Chapter 6: Process

Synchronization

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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.

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.2 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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++;
}

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.3 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Consumer

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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.4 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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}

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.5 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.6 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Critical Section

General structure of process Pi

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.7 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Algorithm for Process Pi

do {

while (turn == j);

critical section
turn = j;

remainder section
} while (true);

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.8 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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 – 9th Edition 6.9 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.10 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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!

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.11 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Algorithm for Process Pi

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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.12 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Peterson’s Solution (Cont.)
Provable that the three CS requirements 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.13 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.14 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Solution to Critical-section Problem Using Locks

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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.15 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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”.

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.16 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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);

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.17 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.18 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 acquire() and release()
acquire() {
while (!available)
; /* busy wait */
available = false;
}
release() {
available = true;
}
do {
acquire lock
critical section
release lock
remainder section
} while (true);

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.19 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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++;
}

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.20 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.21 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.22 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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;

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.23 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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);
}
}

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.24 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.25 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Classical Problems of Synchronization

Classical problems used to test newly-proposed synchronization

schemes
1. Bounded-Buffer Problem
2. Readers and Writers Problem
3. Dining-Philosophers Problem

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.26 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 1. 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.27 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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);

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.28 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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);

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.29 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 2. 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.30 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Readers-Writers Problem (Cont.)

The structure of a writer process

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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.31 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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);

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.32 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 3. 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.33 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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?

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.34 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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.

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.35 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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.

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.36 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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 (…) { … }

}
}

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.37 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Schematic view of a Monitor

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.38 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.39 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Monitor with Condition Variables

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.40 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Synchronization Examples

1. Windows
2. Linux
3. Pthreads

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.41 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 1. 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)

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.42 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 2. 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

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.43 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 3. Pthreads Synchronization

Pthreads API is OS-independent

It provides:
mutex locks
condition variable
Non-portable extensions include:
read-write locks
spinlocks

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.44 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Chapter 7: Deadlocks

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 System Model

System consists of resources

Resource types R1, R2, . . ., Rm
CPU cycles, memory space, I/O devices
Each resource type Ri has Wi instances.
Each process utilizes a resource as follows:
request
use
release

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.46 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Deadlock Characterization
Deadlock can arise if four conditions hold simultaneously.

Mutual exclusion: only one process at a time can use a

resource
Hold and wait: a process holding at least one resource is
waiting to acquire additional resources held by other
processes
No preemption: a resource can be released only voluntarily
by the process holding it, after that process has completed
its task
Circular wait: there exists a set {P0, P1, …, Pn} of waiting
processes such that P0 is waiting for a resource that is held
by P1, P1 is waiting for a resource that is held by P2, …, Pn–1
is waiting for a resource that is held by Pn, and Pn is waiting
for a resource that is held by P0.

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.47 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Resource-Allocation Graph
A set of vertices V and a set of edges E.
V is partitioned into two types:
P = {P1, P2, …, Pn}, the set consisting of all the processes
in the system

R = {R1, R2, …, Rm}, the set consisting of all resource

types in the system

request edge – directed edge Pi → Rj

assignment edge – directed edge Rj → Pi

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.48 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Resource-Allocation Graph (Cont.)
Process

Resource Type with 4 instances

Pi requests instance of Rj

Pi
Rj
Pi is holding an instance of Rj

Pi
Rj

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.49 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Examples of Resource Allocation Graph

A Graph With A Deadlock Graph With A Cycle But No Deadlock

Basic Facts:
If graph contains no cycles  no deadlock
If graph contains a cycle 
if only one instance per resource type, then deadlock
if several instances per resource type, possibility of
deadlock

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.50 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Methods for Handling Deadlocks

Ensure that the system will never enter a deadlock

state:
Deadlock prevention
Deadlock avoidence
Allow the system to enter a deadlock state and then
recover
Ignore the problem and pretend that deadlocks never
occur in the system; used by most operating systems,
including UNIX

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.51 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Deadlock Prevention
Restrain the ways request can be made

