produced a new item and put it into
buffer is about to increment the count.
– Assume the consumer has just retrieved an item from buffer and is
about the decrement the count.

– Namely: Assume producer and consumer is now about to execute

count++ and count– statements.

CS342 Operating Systems 8 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Producer Consumer

or

Producer Consumer

CS342 Operating Systems 9 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Race Condition

• count++ could be implemented as

register1 = count
register1 = register1 + 1
count = register1
• count-- could be implemented as
register2 = count
register2 = register2 - 1
count = register2

CS342 Operating Systems 10 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Race Condition

register1 Count
PRODUCER (count++)
6
5 5
4
6
register1 = count
register1 = register1 + 1
register2 count = register1
5
4
CONSUMER (count--)

register2 = count
register2 = register2 – 1
CPU count = register2

6
Main Memory
CS342 Operating Systems 11 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University
 Interleaved Execution sequence

• Consider this execution interleaving with “count = 5” initially:

S0: producer execute register1 = count {register1 = 5}
S1: producer execute register1 = register1 + 1 {register1 = 6}
S2: consumer execute register2 = count {register2 = 5}
S3: consumer execute register2 = register2 - 1 {register2 = 4}
S4: producer execute count = register1 {count = 6 }
S5: consumer execute count = register2 {count = 4}

CS342 Operating Systems 12 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Programs and critical sections

• The part of the program (process) that is accessing and changing

shared data is called its critical section
Process 1 Code Process 2 Code Process 3 Code

Change X
Change X
Change Y
Change Y
Change Y
Change X

Assuming X and Y are shared data.

CS342 Operating Systems 13 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University
 Program lifetime and its structure

• Considering a process:
– It may be executing critical section code from time to time
– It may be executing non critical section code (remainder section)
other times.

• We should not allow more than one process to be in their critical

regions where they are manipulating the same shared data.

CS342 Operating Systems 14 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Structuring Programs

• The general way to do that is:

do {
do {
entry section
critical section
critical section
remainder section

exit section

} while (TRUE) remainder

The general structure of a program } while (TRUE)

Entry section will allow only one process to enter and execute critical section code.
CS342 Operating Systems 15 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University
 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

CS342 Operating Systems 16 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Applications and Kernel

• Multiprocess applications sharing a file or shared memory segment

may face critical section problems.
• Multithreaded applications sharing global variables may also face
critical section problems.

• Similarly, kernel itself may face critical section problem. It is also a

program. It may have critical sections.

CS342 Operating Systems 17 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Kernel Critical Sections

• While kernel is executing a function x(), a hardware interrupt may

arrive and interrupt handler h() can be run. Make sure that interrupt
handler h() and x() do not access the same kernel global variable.
Otherwise race condition may happen.

• While a process is running in user mode, it may call a system call s().
Then kernel starts running function s(). CPU is executing in kernel
mode now. We say the process is now running in kernel mode (even
though kernel code is running).

• While a process X is running in kernel mode, it may or may not be pre-

empted. It preemptive kernels, the process running in kernel mode can
be preempted and a new process may start running. In non-
preemptive kernels, the process running in kernel mode is not
preempted unless it blocks or returns to user mode.

CS342 Operating Systems 18 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Kernel Critical Sections

• In a preemptive kernel, a process X running in kernel mode may be

suspended (preempted) at an arbitrary (unsafe) time. It may be in the
middle of updating a kernel variable or data structure at that moment.
Then a new process Y may run and it may also call a system call.
Then, process Y starts running in kernel mode and may also try
update the same kernel variable or data structure (execute the critical
section code of kernel). We can have a race condition if kernel is not
synchronized.

• Therefore, we need solve synchronization and critical section problem

for the kernel itself as well. The same problem appears there as well.

CS342 Operating Systems 19 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Peterson’s Solution

• Two process solution

• Assume that the LOAD and STORE 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!

