Peterson’s Algorithm for Mutual Exclusion | Set 2 (CPU Cycles and Memory Fence)
Problem: Given 2 process i and j, you need to write a program that can guarantee mutual exclusion between the two without any additional hardware support.
We strongly recommend to refer below basic solution discussed in previous article.
Peterson’s Algorithm for Mutual Exclusion | Set 1
We would be resolving 2 issues in the previous algorithm.
Wastage of CPU clock cycles
In layman terms, when a thread was waiting for its turn, it ended in a long while loop which tested the condition millions of times per second thus doing unnecessary computation. There is a better way to wait, and it is known as “yield”.
To understand what it does, we need to dig deep into how the Process scheduler works in Linux. The idea mentioned here is a simplified version of the scheduler, the actual implementation has lots of complications.
Consider the following example,
There are three processes, P1, P2 and P3. Process P3 is such that it has a while loop similar to the one in our code, doing not so useful computation, and it exists from the loop only when P2 finishes its execution. The scheduler puts all of them in a round robin queue. Now, say the clock speed of processor is 1000000/sec, and it allocates 100 clocks to each process in each iteration. Then, first P1 will be run for 100 clocks (0.0001 seconds), then P2(0.0001 seconds) followed by P3(0.0001 seconds), now since there are no more processes, this cycle repeats untill P2 ends and then followed by P3’s execution and eventually its termination.
This is a complete waste of the 100 CPU clock cycles. To avoid this, we mutually give up the CPU time slice, i.e. yield, which essentially ends this time slice and the scheduler picks up the next process to run. Now, we test our condition once, then we give up the CPU. Considering our test takes 25 clock cycles, we save 75% of our computation in a time slice. To put this graphically,
Considering the processor clock speed as 1MHz this is a lot of saving!.
Different distributions provide different function to achieve this functionality. Linux provides sched_yield().
The code in earlier tutorial might have worked on most systems, but is was not 100% correct. The logic was perfect, but most modern CPUs employ performance optimizations that can result in out-of-order execution. This reordering of memory operations (loads and stores) normally goes unnoticed within a single thread of execution, but can cause unpredictable behaviour in concurrent programs.
Consider this example,
In the above example, the compiler considers the 2 statements as independent of each other and thus tries to increase the code efficiency by re-ordering them, which can lead to problems for concurrent programs. To avoid this we place a memory fence to give hint to the compiler about the possible relationship between the statements across the barrier.
So the order of statements,
flag[self] = 1;
turn = 1-self;
while (turn condition check)
has to be exactly the same in order for the lock to work, otherwise it will end up in a deadlock condition.
To ensure this, compilers provide a instruction that prevent ordering of statements across this barrier. In case of gcc, its __sync_synchronize().
So the modified code becomes,
Full Implementation in C:
Thread Entered: 1 Thread Entered: 0 Actual Count: 2000000000 | Expected Count: 2000000000
This article is contributed by Pinkesh Badjatiya . If you like GeeksforGeeks and would like to contribute, you can also write an article using contribute.geeksforgeeks.org or mail your article to firstname.lastname@example.org. See your article appearing on the GeeksforGeeks main page and help other Geeks.
Please write comments if you find anything incorrect, or you want to share more information about the topic discussed above.
Attention reader! Don’t stop learning now. Get hold of all the important CS Theory concepts for SDE interviews with the CS Theory Course at a student-friendly price and become industry ready.