Mutual Exclusion – not required for sharable resources

(e.g., read-only files); must hold for non-sharable resources
Hold and Wait – must guarantee that whenever a process
requests a resource, it does not hold any other resources
Require process to request and be allocated all its
resources before it begins execution, or allow process
to request resources only when the process has none
allocated to it.
Low resource utilization; starvation possible

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.52 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Deadlock Prevention (Cont.)
No Preemption –
If a process that is holding some resources requests
another resource that cannot be immediately allocated to
it, then all resources currently being held are released
Preempted resources are added to the list of resources
for which the process is waiting
Process will be restarted only when it can regain its old
resources, as well as the new ones that it is requesting
Circular Wait – impose a total ordering of all resource types,
and require that each process requests resources in an
increasing order of enumeration

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.53 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Deadlock Avoidance
Requires that the system has some additional a priori information
available
Simplest and most useful model requires that each process
declare the maximum number of resources of each type
that it may need
The deadlock-avoidance algorithm dynamically examines
the resource-allocation state to ensure that there can never
be a circular-wait condition
Resource-allocation state is defined by the number of
available and allocated resources, and the maximum
demands of the processes

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.54 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Safe State

When a process requests an available resource, system must

decide if immediate allocation leaves the system in a safe state
System is in safe state if there exists a sequence <P1, P2, …, Pn>
of ALL the processes in the systems such that for each Pi, the
resources that Pi can still request can be satisfied by currently
available resources + resources held by all the Pj, with j < I
That is:
If Pi resource needs are not immediately available, then Pi can
wait until all Pj have finished
When Pj is finished, Pi can obtain needed resources, execute,
return allocated resources, and terminate
When Pi terminates, Pi +1 can obtain its needed resources, and
so on

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.55 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Basic Facts

If a system is in safe state  no deadlocks

If a system is in unsafe state  possibility of deadlock

Avoidance  ensure that a system will never enter an unsafe state.

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.56 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Avoidance Algorithms

Single instance of a resource type

Use a resource-allocation graph

Multiple instances of a resource type

Use the banker’s algorithm

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.57 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Resource-Allocation Graph Scheme
Claim edge Pi → Rj indicated that process Pi may request resource Rj;
represented by a dashed line
Claim edge converts to request edge when a process requests a resource
Request edge converted to an assignment edge when the resource is
allocated to the process
When a resource is released by a process, assignment edge reconverts to a
claim edge
Resources must be claimed a priori in the system

Safe State Unsafe State

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.58 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Resource-Allocation Graph Algorithm
Suppose that process Pi requests a resource Rj
The request can be granted only if converting the request edge to an
assignment edge does not result in the formation of a cycle in the resource
allocation graph

Banker’s Algorithm:
Multiple instances
Each process must a priori claim maximum use
When a process requests a resource it may have to wait
When a process gets all its resources it must return them in a
finite amount of time

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.59 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Data Structures for the Banker’s Algorithm

Let n = number of processes, and m = number of resources types.

Available: Vector of length m. If available [j] = k, there are k

instances of resource type Rj available

Max: n x m matrix. If Max [i,j] = k, then process Pi may request at

most k instances of resource type Rj

Allocation: n x m matrix. If Allocation[i,j] = k then Pi is currently

allocated k instances of Rj

Need: n x m matrix. If Need[i,j] = k, then Pi may need k more

instances of Rj to complete its task

Need [i,j] = Max[i,j] – Allocation [i,j]

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.60 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Safety Algorithm
1. Let Work and Finish be vectors of length m and n, respectively.
Initialize:
Work = Available
Finish [i] = false for i = 0, 1, …, n- 1

2. Find an i such that both:

(a) Finish [i] = false
(b) Needi  Work
If no such i exists, go to step 4

3. Work = Work + Allocationi

Finish[i] = true
go to step 2

4. If Finish [i] == true for all i, then the system is in a safe state

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.61 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Resource-Request Algorithm for Process Pi

Requesti = request vector for process Pi. If Requesti [j] = k then

process Pi wants k instances of resource type Rj
1. If Requesti  Needi go to step 2. Otherwise, raise error condition,
since process has exceeded its maximum claim
2. If Requesti  Available, go to step 3. Otherwise Pi must wait,
since resources are not available
3. Pretend to allocate requested resources to Pi by modifying the
state as follows:
Available = Available – Requesti;
Allocationi = Allocationi + Requesti;
Needi = Needi – Requesti;
If safe  the resources are allocated to Pi
If unsafe  Pi must wait, and the old resource-allocation state
is restored