CS342 Operating Systems 20 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Algorithm for Process Pi

do {

flag[i] = TRUE;
turn = j; entry section

while (flag[j] && turn == j);

critical section
flag[i] = FALSE; exit section
remainder section

} while (1)

CS342 Operating Systems 21 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Two processes executing concurrently

PROCESS 0 PROCESS 1
do { do {
flag[0] = TRUE; flag[1] = TRUE;
turn = 1; turn = 0;
while (flag[1] && turn == while (flag[0] && turn ==
1); 0);
critical section critical section
flag[0] = FALSE; flag[1] = FALSE;
remainder section remainder section
} while (1) } while (1)
0 1
flag
Shared Variables
turn

CS342 Operating Systems 22 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Synchronization Hardware

• Many systems provide hardware support for critical section code

• Uniprocessors – could disable interrupts

– Currently running code would execute without preemption
– Generally too inefficient on multiprocessor systems
• Operating systems using this not broadly scalable

• Use lock variables?

– Can be source of race conditions?
– Hardware can provide extra and more complex instructions to
avoid race conditions

CS342 Operating Systems 23 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Solution to Critical-section Problem Using Locks

do {
acquire lock
critical section
release lock
remainder section
} while (TRUE);

Only one process can acquire lock. Others has to wait (or busy loop)

CS342 Operating Systems 24 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Atomic Hardware Instructions

• Modern machines provide special atomic hardware instructions

• Atomic = non-interruptible
– Either test memory word and set value (TestAndSet)
– Or swap contents of two memory words (Swap)

CS342 Operating Systems 25 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 TestAndSet Instruction

• Is a machine/assembly instruction.
• Need to program in assembly to use. Hence Entry section code should be
programmed in assembly
• But here we provide definition of it using a high level language code.

Definition of TestAndSet Instruction

boolean TestAndSet (boolean *target)
{
boolean rv = *target;
*target = TRUE;
return rv:
}

CS342 Operating Systems 26 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Solution using TestAndSet

• Shared boolean variable lock, initialized to false.

Solution:
do {
while ( TestAndSet (&lock ))
entry section
; // do nothing

// critical section

lock = FALSE; exit_section

// remainder section

} while (TRUE);

CS342 Operating Systems 27 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 In assembly

entry_section:
TestAndSet REGISTER, LOCK; entry section code
CMP REGISTER, #0
JNE entry_section;
RET
exit_section:
move LOCK, #0 exit section code
RET

main:
..
call entry_section;
execute criticial region;
call exit_section;

CS342 Operating Systems 28 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Swap Instruction

• Is a machine/assembly instruction. Intel 80x86 architecture has an XCHG

instruction
• Need to program in assembly to use. Hence Entry section code should be
programmed in assembly
• But here we provide definition of it using a high level language code.

Definition of Swap Instruction

void Swap (boolean *a, boolean *b)
{
boolean temp = *a;
*a = *b;
*b = temp:
}

CS342 Operating Systems 29 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Solution using Swap

• Shared Boolean variable lock initialized to FALSE; Each process has a local
Boolean variable key

Solution: do {
key = TRUE;
while ( key == TRUE)
Swap (&lock, &key );

// critical section

lock = FALSE;

// remainder section

} while (TRUE);

CS342 Operating Systems 30 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 • TestAndSet and Swap provides mutual exclusion: 1st property satisfied

• But, Bounded Waiting property, 3rd property, may not be satisfied.

• A process X may be waiting, but we can have the other process Y

going into the critical region repeatedly

CS342 Operating Systems 31 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Bounded-waiting Mutual Exclusion with
TestandSet()
do {
waiting[i] = TRUE;
key = TRUE;
while (waiting[i] && key) entry section code
key = TestAndSet(&lock);
waiting[i] = FALSE;

// critical section

j = (i + 1) % n;
while ((j != i) && !waiting[j])
j = (j + 1) % n;
if (j == i)
exit section code
lock = FALSE;
else
waiting[j] = FALSE;
// remainder section
} while (TRUE);
CS342 Operating Systems 32 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University
 Semaphore

• Synchronization tool that does not require busy waiting

• Semaphore S: integer variable
shared, and can be a kernel variable
• Two standard operations modify S: wait() and signal()
• Originally called P() and V()
• Also called down() and up()
– Semaphores can only be accessed via these two indivisible
(atomic) operations;
– They can be implemented as system calls by kernel. Kernel makes
sure they are indivisible.

