DOCSLIB.ORG

C/C++ Thread Safety Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
C/C++ Thread Safety Analysis C/C++ Thread Safety Analysis DeLesley Hutchins Aaron Ballman Dean Sutherland Google Inc. CERT/SEI Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Abstract—Writing multithreaded programs is hard. Static including MacOS, Linux, and Windows. The analysis is analysis tools can help developers by allowing threading policies currently implemented as a compiler warning. It has been to be formally specified and mechanically checked. They essen- deployed on a large scale at Google; all C++ code at Google is tially provide a static type system for threads, and can detect potential race conditions and deadlocks. now compiled with thread safety analysis enabled by default. This paper describes Clang Thread Safety Analysis, a tool II. OVERVIEW OF THE ANALYSIS which uses annotations to declare and enforce thread safety policies in C and C++ programs. Clang is a production-quality Thread safety analysis works very much like a type system C++ compiler which is available on most platforms, and the for multithreaded programs. It is based on theoretical work analysis can be enabled for any build with a simple warning on race-free type systems [3]. In addition to declaring the flag: −Wthread−safety. The analysis is deployed on a large scale at Google, where type of data ( int , float , etc.), the programmer may optionally it has provided sufficient value in practice to drive widespread declare how access to that data is controlled in a multithreaded voluntary adoption. Contrary to popular belief, the need for environment. annotations has not been a liability, and even confers some Clang thread safety analysis uses annotations to declare benefits with respect to software evolution and maintenance. threading policies. The annotations can be written using either I. INTRODUCTION GNU-style attributes (e.g., attribute ((...))) or C++11- Writing multithreaded programs is hard, because developers style attributes (e.g., [[...]] ). For portability, the attributes are must consider the potential interactions between concurrently typically hidden behind macros that are disabled when not executing threads. Experience has shown that developers need compiling with Clang. Examples in this paper assume the use help using concurrency correctly [1]. Many frameworks and of macros; actual attribute names, along with a complete list libraries impose thread-related policies on their clients, but of all attributes, can be found in the Clang documentation [4]. they often lack explicit documentation of those policies. Where Figure 1 demonstrates the basic concepts behind the such policies are clearly documented, that documentation analysis, using the classic bank account example. The frequently takes the form of explanatory prose rather than a GUARDED BY attribute declares that a thread must lock mu checkable specification. before it can read or write to balance, thus ensuring that Static analysis tools can help developers by allowing the increment and decrement operations are atomic. Similarly, threading policies to be formally specified and mechanically REQUIRES declares that the calling thread must lock mu checked. Examples of threading policies are: “the mutex mu before calling withdrawImpl. Because the caller is assumed to should always be locked before reading or writing variable have locked mu, it is safe to modify balance within the body accountBalance” and “the draw() method should only be of the method. invoked from the GUI thread.” In the example, the depositImpl() method lacks a REQUIRES Formal specification of policies provides two main benefits. clause, so the analysis issues a warning. Thread safety analysis First, the compiler can issue warnings on policy violations. is not interprocedural, so caller requirements must be explicitly Finding potential bugs at compile time is much less expensive declared. There is also a warning in transferFrom(), because it in terms of engineer time than debugging failed unit tests, or fails to lock b.mu even though it correctly locks this−>mu. worse, having subtle threading bugs hit production. The analysis understands that these are two separate mutexes Second, specifications serve as a form of machine-checked in two different objects. Finally, there is a warning in the documentation. Such documentation is especially important withdraw() method, because it fails to unlock mu. Every lock for software libraries and APIs, because engineers need to must have a corresponding unlock; the analysis detects both know the threading policy to correctly use them. Although double locks and double unlocks. A function may acquire documentation can be put in comments, our experience