Chapter7 MultipleResources

Synchronization Algorithms
and Concurrent Programming

Gadi Taubenfeld
Chapter 7
Multiple resources
The dinning philosophers problem
Version: June 2014

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 1
Gadi Taubenfeld © 2014
Synchronization Algorithms
and Concurrent Programming
ISBN: 0131972596, 1st edition
A note on the use of these ppt slides:

I am making these slides freely available to all (faculty, students, readers).
They are in PowerPoint form so you can add, modify, and delete slides and slide
content to suit your needs. They obviously represent a lot of work on my part.
In return for use, I only ask the following:
q That you mention their source, after all, I would like people to use my book!
q That you note that they are adapted from (or perhaps identical to)
my slides, and note my copyright of this material.
Thanks and enjoy!

Gadi Taubenfeld
All material copyright 2014
Gadi Taubenfeld, All Rights Reserved
To get the most updated version of these slides go to:

http://www.faculty.idc.ac.il/gadi/book.htm
Chapter 7
Multiple Resources
2.1 Deadlocks
2.2 Deadlock Prevention
2.3 Deadlock Avoidance
2.4 The Dining Philosophers
2.5 Hold and Wait Strategy
2.5 Wait and Release Strategy
2.6 Randomized algorithms

Deadlocks
Section 7.1

Deadlocks
A set of processes is deadlocked if each
process in the set is waiting for an event that
only another process in the set can cause.

Multiple resources
How to avoid deadlock?
account A account B
Transferring money between two bank accounts
semaphores A and B, initialized to 1

P0 P1
down(A); down(B)
deadlock
down(B); down(A)

Multiple resources
How to avoid deadlock?
Bridge crossing
q On the bridge traffic only in one direction.

q The resources are the two entrances.

Two Simple Questions
Question: A system has 2 processes and 3

identical resources. Each process needs a No
maximum of 2 resources. Is deadlock possible?
Question: Consider a system with X identical

resources. The system has 15 processes each
needing a maximum of 15 resources. What is the
smallest value for X which makes the system
deadlock-free (without the need to use a
deadlock avoidance algorithm)?
15×14+1 = 211

Question
Question: Two processes, P1 and P2 each need to hold

five records 1,2,3,4 and 5 in a database to complete. If
P1 asks for them in the order 1,2,3,4,5 and P2 asks
them in the same order, deadlock is not possible.
However, if P2 asks for them in the order 5,4,3,2,1
then deadlock is possible. With five resources, there
are 5! or 120 possible combinations each process can
request the resources. Hence there are 5!×5! different
algorithms. What is the exact number of algorithms
(out of 5!×5!) that is guaranteed to be deadlock free?
5!(4!×4!) = (5!×5!)/5

Strategies for dealing with Deadlocks
q Just ignore the problem altogether

m UNIX and Windows take this approach.
q Detection and recovery
m Allow the system to enter a deadlock state and then
recover.
q Avoidance
m By careful resource allocation, ensure that the
system will never enter a deadlock state.
q Prevention
m The programmer should write programs that never
deadlock. This is achieved by negating one of the
four necessary conditions for deadlock to occur
(mentioned in the next slide.)

Deadlock Prevention
Section 7.2

Deadlock Prevention
Attacking one of the following conditions for deadlock
q Mutual exclusion condition

m one process at a time can use the resource.
q Hold and wait condition
m a process can request (and wait for) a resource
while holding another resource.
q No preemption condition
m A resource can be released only voluntarily by
the process holding it.
q Circular wait condition
m must be a cycle involving several processes, each
waiting for a resource held by the next one.

Attacking the mutual Attacking the no
exclusion condition preemption condition
q Some devices (such as q Many resources (such as

printer) can be spooled printer) should not be
m only the printer preempted
daemon uses printer m can not take the
resource, thus
deadlock for printer printer from a process
eliminated that has not finished
q Not all devices can be
printing yet
spooled
è attack is not useful in è attack is not useful in
general general

Attacking the Hold and Wait Condition
Processes may request all the resources they need in advance.
q Problems
m May not know all required resources in advance.
m Inefficient : ties up resources other processes
could be using.
m Starvation is possible.

Two-Phase Locking
(Notice similarity to requesting all resources at once)
q Phase one
mThe process tries to lock all the resources it
currently needs, one at a time
m if needed record is not avaliable, release
and start over
q Phase two: when phase one succeeds,
m performing updates
m releasing locks
“livelock” is possible.

The time-stamping ordering technique
Time stamps:
q Before a process starts locking a unique new
timestamp is associated with that process.
q If a process has been assigned timestamp Ti
and later a new process has assigned
timestamp Tj then Ti <Tj.
q We associate with each resource a
timestamp value, which is the timestamp of
the process that is currently holding that
resource.

The time-stamping ordering technique
Phase one: the process tries to lock all the resources it
currently needs, one at a time.
q If a needed resource is not available and the
timestamp value is smaller than that of the process,
m release all the resources,
m waits until the resource with the smaller
timestamp is released,
m and starts over.
q Otherwise, if the timestamp of the resource is not
smaller,
m waits until the resource is released and locks it.
Phase two: when phase one succeeds,
q performing updates; releasing locks.
Prevents deadlock and starvation.

Attacking the Circular Wait Condition
Impose a total ordering of all resource types, and
require that each process requests resources in
an increasing order of enumeration.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
time
account A account B
Solves transferring money between two bank accounts
Chapter 7 We will see other interesting usage of this observation

Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming
18
Deadlock Avoidance
Section 7.3

Deadlock Avoidance
Safe and Unsafe States
safe
unsafe
time
deadlock
All terminated!
Basic Facts
q If a system is in safe state è no deadlock.
q If a system is in unsafe state è deadlock

now or in the future.
q Deadlock Avoidance è ensure that a system

will never enter an unsafe state.