• Less complicated entry and exit sections when semaphores are used

CS342 Operating Systems 33 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Semaphore Operations: Meaning

• wait (S): indivisible (until calling process is blocked)

– if S is positive (S > 0), decrement S and return.
will not cause the process to block.)
– If S is not positive, then the calling process is put to sleep
(blocked), until someone does a signal and this process is selected
to wakeup.

• signal (S): indivisible (never blocks the calling process)

– If there is one or more processes sleeping on S, then one process
is selected and waken up, and signal returns.
– If there is no process sleeping, then S is simply incremented by 1
and signal returns.

CS342 Operating Systems 34 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Semaphore as General Synchronization
Tool
• Binary semaphore – integer value can range only between 0
and 1; can be simpler to implement
– Also known as mutex locks

– Binary semaphores provides mutual exclusion; can be used for the

critical section problem.

• Counting semaphore – integer value can range over an unrestricted

domain
– Can be used for other synchronization problems; for example for
resource allocation.

CS342 Operating Systems 35 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Usage

• Binary semaphores (mutexes) can be used to solve critical section

problems.

• A semaphore variable (lets say mutex) can be shared by N processes,

and initialized to 1.

• Each process is structured as follows:

do {
wait (mutex);
// Critical Section
signal (mutex);
// remainder section
} while (TRUE);

CS342 Operating Systems 36 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 usage: mutual exclusion

Process 0 Process 1

do {
do {
wait (mutex);
wait (mutex);
// Critical Section
// Critical Section
signal (mutex);
signal (mutex);
// remainder section
// remainder section
} while (TRUE);
} while (TRUE);

wait() {…} signal() {…}

Kernel
Semaphore mutex; // initialized to 1

CS342 Operating Systems 37 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 usage: other synchronization problems
P0 P1
… …
S1; Assume we definitely want to
S2;
…. have S1 executed before S2.
….

semaphore x = 0; // initialized to 0
P0 P1
… …
S1; wait (x);
Solution: signal (x); S2;
…. ….

CS342 Operating Systems 38 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Uses of Semaphore: synchronization
Buffer is an array of BUF_SIZE Cells (at most BUF_SIZE items can be put)

Producer Consumer
do { do {
// produce item wait (Full_Cells);
… ….
put item into buffer remove item from buffer
..
.. …
signal (Full_Cells); } while (TRUE);

} while (TRUE);
wait() {…} signal() {…}
Kernel
Semaphore Full_Cells = 0; // initialized to 0

CS342 Operating Systems 39 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Consumer/Producer is Synchronized

Full_Cells

BUF_SIZE
Producer
Sleeps

0 time
Consumer
Sleeps
CS342 Operating Systems 40 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University
 Ensured by synchronization mechanisms: * Red is always less than Blue
Pt – Ct <= BUF_SIZE * (Blue – Red) can never be
Pt – Ct >= 0 greater than BUF_SIZE

all items produced (Pt)

BUF_SIZE

times
all items consumed (Ct)

CS342 Operating Systems 41 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 usage: resource allocation

• Assume we have a resource that has 5 instances. A process that

needs that type of resource will need to use one instance. We can
allow at most 5 process concurrently using these 5 resource
instances. Another process (processes) that want the resource need
to block. How can we code those processes?
• Solution:
one of the processes creates and initializes a semaphore to 5.
semaphore x = 5; // semaphore to access resource

wait (x);
…
….use one instance Each process has to be
of the resource… coded in this manner.
…
signal (x);

CS342 Operating Systems 42 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Semaphore Implementation

• Must guarantee that no two processes can execute wait () and signal
() on the same semaphore at the same time.
• Kernel can guarantee this.

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

CS342 Operating Systems 43 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Semaphore Implementation with no Busy waiting

• With each semaphore there is an associated waiting queue.

– The processes waiting for the semaphore are waited here.

