MODERN OPERATING SYSTEMS (3rd Ed.

)
ANDREW S. TANENBAUM Modified by S. Pearce

Chapter 2 Processes and Threads 6 Classical IPC Problems

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Overview of Processes and Threads 5

Introduce scheduling algorithms.

Overview of Processes and Threads 5

Introduce scheduling algorithms. Summarize process behavior.

Overview of Processes and Threads 5

Introduce scheduling algorithms. Summarize process behavior. Describe the four principle classes of scheduling in multiprogramming.

Overview of Processes and Threads 5

Introduce scheduling algorithms. Summarize process behavior. Describe the four principle classes of scheduling in multiprogramming. Summarize the goals and trade-offs.

Overview of Processes and Threads 5

Introduce scheduling algorithms. Summarize process behavior. Describe the four principle classes of scheduling in multiprogramming. Summarize the goals and trade-offs. Scheduling in batch and real-time systems.

Overview of Processes and Threads 5

Introduce scheduling algorithms. Summarize process behavior. Describe the four principle classes of scheduling in multiprogramming. Summarize the goals and trade-offs. Scheduling in batch and real-time systems. Gnatt Charts

Summary of Processes and Threads 6

Summarize the classical IPC problems found throughout OS literature.

Summary of Processes and Threads 6

Summarize the classical IPC problems found throughout OS literature. Review the Dining Philosophers Problem.

Summary of Processes and Threads 6

Summarize the classical IPC problems found throughout OS literature. Review the Dining Philosophers Problem. Review the Readers-Writers Problem.

Summary of Processes and Threads 6

Summarize the classical IPC problems found throughout OS literature. Review the Dining Philosophers Problem. Review the Readers-Writers Problem. Mention the Sleeping Barber Problem (Homework problem from slide #55 of Tanenbaum-Pearce 4 PPT)

Summary of Processes and Threads 6

Summarize the classical IPC problems found throughout OS literature. Review the Dining Philosophers Problem. Review the Readers-Writers Problem. Mention the Sleeping Barber Problem (Homework problem from slide #55 of Tanenbaum-Pearce 4 PPT)

NOTE: The Producer-Consumer Problem of Processes and Threads 4 introduced the issues that are fundamental to IPC, and is often regarded as so-called classical.

The Dining Philosophers Problem

It was originally formulated in 1965 by Edsger Dijkstra as a student exam exercise, in terms of computers competing for access to tape drive peripherals.

The Dining Philosophers Problem

It was originally formulated in 1965 by Edsger Dijkstra as a student exam exercise, in terms of computers competing for access to tape drive peripherals. Soon after, Tony Hoare gave the problem its present formulation.

Wikipedia

Dining Philosophers Problem

Figure 2-44. Lunch time in the Philosophy Department.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

SITUATION: Five silent philosophers sitting around a table of spaghetti with one fork place between each pair of adjacent philosophers:

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

SITUATION: Five silent philosophers sitting around a table of spaghetti with one fork place between each pair of adjacent philosophers: RULES: 1. Each philosopher must alternately think and eat.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

SITUATION: Five silent philosophers sitting around a table of spaghetti with one fork place between each pair of adjacent philosophers: RULES: 1. 2. Each philosopher must alternately think and eat. The spaghetti is unlimited.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

SITUATION: Five silent philosophers sitting around a table of spaghetti with one fork place between each pair of adjacent philosophers: RULES: 1. 2. 3. Each philosopher must alternately think and eat. The spaghetti is unlimited. A philosopher can eat only while possessing two adjacent forks simultaneously; one from the RHS and one from the LHS.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

SITUATION: Five silent philosophers sitting around a table of spaghetti with one fork place between each pair of adjacent philosophers: RULES: 1. 2. 3. 4. Each philosopher must alternately think and eat. The spaghetti is unlimited. A philosopher can eat only while possessing two adjacent forks simultaneously; one from the RHS and one from the LHS. A philosopher can only acquire or relinquish forks individually.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The only situation where two forks makes sense.

2 forks should be 2 chopsticks

Dining Philosophers Problem

SITUATION: Five silent philosophers sitting around a table of spaghetti with one fork place between each pair of adjacent philosophers: RULES: 1. 2. 3. 4. Each philosopher must alternately think and eat. The spaghetti is unlimited. A philosopher can eat only while possessing two adjacent forks simultaneously; one from the RHS and one from the LHS. A philosopher can only acquire or relinquish forks individually.

QUESTION: Can each philosophers indefinitely perform the task of thinking without starving according to this simple set of rules?

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Simple-Minded Solution

See Figure 2.45 of Tanenbaum.

