Process Synchronization

Prepared By

Dr. Teena Narang

Chitkara University Institute of Engineering and

Technology,
Chitkara University, Punjab
Content

 Background

 The Critical-
Section Problem
 Peterson’s Solution

 Synchronization
Hardware
 Mutex Locks
 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.
 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++;
}
 Consumer

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

• General structure of process Pi

 Algorithm for Process Pi

do {

while (turn == j);

critical section
turn = j;
remainder section
} while (true);
 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
 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
Classic solution to Critical Section Problem

• Two Process Solution using

It Leads to deadlock and doesn't retain
turn variable (Algo 1)
information about the status of each
• do
process. It remembers only the process
• {
allowed to enter the critical section.
• while ( turn != i);
• CS
• turn = j;
• RS
• }while (1)
Classic solution to Critical Section Problem

Algo 1 Leads to deadlock and doesn't

• Two Process Solution using retain information about the status of

Boolean array each process. It remembers only the

• process allowed to enter the critical

Boolean flag[2];
section.
• flag[i] = true;
Algo 2 leads to no progress because
• while ( flag[j]);
both process enter waiting state for
• CS
indefinite time.
• flag[i] = false;
• RS
• }while (1)
 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!
 Algorithm for Process Pi

do {

flag[i] = true;

turn = j;

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

critical section

flag[i] = false;

remainder section

} while (true);
 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

 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
Solution to Critical-section Problem
Using Locks

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

 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);
 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
 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);
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);
 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
 acquire() and release()

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