CS342 Operating Systems 44 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Semaphore Implementation with no Busy waiting
(Cont.)
Implementation of wait:
wait(semaphore *S) {
S->value--;
if (S->value < 0) {
add this process to S->list;
block the process;

}
} Implementation of signal:
signal(semaphore *S) {
S->value++;
if (S->value <= 0) {
remove a process P from S->list;
wakeup the process;

}
}
CS342 Operating Systems 45 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University
 Kernel Implementing wait and signal

• The wait and signal operations must be atomic. The integer value is updated.
No two process should update at the same time.
How can the kernel ensure that? It can NOT use semaphores to implement
semaphores.

• Implementation of these operations in kernel becomes the critical section

problem where the wait and signal code are placed in the critical section. How
can ensure two processes will not execute at the same time in wait or signal?
– Could now have busy waiting in critical section implementation
• But implementation code is short
• Little busy waiting if critical section rarely occupied
– Note that applications may spend lots of time in critical sections and
therefore busy waiting is not a good solution for applications. But, for short
kernel critical sections, it may be acceptable in multi-CPU systems.

CS342 Operating Systems 46 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 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);
• Starvation – indefinite blocking. A process may never be removed from the
semaphore queue in which it is suspended
• Priority Inversion - Scheduling problem when lower-priority process holds a
lock needed by higher-priority process

CS342 Operating Systems 47 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Classical Problems of Synchronization

• Bounded-Buffer Problem
• Readers and Writers Problem
• Dining-Philosophers Problem

CS342 Operating Systems 48 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Bounded Buffer Problem

• N buffers, each can hold one item

• Semaphore mutex initialized to the value 1
• Semaphore full initialized to the value 0
• Semaphore empty initialized to the value N.

buffer
prod cons

full = 4
empty = 6

CS342 Operating Systems 49 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Bounded Buffer Problem

The structure of the producer process The structure of the consumer process
do { do {
// produce an item in nextp wait (full);
wait (mutex);
wait (empty);
wait (mutex); // remove an item from
// buffer to nextc
// add the item to the buffer
signal (mutex);
signal (mutex); signal (empty);
signal (full);
// consume the item in nextc
} while (TRUE);
} while (TRUE);

CS342 Operating Systems 50 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 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

reader
writer
reader

Data Set
reader
writer
writer reader

CS342 Operating Systems 51 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Readers-Writers Problem

• Shared Data
– Data set
– Integer readcount initialized to 0
• Number of readers reading the data at the moment
– Semaphore mutex initialized to 1
• Protects the readcount variable
(multiple readers may try to modify it)
– Semaphore wrt initialized to 1
• Protects the data set
(either writer or reader(s) should access data at a time)

CS342 Operating Systems 52 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Readers-Writers Problem (Cont.)
The structure of a reader process
do {
wait (mutex) ;
readcount ++ ;
The structure of a writer process if (readcount == 1)
do { wait (wrt) ;
signal (mutex);
wait (wrt) ;
// reading is performed
// writing is performed
wait (mutex) ;
signal (wrt) ; readcount - - ;
} while (TRUE); if (readcount == 0)
signal (wrt) ;
signal (mutex) ;
} while (TRUE);

CS342 Operating Systems 53 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Dining-Philosophers Problem

a resource

a process

Assume a philosopher needs two forks to eat. Forks are like resources.
While a philosopher is holding a fork, another one can not have it.

CS342 Operating Systems 54 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Dining-Philosophers Problem

• Is not a real problem

• But lots of real resource allocation problems look like this. If we can
solve this problem effectively and efficiently, we can also solve the real
problems.

• From a satisfactory solution:

– We want to have concurrency: two philosophers that are not sitting

next to each other on the table should be able to eat concurrently.

– We don’t want deadlock: waiting for each other indefinitely.

– We don’t want starvation: no philosopher waits forever.

CS342 Operating Systems 55 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Dining-Philosophers Problem (Cont.)
Semaphore chopstick [5] initialized to 1

do {
wait ( chopstick[i] );
wait ( chopStick[ (i + 1) %
5] );

// eat

signal ( chopstick[i] );
signal (chopstick[ (i + 1)
% 5] );

// think
} while (TRUE);
This solution provides concurrency but may result in deadlock.