Simple-Minded Solution

Think until the left fork is available; when it is, pick it up Think until the right fork is available; when it is, pick it up Eat Put the left fork down Put the right fork down Repeat from the start

See Figure 2.45 of Tanenbaum.

Simple-Minded Solution

Think until the left fork is available; when it is, pick it up Think until the right fork is available; when it is, pick it up Eat Put the left fork down Put the right fork down Repeat from the start

The following possibility exists: Each philosopher holds one LH-chopstick, waiting for the RHchopstick to be relinquished - DEADLOCK.

Dining Philosophers Problem

SITUATION: Five silent philosophers sitting around a table of spaghetti with one fork place between each pair of adjacent philosophers: RULES: 1. 2. 3. 4. Each philosopher must alternately think and eat. The spaghetti is unlimited. A philosopher can eat only while possessing two adjacent forks simultaneously; one from the RHS and one from the LHS. A philosopher can only acquire or relinquish forks individually.

QUESTION: Can each philosophers indefinitely perform the task of thinking without starving according to this simple set of rules? TWO MORE RULES: 5. It is impossible for deadlock to occur.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

SITUATION: Five silent philosophers sitting around a table of spaghetti with one fork place between each pair of adjacent philosophers: RULES: 1. 2. 3. 4. Each philosopher must alternately think and eat. The spaghetti is unlimited. A philosopher can eat only while possessing two adjacent forks simultaneously; one from the RHS and one from the LHS. A philosopher can only acquire or relinquish forks individually.

QUESTION: Can each philosophers indefinitely perform the task of thinking without starving according to this simple set of rules? TWO MORE RULES: 5. It is impossible for deadlock to occur. 6. It is impossible for starvation to occur.
Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

It turns out that any implementation involving limitations on the number of philosophers, a no-hold on chopsticks rule if the other chopstick is not available, or a block/sleep wait for a preset time period for the second chopstick will not be effective.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

Example 1: One semaphore per philosopher ensuring that only one philosopher can pick up a chopstick at any time. This fails if all philosophers put their LH chopstick down simultaneously (context switching occurs after down and so all of them will just sit there indefinitely with a LH chopstick in their hands).
Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

Example 2: Use a single MUTEX semaphore enforcing the rule that only one philosopher can pick up a chopstick at any given time. The result removes starvation, but only one philosopher can eat at a time wasteful.
Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

A good solutions was proposed by Dijkstra (1965) introduce states as well as semaphores: THINKING HUNGRY EATING

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Dining Philosophers Problem

Figure 2-46. A deadlock-free solution for N dining philosophers, utilizing the array, state, to keep track of semaphores such that hungry philosophers can block if needed forks are busy.
Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

Philosophers are now happy and prosperous.

The Readers and Writers Problem

The Dining Philosophers Problem pertains to modeling threads that compete for exclusive access to a common resource.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

The Dining Philosophers Problem pertains to modeling threads that compete for exclusive access to a common resource. The classic model of access to databases is the Readers and Writers Problem.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

Situation: A set of threads share a common memory.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

Situation: A set of threads share a common memory. The set of threads are partitioned into readers and writers readers only read and writers only write.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

Situation: A set of threads share a common memory. The set of threads are partitioned into readers and writers readers only read and writers only write. NOTE: We can, in fact, define a thread that both reads and writes but it must be considered a writer.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

Situation: A set of threads share a common memory. The set of threads are partitioned into readers and writers readers only read and writers only write. NOTE: We can, in fact, define a thread that both reads and writes but it must be considered a writer. There is no problem if two or more readers read from memory simultaneously.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

Situation: A set of threads share a common memory. The set of threads are partitioned into readers and writers readers only read and writers only write. NOTE: We can, in fact, define a thread that both reads and writes but it must be considered a writer. There is no problem if two or more readers read from memory simultaneously. There are indeterminable problems, however, if a writer and a reader or two writers access memory simultaneously.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

Situation: A set of threads share a common memory. The set of threads are partitioned into readers and writers readers only read and writers only write. NOTE: We can, in fact, define a thread that both reads and writes but it must be considered a writer. There is no problem if two or more readers read from memory simultaneously. There are indeterminable problems, however, if a writer and a reader or two writers access memory simultaneously. Conclusion: The writers must have exclusive access to memory.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

General Solution: There are actually several versions of this problem (eg. The First, Second, and Third Readers/Writers Problems).

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

General Solution: There are actually several versions of this problem (eg. The First, Second, and Third Readers/Writers Problems). A data structure (readers-writer lock) solves all of the readers-writers problems.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

The Readers and Writers Problem

Figure 2-47. A solution to the readers and writers problem.

Tanenbaum, Modern Operating Systems 3 e, (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, Inc. All rights reserved. 0-13-6006639

END

PRESENTATION