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.62 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Example of Banker’s Algorithm

5 processes P0 through P4;

3 resource types:
A (10 instances), B (5instances), and C (7 instances)
Snapshot at time T0:
Allocation Max Available
ABC ABC ABC
P0 010 753 332
P1 200 322
P2 302 902
P3 211 222
P4 002 433

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.63 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Example (Cont.)
The content of the matrix Need is defined to be Max – Allocation

Need
ABC
P0 743
P1 122
P2 600
P3 011
P4 431

The system is in a safe state since the sequence < P1, P3, P4, P2, P0>
satisfies safety criteria

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.64 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Example: P1 Request (1,0,2)
Check that Request  Available (that is, (1,0,2)  (3,3,2)  true
Allocation Need Available
ABC ABC ABC
P0 010 743 230
P1 302 020
P2 302 600
P3 211 011
P4 002 431

Executing safety algorithm shows that sequence < P1, P3, P4, P0, P2>
satisfies safety requirement

Can request for (3,3,0) by P4 be granted?

Can request for (0,2,0) by P0 be granted?

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.65 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Deadlock Detection

Allow system to enter deadlock state

Detection algorithm

Recovery scheme

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.66 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Single Instance of Each Resource Type

Maintain wait-for graph

Nodes are processes
Pi → Pj if Pi is waiting for Pj

Periodically invoke an algorithm that searches for a cycle in the

graph. If there is a cycle, there exists a deadlock

An algorithm to detect a cycle in a graph requires an order of n2

operations, where n is the number of vertices in the graph

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.67 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Several Instances of a Resource Type
Available: A vector of length m indicates the number of
available resources of each type
Allocation: An n x m matrix defines the number of resources
of each type currently allocated to each process
Request: An n x m matrix indicates the current request of
each process. If Request [i][j] = k, then process Pi is
requesting k more instances of resource type Rj.

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.68 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Detection Algorithm
1. Let Work and Finish be vectors of length m and n, respectively
Initialize:
(a) Work = Available
(b) For i = 1,2, …, n, if Allocationi  0, then
Finish[i] = false; otherwise, Finish[i] = true
2. Find an index i such that both:
(a) Finish[i] == false
(b) Requesti  Work
If no such i exists, go to step 4
3. Work = Work + Allocationi
Finish[i] = true
go to step 2
4. If Finish[i] == false, for some i, 1  i  n, then the system is in
deadlock state. Moreover, if Finish[i] == false, then Pi is deadlocked

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.69 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Example of Detection Algorithm
Five processes P0 through P4; three resource types
A (7 instances), B (2 instances), and C (6 instances)

Snapshot at time T0:

Allocation Request Available
ABC ABC ABC
P0 010 000 000
P1 200 202
P2 303 000
P3 211 100
P4 002 002

Sequence <P0, P2, P3, P1, P4> will result in Finish[i] = true for all i

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.70 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Example (Cont.)

P2 requests an additional instance of type C

Request
ABC
P0 000
P1 202
P2 001
P3 100
P4 002

State of system?
Can reclaim resources held by process P0, but insufficient
resources to fulfill other processes; requests
Deadlock exists, consisting of processes P1, P2, P3, and P4

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.71 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Recovery from Deadlock: Process Termination

Abort all deadlocked processes

Abort one process at a time until the deadlock cycle is eliminated

In which order should we choose to abort?

1. Priority of the process
2. How long process has computed, and how much longer to
completion
3. Resources the process has used
4. Resources process needs to complete
5. How many processes will need to be terminated
6. Is process interactive or batch?

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.72 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013
 Recovery from Deadlock: Resource Preemption

Selecting a victim – minimize cost

Rollback – return to some safe state, restart process for that

state

Starvation – same process may always be picked as victim,

include number of rollback in cost factor

Operating System Concepts – 9th Edition 6.73 Silberschatz, Galvin and Gagne ©2013