Bài giảng Operating system Concepts - Chapter 7: Process Synchronization

Nội dung text: Bài giảng Operating system Concepts - Chapter 7: Process Synchronization

1. Chapter 7: Process Synchronization n Background n The Critical-Section Problem n Synchronization Hardware n Semaphores n Classical Problems of Synchronization n Critical Regions n Monitors n Synchronization in Solaris 2 & Windows 2000 Operating System Concepts 7.1 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
2. Background n Concurrent access to shared data may result in data inconsistency. n Maintaining data consistency requires mechanisms to ensure the orderly execution of cooperating processes. n Shared-memory solution to bounded-butter 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. F 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
3. Bounded-Buffer n 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
4. Bounded-Buffer n Producer process item nextProduced; while (1) { while (counter == BUFFER_SIZE) ; /* do nothing */ buffer[in] = nextProduced; in = (in + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE; counter++; } Operating System Concepts 7.4 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
5. Bounded-Buffer n Consumer process item nextConsumed; while (1) { while (counter == 0) ; /* do nothing */ nextConsumed = buffer[out]; out = (out + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE; counter ; } Operating System Concepts 7.5 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
6. Bounded Buffer n The statements counter++; counter ; must be performed atomically. n Atomic operation means an operation that completes in its entirety without interruption. Operating System Concepts 7.6 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
7. Bounded Buffer n The statement “count++” may be implemented in machine language as: register1 = counter register1 = register1 + 1 counter = register1 n The statement “count—” may be implemented as: register2 = counter register2 = register2 – 1 counter = register2 Operating System Concepts 7.7 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
8. Bounded Buffer n If both the producer and consumer attempt to update the buffer concurrently, the assembly language statements may get interleaved. n Interleaving depends upon how the producer and consumer processes are scheduled. Operating System Concepts 7.8 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
9. Bounded Buffer n 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) n The value of count may be either 4 or 6, where the correct result should be 5. Operating System Concepts 7.9 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
10. Race Condition n 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. n To prevent race conditions, concurrent processes must be synchronized. Operating System Concepts 7.10 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
11. The Critical-Section Problem n n processes all competing to use some shared data n Each process has a code segment, called critical section, in which the shared data is accessed. n 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 7.11 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
12. 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 7.12 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
13. Initial Attempts to Solve Problem n Only 2 processes, P0 and P1 n General structure of process Pi (other process Pj) do { entry section critical section exit section reminder section } while (1); n Processes may share some common variables to synchronize their actions. Operating System Concepts 7.13 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
14. Algorithm 1 n Shared variables: F int turn; initially turn = 0 F turn - i Pi can enter its critical section n Process Pi do { while (turn != i) ; critical section turn = j; reminder section } while (1); n Satisfies mutual exclusion, but not progress Operating System Concepts 7.14 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
15. Algorithm 2 n Shared variables F boolean flag[2]; initially flag [0] = flag [1] = false. F flag [i] = true Pi ready to enter its critical section n Process Pi do { flag[i] := true; while (flag[j]) ; critical section flag [i] = false; remainder section } while (1); n Satisfies mutual exclusion, but not progress requirement. Operating System Concepts 7.15 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
16. Algorithm 3 n Combined shared variables of algorithms 1 and 2. n Process Pi do { flag [i]:= true; turn = j; while (flag [j] and turn = j) ; critical section flag [i] = false; remainder section } while (1); n Meets all three requirements; solves the critical-section problem for two processes. Operating System Concepts 7.16 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
17. Bakery Algorithm Critical section for n processes n Before entering its critical section, process receives a number. Holder of the smallest number enters the critical section. n If processes Pi and Pj receive the same number, if i < j, then Pi is served first; else Pj is served first. n The numbering scheme always generates numbers in increasing order of enumeration; i.e., 1,2,3,3,3,3,4,5 Operating System Concepts 7.17 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
18. Bakery Algorithm n Notation < lexicographical order (ticket #, process id #) F (a,b) < c,d) if a < c or if a = c and b < d F max (a0, , an-1) is a number, k, such that k ai for i - 0, , n – 1 n Shared data boolean choosing[n]; int number[n]; Data structures are initialized to false and 0 respectively Operating System Concepts 7.18 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