CS342 Operating Systems 56 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Problems with Semaphores

Incorrect use of semaphore operations:

signal (mutex) …. wait (mutex)

wait (mutex) … wait (mutex)

Omitting of wait (mutex) or signal (mutex) (or both)

CS342 Operating Systems 57 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Monitors

• A high-level abstraction that provides a convenient and effective mechanism

for process synchronization
• Only one process may be active within the monitor at a time

monitor monitor-name
{
// shared variable declarations

procedure P1 (…) { …. }
…
procedure Pn (…) {……}

Initialization code ( ….) { … }

…

CS342 Operating Systems 58 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Schematic view of a Monitor

CS342 Operating Systems 59 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Condition Variables

• condition x, y;

• Two operations on a condition variable:

– x.wait () – a process that invokes the operation is suspended.
– x.signal () – resumes one of processes (if any) that
invoked x.wait ()

CS342 Operating Systems 60 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Monitor with Condition Variables

CS342 Operating Systems 61 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Condition Variables

• Condition variables are not semaphores. They are different even though they
look similar.

– A condition variable does not count: have no associated integer.

– A signal on a condition variable x is lost (not saved for future use) if there
is no process waiting (blocked) on the condition variable x.
– The wait() operation on a condition variable x will always cause the caller
of wait to block.
– The signal() operation on a condition variable will wake up a sleeping
process on the condition variable, if any. It has no effect if there is nobody
sleeping.

CS342 Operating Systems 62 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Monitor Solution to Dining Philosophers

monitor DP {
enum { THINKING;
HUNGRY, EATING) state [5] ;
void test (int i) {
condition cond [5];
if ( (state[(i + 4) % 5] != EATING) &&
(state[(i + 1) % 5] != EATING) &&
void pickup (int i) {
(state[i] == HUNGRY)) {
state[i] = HUNGRY;
state[i] = EATING ;
test(i);
cond[i].signal ();
if (state[i] != EATING)
}
cond[i].wait;
}
}
void putdown (int i) {
initialization_code() {
state[i] = THINKING;
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
// test left and right neighbors
state[i] = THINKING;
test((i + 4) % 5)
}
test((i + 1) % 5);
}
} /* end of monitor */
CS342 Operating Systems 63 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University
 Solution to Dining Philosophers (cont)

• Each philosopher invokes the operations pickup() and putdown() in the

following sequence:
Philosopher i
…
DP DiningPhilosophers;
….
while (1)
THINK…

DiningPhilosophters.pickup (i);

EAT /* use resource(s) */

DiningPhilosophers.putdown (i);

THINK…
}

CS342 Operating Systems 64 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Monitor Solution to Dining Philosophers

#define LEFT (i+4)%5 THINKING?

#define RIGHT (i+1)%5 HUNGRY?
EATING?

state[LEFT] = ? state[i] = ? state[RIGHT] = ?

Process Process Process

… …
(i+4) % 5 i (i+1) % 5

Test(i)
Test(i+4 %5) Test(i+1 %5)

CS342 Operating Systems 65 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Monitor Implementation Using
Semaphores
• Variables
semaphore mutex; // (initially = 1); allows only one process to be
active
semaphore next; // (initially = 0); causes signaler to sleep
int next-count = 0; /* num sleepers since they signalled */

• Each procedure F will be replaced by

wait(mutex);
…
body of F;
…
if (next_count > 0)
signal(next)
else
signal(mutex);
• Mutual exclusion within a monitor is ensured.

CS342 Operating Systems 66 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Monitor Implementation Using
Semaphores
• Condition variables: how do we implement them?

• Assume the following strategy is implemented regarding who will run after a
signal() is issued on a condition variable:
– “The process that calls signal() on a condition variable is blocked. It can
not be waken up if there is somebody running inside the monitor”.

• Some programming languages require the process calling signal to quit

monitor by having the signal() call as the last statement of a monitor
procedure.
– Such a strategy can be implemented in a more easy way.

