Chapter 3:

Process Synchronization

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Chapter 5: Process Synchronization
• Background
• The Critical-Section Problem
• Peterson’s Solution
• Synchronization Hardware
• Mutex Locks
• Semaphores
• Classic Problems of Synchronization
• Monitors
• Synchronization Examples
• Alternative Approaches

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Objectives
• To present the concept of process synchronization.
• 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
• To examine several classical process-synchronization
problems
• To explore several tools that are used to solve process
synchronization problems

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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.

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Producer
while (true) {
/* produce an item in next produced */

while (counter == BUFFER_SIZE) ;

/* do nothing */
buffer[in] = next_produced;
in = (in + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
counter++;
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Consumer
while (true) {
while (counter == 0)
; /* do nothing */
next_consumed = buffer[out];
out = (out + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
counter--;
/* consume the item in next consumed */
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Race Condition
• counter++ could be implemented as

register1 = counter
register1 = register1 + 1
counter = register1
• counter-- could be implemented as

register2 = counter
register2 = register2 - 1
counter = register2

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

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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Critical Section

• General structure of process Pi

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Algorithm for Process Pi

do {

while (turn == j);

critical section
turn = j;

remainder section
} while (true);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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
• Essentially free of race conditions in kernel mode

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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!

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Algorithm for Process Pi

do {
flag[i] = true;
turn = j;
while (flag[j] && turn = = j);
critical section
flag[i] = false;
remainder section
} while (true);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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
• Operating systems using this not broadly scalable
• Modern machines provide special atomic hardware
instructions
• Atomic = non-interruptible
• Either test memory word and set value
• Or swap contents of two memory words

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Solution to Critical-section Problem Using Locks

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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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”.

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Solution using test_and_set()

 Shared Boolean variable lock, initialized to FALSE

 Solution:
do {
while (test_and_set(&lock))
; /* do nothing */
/* critical section */
lock = false;
/* remainder section */
} while (true);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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.

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

acquire() and release()
• acquire() {
while (!available)
; /* busy wait */
available = false;
}
• release() {
available = true;
}
• do {
acquire lock
critical section
release lock
remainder section
} while (true);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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()
• Originally called P() and V()
• Definition of the wait() operation
wait(S) {
while (S <= 0)
; // busy wait
S--;
}
• Definition of the signal() operation
signal(S) {
S++;
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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
• 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 this is not a good solution

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Semaphore Implementation with no Busy waiting
• With each semaphore there is an associated waiting queue
• Each entry in a waiting queue has two data items:
• value (of type integer)
• pointer to next record in the list
• Two operations:
• block – place the process invoking the operation on the appropriate waiting queue
• wakeup – remove one of processes in the waiting queue and place it in the ready
queue
• typedef struct{
int value;
struct process *list;
} semaphore;

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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);
}
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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
• Solved via priority-inheritance protocol

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Classical Problems of
Synchronization
• Classical problems used to test newly-proposed synchronization
schemes
• Bounded-Buffer Problem
• Readers and Writers Problem
• Dining-Philosophers Problem

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Bounded Buffer Problem (Cont.)
• The structure of the producer process

do {
...
/* produce an item in next_produced */
...
wait(empty);
wait(mutex);
...
/* add next produced to the buffer */
...
signal(mutex);
signal(full);
} while (true);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Readers-Writers Problem (Cont.)
• The structure of a writer process

do {
wait(rw_mutex);
...
/* writing is performed */
...
signal(rw_mutex);
} while (true);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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);

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Readers-Writers Problem Variations
• First variation – no reader kept waiting unless writer
has permission to use shared object
• Second variation – once writer is ready, it performs the
write ASAP
• Both may have starvation leading to even more
variations
• Problem is solved on some systems by kernel providing
reader-writer locks

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Dining-Philosophers
Problem

• Philosophers spend their lives alternating thinking and eating

• Don’t interact with their neighbors, occasionally try to pick up 2 chopsticks
(one at a time) to eat from bowl
• Need both to eat, then release both when done
• In the case of 5 philosophers
• Shared data
• Bowl of rice (data set)
• Semaphore chopstick [5] initialized to 1

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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?

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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.

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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)

• Deadlock and starvation are possible.

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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 (…) { …. }

procedure Pn (…) {……}

Initialization code (…) { … }

}
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Schematic view of a
Monitor

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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()
• If no x.wait() on the variable, then it has no effect on the variable

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Monitor with Condition Variables

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Condition Variables Choices
• If process P invokes x.signal(), and process Q is suspended in
x.wait(), what should happen next?
• Both Q and P cannot execute in paralel. If Q is resumed, then P must wait
• Options include
• Signal and wait – P waits until Q either leaves the monitor or it waits for
another condition
• Signal and continue – Q waits until P either leaves the monitor or it waits
for another condition
• Both have pros and cons – language implementer can decide
• Monitors implemented in Concurrent Pascal compromise
• P executing signal immediately leaves the monitor, Q is resumed
• Implemented in other languages including Mesa, C#, Java

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Monitor Solution to Dining Philosophers
monitor DiningPhilosophers
{
enum { THINKING; HUNGRY, EATING) state [5] ;
condition self [5];

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);
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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;
}
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Solution to Dining Philosophers (Cont.)

• Each philosopher i invokes the operations pickup() and

putdown() in the following sequence:

DiningPhilosophers.pickup(i);

EAT

DiningPhilosophers.putdown(i);

• No deadlock, but starvation is possible

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Monitor Implementation Using
Semaphores
• Variables

semaphore mutex; // (initially = 1)

semaphore next; // (initially = 0)
int next_count = 0;
• 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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Monitor Implementation – Condition Variables

• 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--;
Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)
Monitor Implementation (Cont.)

• The operation x.signal can be implemented as:

if (x_count > 0) {
next_count++;
signal(x_sem);
wait(next);
next_count--;
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Resuming Processes within a Monitor

• If several processes queued on condition x, and x.signal()

executed, which should be resumed?
• FCFS frequently not adequate
• conditional-wait construct of the form x.wait(c)
• Where c is priority number
• Process with lowest number (highest priority) is scheduled next

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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;

• Where R is an instance of type ResourceAllocator

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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;
}
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Synchronization Examples
• Solaris
• Windows
• Linux
• Pthreads

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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
Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)
Windows Synchronization

• Uses interrupt masks to protect access to global resources

on uniprocessor systems
• Uses spinlocks on multiprocessor systems
• Spinlocking-thread will never be preempted
• Also provides dispatcher objects user-land which may act
mutexes, semaphores, events, and timers
• Events
• An event acts much like a condition variable
• Timers notify one or more thread when time expired
• Dispatcher objects either signaled-state (object available) or non-
signaled state (thread will block)

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

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

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Pthreads Synchronization
• Pthreads API is OS-independent
• It provides:
• mutex locks
• condition variable
• Non-portable extensions include:
• read-write locks
• spinlocks

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

Alternative Approaches
• Transactional Memory

• OpenMP

• Functional Programming Languages

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 Transactional Memory

• A memory transaction is a sequence of read-write

operations to memory that are performed atomically.

void update()
{
/* read/write memory */
}

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 OpenMP

• OpenMP is a set of compiler directives and API that support

parallel progamming.

void update(int value)

{
#pragma omp critical
{
count += value
}
}

The code contained within the #pragma omp critical

directive is treated as a critical section and performed
atomically.

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

 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.

• There is increasing interest in functional languages such as

Erlang and Scala for their approach in handling data races.

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)

End of Chapter 3

Department of Computer Science and Engineering (AI)