Example: Prove that the state below is safe
Allocation
Maximum
P1 1 9
P2 4 5
P3 2 8
available : 2

Proof
Allocation
Allocation
Allocation
Allocation
Allocation
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
Maximum
P1 1 9 P1 1 9 P1 1 9 P1 1 9 P1 1 9
P2 4 5 P2 5 5 P2 0 - P2 0 - P2 0 -
P3 2 8 P3 2 8 P3 2 8 P3 8 8 P3 0 -
available : 2 available : 1 available : 6 available : 0 available : 8
P1 9 9 P1 0 --
P2 0 -- P2 0 --
P3 0 -- P3 0 --
available : 0 available : 9
time
Example: safe and unsafe
Allocation
Maximum
P1 1 9
q If process P1 requests one (out of the 2 avaliable),
P2 4 5
resources the Banker will not allocated it.
P3 2 8
available : 2
P1 2 9 unsafe
state
P2 4 5
P3 2 8
available : 1

The Banker’s Algorithm
q When there is a request q A state is safe if there

for an available resource, exists a sequence of all
the banker must decide if processes <P1, P2, …, Pn>
immediate allocation leaves such that for each Pi, the
the system in a safe state. resources that Pi can still
request can be satisfied by
q If the answer is positive,
currently available
the resource is allocated, resources + resources held
by all the Pj, with j < i.
otherwise the request is
temporarily denied.

The Banker’s Algorithm: commensts
q Can handle Multiple instances.

q Each process must a priori claim maximum
use -- a disadvantage.
q When a process requests a resource it may
have to wait.
q When a process gets all its resources it must
return them in a finite amount of time.

The Dinning Philosophers Problem
Section 7.4

Dining Philosophers
q Philosophers
think
m
m take forks
m eat
m put forks
q Eating needs 2
forks
q Pick one fork at a
time
q How to prevent
deadlock

An incorrect solution
( means “waiting for this forks”)
L L
L L

An inefficient solution
using mutual exclusion

Proving deadlock-freedom & starvation-freedom
Impose a total ordering of all forks, and require that
each philosopher requests resources in an increasing order.
1 2
R
L R
6 3
R R
R
5 4
The Hold and Wait Strategy
Section 7.5

The LR Solution
R R
L L

The LR Solution
1 4
R
L L
6 2
R R
L
3 5

Concurrency
How many can eat simultaneously?

At most half can eat simultaneously

Only one third can eat simultaneously
Any algorithm is at most én/3ù-concurrent

In LR only one forth can eat simultaneously
The LR algorithm is at most én/4ù-concurrent

LR
If all want to eat, there is a case where only én/4ù
will be able to eat simultaneously.
( means “waiting for this forks”)
R L
L R
free

Robustness
k-robust: if all except k consecutive

philosophers fail, then one will not
starve.
q Any algorithm is at most
én/3ù-robust.
q The LR algorithm is not 4-robust.
q The LR algorithm is 5-robust iff

n is even.
q There is no 4-robust algorithm
using a hold and wait strategy.

The LLR Solution
R L
L R

LLR
3 2
L
R L
0 1
L R
L
5 6

In LLR one third can eat simultaneously
The LLR algorithm is én/3ù-concurrent
A tight bound

Robustness
k-robust: if all except k consecutive

philosophers fail, then one will not
starve.
q The LLR algorithm is not 4-
robust.
q The LLR algorithm is 5-robust iff
n º 0 mod 3.

The Hold and Release Strategy
Section 7.6

The LR wait/release Algorithm
The LR wait/release algorithm is:

q deadlock-free but not L
starvation-free.
R R
q ën/3û-concurrent.
q 3-robust iff n is even.
L L
q Recall: There is no 4-robust
algorithm using a hold and wait R
strategy.

Randomized Algorithms
Section 7.7

Two Randomized Algorithms
The Free Philosophers algorithm is:
q deadlock-free with probability 1,
but is not starvation-free and is
not 2-concurrent.
q 3-robust with probability 1.
The Courteous Philosophers

algorithm is:
q starvation-free with probability
1, but is not 2-concurrent and is
not (n-1)-robust.


Chapter7 MultipleResources

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter7 MultipleResources

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Synchronization Algorithms

and Concurrent Programming

Version: June 2014

A note on the use of these ppt slides:

Thanks and enjoy!

To get the most updated version of these slides go to:

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 3

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 4

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 5

Transferring money between two bank accounts

semaphores A and B, initialized to 1

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 6

q On the bridge traffic only in one direction.

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 7

Question: A system has 2 processes and 3

Question: Consider a system with X identical

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 8

Question: Two processes, P1 and P2 each need to hold

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 9

q Just ignore the problem altogether

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 10

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 11

q Mutual exclusion condition

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 12

q Some devices (such as q Many resources (such as

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 13

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 14

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 15

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 16

Prevents deadlock and starvation.

Solves transferring money between two bank accounts

Chapter 7 We will see other interesting usage of this observation

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 19

q If a system is in unsafe state è deadlock

q Deadlock Avoidance è ensure that a system

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 21

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 22

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 24

q When there is a request q A state is safe if there

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 25

q Can handle Multiple instances.

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 26

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 27

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 28

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 29

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 30

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 32

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 33

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 34

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 35

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 36

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 37

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 38

( means “waiting for this forks”)

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 39

k-robust: if all except k consecutive

q The LR algorithm is 5-robust iff

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 40

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 41

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 42

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 43

k-robust: if all except k consecutive

Chapter 7 Synchronization Algorithms and Concurrent Programming 44