CS342 Operating Systems 67 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Monitor Implementation Using
Semaphores
• For each condition variable x, we have:
semaphore x_sem; // (initially = 0); causes caller of wait to sleep
int x-count = 0; // number of sleepers on condition

The operation x.wait can be The operation x.signal can be

implemented as: implemented as:

x-count++; if (x-count > 0) {

if (next_count > 0) next_count++;
signal(next); signal(x_sem);
else wait(next);
signal(mutex); next_count--;
wait(x_sem); }
x-count--;

CS342 Operating Systems 68 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 A Monitor to Allocate Single Resource

• Now we illustrate how monitors can be used to allocate a resource to one of

several processes.

• We would like to apply a priority based allocation. The process that will use the
resource for the shortest amount of time will get the resource first if there are
other processes that want the resource.

Processes or Threads
…. that want to use the resource

Resource

CS342 Operating Systems 69 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 A Monitor to Allocate Single Resource

• Assume we have condition variable implementation that can enqueue sleeping

processes with respect to a priority specified as a parameter to wait() call.
– cond x;
– …
– x.wait (priority);

Queue of sleeping processes waiting on condition x

X
10 20 45 70

priority could be the time-duration to use the resource

CS342 Operating Systems 70 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 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;
}
}
CS342 Operating Systems 71 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University
 A Monitor to Allocate Single Resource

Process 1 Process 2 Process N

ResourceAllocator RA; ResourceAllocator RA; ResourceAllocator RA;

RA.acquire(10); RA.acquire(30); RA.acquire(25);

… … …
….use resource… ….use resource… … ….use resource…
…. …. ….
RA.release(); RA.release(); RA.release();

Each process should use resource between acquire() and release() calls.

CS342 Operating Systems 72 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Spin Locks

• Kernel uses to protect short critical regions (a few instructions) on multi-

processor systems.

• Assume we have a process A running in CPU 1 and holding a spin lock and
executing the critical region touching to some shared data.
• Assume at the same, another process B running in CPU 2 would like run a
critical region touching to the same shared data.

• B can wait on a semaphore, but this will cause B to sleep (a context switch is
needed; costly operation). However, critical section of A is short; It would be
better if B would busy wait for a while; then the lock would be available.

• Spin Locks are doing this. B can use a Spin Lock to wait (busy wait) until A will
leave the critical region and releases the Spin Lock. Since critical region is
short, B will not wait much.

CS342 Operating Systems 73 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Spin Locks
Process A running in kernel mode Process B running in kernel mode
(i.e. executing kernel code shown) (i.e. executing kernel code shown)

f1() {… f2() {…
acquire_spin_lock_(X); acquire_spin_lock_(X);
…//critical region…. …//critical region….
…touch to SD (shared data); …touch to SD (shared data);
release_spin_lock(X); release_spin_lock(X); …
} }

CPU 1 CPU 2

Kernel X lock variable (accessed atomically)

Main f1() {…}
Memory f2() {…} SD shared data

CS342 Operating Systems 74 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Spin Locks

• a spin lock can be acquired after busy waiting.

• Remember the TestAndSet or Swap hardware instructions that are atomic

even on multi-processor systems. They can be used to implement the busy-
wait acquisition code of spin locks.

• While process A is in the critical region, executing on CPU 1 and having the
lock (X set to 1), process A may be spinning on a while loop on CPU 2, waiting
for the lock to be become available (i.e. waiting X to become 0). As soon as
process A releases the lock (sets X to 0), process B can get the lock (test and
set X), and enter the critical region.

CS342 Operating Systems 75 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Synchronization Examples

• Solaris
• Windows XP
• Linux
• Pthreads

CS342 Operating Systems 76 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 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
• 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

CS342 Operating Systems 77 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Windows XP 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 either mutexes and
semaphores
• Dispatcher objects may also provide events
– An event acts much like a condition variable

CS342 Operating Systems 78 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 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
– spin locks

CS342 Operating Systems 79 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 Pthreads Synchronization

• Pthreads API is OS-independent

• It provides:
– mutex locks
– condition variables

• Non-portable extensions include:

– read-write locks
– spin locks

CS342 Operating Systems 80 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University

 End of lecture

CS342 Operating Systems 81 İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University