19. 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 7.19 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
20. Synchronization Hardware n Test and modify the content of a word atomically . boolean TestAndSet(boolean &target) { boolean rv = target; tqrget = true; return rv; } Operating System Concepts 7.20 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
21. Mutual Exclusion with Test-and-Set n Shared data: boolean lock = false; n Process Pi do { while (TestAndSet(lock)) ; critical section lock = false; remainder section } Operating System Concepts 7.21 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
22. Synchronization Hardware n Atomically swap two variables. void Swap(boolean &a, boolean &b) { boolean temp = a; a = b; b = temp; } Operating System Concepts 7.22 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
23. Mutual Exclusion with Swap n Shared data (initialized to false): boolean lock; boolean waiting[n]; n Process Pi do { key = true; while (key == true) Swap(lock,key); critical section lock = false; remainder section } Operating System Concepts 7.23 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
24. Semaphores n Synchronization tool that does not require busy waiting. n Semaphore S – integer variable n can only be accessed via two indivisible (atomic) operations wait (S): while S 0 do no-op; S ; signal (S): S++; Operating System Concepts 7.24 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
25. Critical Section of n Processes n Shared data: semaphore mutex; //initially mutex = 1 n Process Pi: do { wait(mutex); critical section signal(mutex); remainder section } while (1); Operating System Concepts 7.25 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
26. Semaphore Implementation n Define a semaphore as a record typedef struct { int value; struct process *L; } semaphore; n Assume two simple operations: F block suspends the process that invokes it. F wakeup(P) resumes the execution of a blocked process P. Operating System Concepts 7.26 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
27. Implementation n 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 7.27 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
28. Semaphore as a General Synchronization Tool n Execute B in Pj only after A executed in Pi n Use semaphore flag initialized to 0 n Code: Pi Pj   A wait(flag) signal(flag) B Operating System Concepts 7.28 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
29. Deadlock and Starvation n Deadlock – two or more processes are waiting indefinitely for an event that can be caused by only one of the waiting processes. n 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); n Starvation – indefinite blocking. A process may never be removed from the semaphore queue in which it is suspended. Operating System Concepts 7.29 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
30. Two Types of Semaphores n Counting semaphore – integer value can range over an unrestricted domain. n Binary semaphore – integer value can range only between 0 and 1; can be simpler to implement. n Can implement a counting semaphore S as a binary semaphore. Operating System Concepts 7.30 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
31. Implementing S as a Binary Semaphore n Data structures: binary-semaphore S1, S2; int C: n Initialization: S1 = 1 S2 = 0 C = initial value of semaphore S Operating System Concepts 7.31 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
32. Implementing S n wait operation wait(S1); C ; if (C < 0) { signal(S1); wait(S2); } signal(S1); n signal operation wait(S1); C ++; if (C <= 0) signal(S2); else signal(S1); Operating System Concepts 7.32 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
33. Classical Problems of Synchronization n Bounded-Buffer Problem n Readers and Writers Problem n Dining-Philosophers Problem Operating System Concepts 7.33 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
34. Bounded-Buffer Problem n Shared data semaphore full, empty, mutex; Initially: full = 0, empty = n, mutex = 1 Operating System Concepts 7.34 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
35. Bounded-Buffer Problem Producer Process do { produce an item in nextp wait(empty); wait(mutex); add nextp to buffer signal(mutex); signal(full); } while (1); Operating System Concepts 7.35 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
36. Bounded-Buffer Problem Consumer Process do { wait(full) wait(mutex); remove an item from buffer to nextc signal(mutex); signal(empty); consume the item in nextc } while (1); Operating System Concepts 7.36 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
37. Readers-Writers Problem n Shared data semaphore mutex, wrt; Initially mutex = 1, wrt = 1, readcount = 0 Operating System Concepts 7.37 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
38. Readers-Writers Problem Writer Process wait(wrt); writing is performed signal(wrt); Operating System Concepts 7.38 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
39. Readers-Writers Problem Reader Process wait(mutex); readcount++; if (readcount == 1) wait(rt); signal(mutex); reading is performed wait(mutex); readcount ; if (readcount == 0) signal(wrt); signal(mutex): Operating System Concepts 7.39 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
40. Dining-Philosophers Problem n Shared data semaphore chopstick[5]; Initially all values are 1 Operating System Concepts 7.40 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
41. Dining-Philosophers Problem n Philosopher i: do { wait(chopstick[i]) wait(chopstick[(i+1) % 5]) eat signal(chopstick[i]); signal(chopstick[(i+1) % 5]); think } while (1); Operating System Concepts 7.41 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
