Process Synchronization for operating Systems

CS342 Operating Systems İbrahim Körpeoğlu, Bilkent University
1
Lecture 6
Process Synchronization
(chapter 6)
Dr. İbrahim Körpeoğlu
http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~korpe
Bilkent University
Department of Computer Engineering
CS342 Operating Systems

2
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.

3
Outline
• Background
• The Critical-Section Problem
• Peterson’s Solution
• Synchronization Hardware
• Semaphores
• Classic Problems of Synchronization
• Monitors
• Synchronization Examples from operating systems

4
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

5
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
Concurrent Threads or Processes
Can be a shared memory
variable, a global variable
in a multi-thread program or
a file; or a kernel variable

6
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.
Shared Buffer
Producer Consumer
count
also a shared variable
at most BUFFER_SIZE items

7
Producer and Consumer Code
while (true) {
/* produce an item and
put in nextProduced */
while (count == BUFFER_SIZE)
; // do nothing
buffer [in] = nextProduced;
in = (in + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
count++;
}
while (true) {
while (count == 0)
; // do nothing
nextConsumed = buffer[out];
out = (out + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
count--;
/* consume the item
in nextConsumed */
}
Producer ConSUMER

8
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.

9
Producer Consumer
Producer Consumer
or

10
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

11
register2 = count
register2 = register2 – 1
count = register2
register1 = count
count = register1
Race Condition
Count
register1
register2
5
register1 = count
count = register1
register2 = count
register2 = register2 – 1
count = register2
PRODUCER (count++)
CONSUMER (count--)
5
6
5
6
4
6
4
CPU
Main Memory

12
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}

13
Programs and critical sections
• The part of the program (process) that is accessing and changing
shared data is called its critical section
Change X
Change X
Change Y
Change Y
Change Y
Change X
Process 1 Code Process 2 Code Process 3 Code
Assuming X and Y are shared data.

14
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.

15
Structuring Programs
• The general way to do that is:
do {
critical section
remainder section
} while (TRUE)
The general structure of a program
do {
entry section
critical section
exit section
remainder
} while (TRUE)
Entry section will allow only one process to enter and execute critical section code.

16
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

17
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.

18
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.

19
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.

20
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!

21
Algorithm for Process Pi
do {
flag[i] = TRUE;
turn = j;
while (flag[j] && turn == j);
critical section
flag[i] = FALSE;
remainder section
} while (1)
entry section
exit section

22
Two processes executing concurrently
do {
flag[0] = TRUE;
turn = 1;
while (flag[1] && turn == 1);
critical section
flag[0] = FALSE;
remainder section
} while (1)
do {
flag[1] = TRUE;
turn = 0;
while (flag[0] && turn == 0);
critical section
flag[1] = FALSE;
remainder section
} while (1)
PROCESS 0 PROCESS 1
flag
0 1
turn
Shared Variables

23
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

24
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)

25
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)

26
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.
boolean TestAndSet (boolean *target)
{
boolean rv = *target;
*target = TRUE;
return rv:
}
Definition of TestAndSet Instruction

27
Solution using TestAndSet
• Shared boolean variable lock, initialized to false.
do {
while ( TestAndSet (&lock ))
; // do nothing
// critical section
lock = FALSE;
// remainder section
} while (TRUE);
entry section
Solution:
exit_section

28
In assembly
main:
..
call entry_section;
execute criticial region;
call exit_section;
entry section code
exit section code
entry_section:
TestAndSet REGISTER, LOCK;
CMP REGISTER, #0
JNE entry_section;
RET
exit_section:
move LOCK, #0
RET

29
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.
void Swap (boolean *a, boolean *b)
{
boolean temp = *a;
*a = *b;
*b = temp:
}
Definition of Swap Instruction

30
Solution using Swap
• Shared Boolean variable lock initialized to FALSE; Each process has a local
Boolean variable key
do {
key = TRUE;
while ( key == TRUE)
Swap (&lock, &key );
// critical section
lock = FALSE;
} while (TRUE);
Solution:

31
• 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

32
Bounded-waiting Mutual Exclusion with
TestandSet()
do {
waiting[i] = TRUE;
key = TRUE;
while (waiting[i] && key)
key = TestAndSet(&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;
} while (TRUE);
entry section code
exit section code

33
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

34
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.

35
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.

36
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);
} while (TRUE);

37
usage: mutual exclusion
do {
wait (mutex);
// Critical Section
signal (mutex);
} while (TRUE);
do {
wait (mutex);
// Critical Section
signal (mutex);
} while (TRUE);
Semaphore mutex; // initialized to 1
Kernel
Process 0 Process 1
wait() {…} signal() {…}

38
usage: other synchronization problems
…
S1;
….
…
S2;
….
Assume we definitely want to
have S1 executed before S2.
P0 P1
…
S1;
signal (x);
….
…
wait (x);
S2;
….
P0 P1
semaphore x = 0; // initialized to 0
Solution:

39
Uses of Semaphore: synchronization
do {
// produce item
…
put item into buffer
..
signal (Full_Cells);
} while (TRUE);
do {
wait (Full_Cells);
….
remove item from buffer
..
…
} while (TRUE);
Semaphore Full_Cells = 0; // initialized to 0
Kernel
Producer Consumer
wait() {…} signal() {…}
Buffer is an array of BUF_SIZE Cells (at most BUF_SIZE items can be put)

40
Consumer/Producer is Synchronized
Full_Cells
0
BUF_SIZE
time
Consumer
Sleeps
Producer
Sleeps

41
BUF_SIZE
all items produced (Pt)
all items consumed (Ct)
Pt – Ct <= BUF_SIZE
Pt – Ct >= 0
Ensured by synchronization mechanisms:
times
* Red is always less than Blue
* (Blue – Red) can never be
greater than BUF_SIZE

42
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:
semaphore x = 5; // semaphore to access resource
wait (x);
…
….use one instance
of the resource…
…
signal (x);
Each process has to be
coded in this manner.
one of the processes creates and initializes a semaphore to 5.