42. Critical Regions n High-level synchronization construct n A shared variable v of type T, is declared as: v: shared T n Variable v accessed only inside statement region v when B do S where B is a boolean expression. n While statement S is being executed, no other process can access variable v. Operating System Concepts 7.42 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
43. Critical Regions n Regions referring to the same shared variable exclude each other in time. n 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 7.43 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
44. Example – Bounded Buffer n Shared data: struct buffer { int pool[n]; int count, in, out; } Operating System Concepts 7.44 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
45. Bounded Buffer Producer Process n Producer process inserts nextp into the shared buffer region buffer when( count < n) { pool[in] = nextp; in:= (in+1) % n; count++; } Operating System Concepts 7.45 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
46. Bounded Buffer Consumer Process n 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 7.46 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
47. Implementation region x when B do S n Associate with the shared variable x, the following variables: semaphore mutex, first-delay, second-delay; int first-count, second-count; n Mutually exclusive access to the critical section is provided by mutex. n 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 7.47 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
48. Implementation n Keep track of the number of processes waiting on first- delay and second-delay, with first-count and second- count respectively. n The algorithm assumes a FIFO ordering in the queuing of processes for a semaphore. n For an arbitrary queuing discipline, a more complicated implementation is required. Operating System Concepts 7.48 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
49. Monitors n 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 7.49 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
50. Monitors n To allow a process to wait within the monitor, a condition variable must be declared, as condition x, y; n Condition variable can only be used with the operations wait and signal. F The operation x.wait(); means that the process invoking this operation is suspended until another process invokes x.signal(); F The x.signal operation resumes exactly one suspended process. If no process is suspended, then the signal operation has no effect. Operating System Concepts 7.50 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
51. Schematic View of a Monitor Operating System Concepts 7.51 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
52. Monitor With Condition Variables Operating System Concepts 7.52 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
53. 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; } } Operating System Concepts 7.53 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
54. 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); } Operating System Concepts 7.54 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
55. Dining Philosophers 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 7.55 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
56. Monitor Implementation Using Semaphores n Variables semaphore mutex; // (initially = 1) semaphore next; // (initially = 0) int next-count = 0; n Each external procedure F will be replaced by wait(mutex); body of F; if (next-count > 0) signal(next) else signal(mutex); n Mutual exclusion within a monitor is ensured. Operating System Concepts 7.56 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
57. Monitor Implementation n For each condition variable x, we have: semaphore x-sem; // (initially = 0) int x-count = 0; n 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 7.57 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
58. Monitor Implementation n The operation x.signal can be implemented as: if (x-count > 0) { next-count++; signal(x-sem); wait(next); next-count ; } Operating System Concepts 7.58 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
59. Monitor Implementation n Conditional-wait construct: x.wait(c); F c – integer expression evaluated when the wait operation is executed. F value of c (a priority number) stored with the name of the process that is suspended. F when x.signal is executed, process with smallest associated priority number is resumed next. n Check two conditions to establish correctness of system: F User processes must always make their calls on the monitor in a correct sequence. F 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 7.59 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
60. Solaris 2 Synchronization n Implements a variety of locks to support multitasking, multithreading (including real-time threads), and multiprocessing. n Uses adaptive mutexes for efficiency when protecting data from short code segments. n Uses condition variables and readers-writers locks when longer sections of code need access to data. n Uses turnstiles to order the list of threads waiting to acquire either an adaptive mutex or reader-writer lock. Operating System Concepts 7.60 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002
61. Windows 2000 Synchronization n Uses interrupt masks to protect access to global resources on uniprocessor systems. n Uses spinlocks on multiprocessor systems. n Also provides dispatcher objects which may act as wither mutexes and semaphores. n Dispatcher objects may also provide events. An event acts much like a condition variable. Operating System Concepts 7.61 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne 2002