43
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;

44
Semaphore Implementation with no Busy waiting
• With each semaphore there is an associated waiting queue.
– The processes waiting for the semaphore are waited here.

45
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;
}
}

46
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.

47
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

48
Classical Problems of Synchronization
• Bounded-Buffer Problem
• Readers and Writers Problem
• Dining-Philosophers Problem

49
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.
full = 4
empty = 6
buffer
prod cons

50
Bounded Buffer Problem
do {
// produce an item in nextp
wait (empty);
wait (mutex);
// add the item to the buffer
signal (mutex);
signal (full);
} while (TRUE);
The structure of the producer process
do {
wait (full);
wait (mutex);
// remove an item from
// buffer to nextc
signal (mutex);
signal (empty);
// consume the item in nextc
} while (TRUE);
The structure of the consumer process

51
• 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
Readers-Writers Problem
Data Set
reader
writer
writer reader
reader
writer
reader

52
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)

53
Readers-Writers Problem (Cont.)
The structure of a reader process
do {
wait (mutex) ;
readcount ++ ;
if (readcount == 1)
wait (wrt) ;
signal (mutex);
// reading is performed
wait (mutex) ;
readcount - - ;
if (readcount == 0)
signal (wrt) ;
signal (mutex) ;
} while (TRUE);
do {
wait (wrt) ;
// writing is performed
signal (wrt) ;
} while (TRUE);
The structure of a writer process

54
Dining-Philosophers Problem
a process
a resource
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.

55
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.

56
Dining-Philosophers Problem (Cont.)
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.
Semaphore chopstick [5] initialized to 1

57
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)

58
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 ( ….) { … }
…
}

59
Schematic view of a Monitor

60
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 ()

61
Monitor with Condition Variables

62
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.

63
Monitor Solution to Dining Philosophers
monitor DP {
enum { THINKING;
HUNGRY, EATING) state [5] ;
condition cond [5];
void pickup (int i) {
state[i] = HUNGRY;
test(i);
if (state[i] != EATING)
cond[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 + 1) % 5] != EATING) &&
(state[i] == HUNGRY)) {
state[i] = EATING ;
cond[i].signal ();
}
}
initialization_code() {
for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++)
state[i] = THINKING;
}
} /* end of monitor */

64
Solution to Dining Philosophers (cont)
• Each philosopher invokes the operations pickup() and putdown() in the
following sequence:
…
DP DiningPhilosophers;
….
while (1)
THINK…
DiningPhilosophters.pickup (i);
EAT /* use resource(s) */
DiningPhilosophers.putdown (i);
THINK…
}
Philosopher i

65
Monitor Solution to Dining Philosophers
Process
i
Process
(i+1) % 5
Process
(i+4) % 5
Test(i)
… …
Test(i+1 %5)
Test(i+4 %5)
state[LEFT] = ? state[RIGHT] = ?
state[i] = ?
#define LEFT (i+4)%5
#define RIGHT (i+1)%5
THINKING?
HUNGRY?
EATING?

66
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.

67
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.

68
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
implemented as:
x-count++;
if (next_count > 0)
signal(next);
else
signal(mutex);
wait(x_sem);
x-count--;
The operation x.signal can be
implemented as:
if (x-count > 0) {
next_count++;
signal(x_sem);
wait(next);
next_count--;
}

69
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.
Resource
….
Processes or Threads
that want to use the resource

70
• 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);
10 20 45 70
Queue of sleeping processes waiting on condition x
X
priority could be the time-duration to use the resource

71
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;
}
}

72
ResourceAllocator RA;
RA.acquire(10);
…
….use resource…
….
RA.release();
RA.acquire(30);
…
….use resource…
….
RA.release();
Process 1 Process 2
RA.acquire(25);
…
….use resource…
….
RA.release();
Process N
…
Each process should use resource between acquire() and release() calls.

73
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.

74
CPU 2
CPU 1
Spin Locks
f1() {…
acquire_spin_lock_(X);
…//critical region….
…touch to SD (shared data);
release_spin_lock(X);
}
f2() {…
acquire_spin_lock_(X);
…//critical region….
…touch to SD (shared data);
release_spin_lock(X); …
}
Process A running in kernel mode
(i.e. executing kernel code shown)
Process B running in kernel mode
(i.e. executing kernel code shown)
SD
X
shared data
lock variable (accessed atomically)
Main
Memory
f1() {…}
f2() {…}
Kernel

75
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.

76
Synchronization Examples
• Solaris
• Windows XP
• Linux
• Pthreads

77
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

78
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

79
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

80
Pthreads Synchronization
• Pthreads API is OS-independent
• It provides:
– mutex locks
– condition variables
• Non-portable extensions include:
– read-write locks
– spin locks

81
End of lecture

Process Synchronization for operating Systems

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Process Synchronization for operating Systems (20)

More from Devid John Magnus (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Process Synchronization for operating Systems