shows a lock without releasing it (or vice versa), but it must be that comments quickly “rot” because they are not updated annotated to specify this behavior. when variables are renamed or code is refactored. A. Running the Analysis This paper describes thread safety analysis for Clang. The analysis was originally implemented in GCC [2], but the GCC To run the analysis, first download and install Clang [5]. version is no longer being maintained. Clang is a production- Then, compile with the −Wthread−safety flag: quality C++ compiler, which is available on most platforms, clang −c −Wthread−safety example.cpp #include ” mutex . h ” #include ”ThreadRole.h” class BankAcct f ThreadRole Input Thread ; Mutex mu; ThreadRole GUI Thread ; i n t balance GUARDED BY(mu ) ; class Widget f void depositImpl( i n t amount ) f public : / / WARNING! Must lock mu. virtual void onClick () REQUIRES(Input Thread ) ; balance += amount; virtual void draw ( ) REQUIRES( GUI Thread ) ; g g ; void withdrawImpl( i n t amount ) REQUIRES(mu) f class Button : public Widget f // OK. Caller must have locked mu. public : balance −= amount ; void onClick() override f g depressed = true ; draw ( ) ; / / WARNING! public : g void withdraw ( i n t amount ) f g ; mu. lock ( ) ; Fig. 2. Thread Roles // OK. We’ve locked mu. withdrawImpl(amount); // WARNING! Failed to unlock mu. or token, which the thread must present to perform the read g or write. Capabilities can be either unique or shared. A unique void transferFrom(BankAcct& b, i n t amount ) f mu. lock ( ) ; capability cannot be copied, so only one thread can hold // WARNING! Must lock b.mu. the capability at any one time. A shared capability may b.withdrawImpl(amount); have multiple copies that are shared among multiple threads. // OK. depositImpl() has no requirements. Uniqueness is enforced by a linear type system [9]. depositImpl(amount); The analysis enforces a single-writer/multiple-reader disci- mu.unlock (); g pline. Writing to a guarded location requires a unique capa- g ; bility, and reading from a guarded location requires either a Fig. 1. Thread Safety Annotations unique or a shared capability. In other words, many threads can read from a location at the same time because they can share Note that this example assumes the presence of a suitably the capability, but only one thread can write to it. Moreover, a thread cannot write to a memory location at the same time that annotated mutex.h [4] that declares which methods perform locking and unlocking. another thread is reading from it, because a capability cannot be both shared and unique at the same time. B. Thread Roles This discipline ensures that programs are free of data Thread safety analysis was originally designed to enforce races, where a data race is defined as a situation that occurs locking policies such as the one previously described, but locks when multiple threads attempt to access the same location in are not the only way to ensure safety. Another common pattern memory at the same time, and at least one of the accesses in many systems is to assign different roles to different threads, is a write [10]. Because write operations require a unique such as “worker thread” or “GUI thread” [6]. capability, no other thread can access the memory location The same concepts used for mutexes and locking can also at that time. be used for thread roles, as shown in Figure 2. Here, a A. Background: Uniqueness and Linear Logic widget library has two threads, one to handle user input, like mouse clicks, and one to handle rendering. It also enforces a Linear logic is a formal theory for reasoning about re- constraint: the draw() method should only be invoked only by sources; it can be used to express logical statements like: “You the GUI thread. The analysis will warn if draw() is invoked cannot have your cake and eat it too” [9]. A unique, or linear, directly from onClick(). variable must be used exactly once; it cannot be duplicated The rest of this paper will focus discussion on mutexes in (used multiple times) or forgotten (not used). the interest of brevity, but there are analogous examples for A unique object is produced at one point in the program, thread roles. and then later consumed. Functions that use the object without consuming it must be written using a hand-off protocol. The III. BASIC CONCEPTS caller hands the object to the function, thus relinquishing Clang thread safety analysis is based on a calculus of control of it; the function hands the object back to the caller capabilities [7] [8]. To read or write to a particular location in when it returns. memory, a thread must have the capability, or permission, to For example, if std :: stringstream were a linear type, stream do so. A capability can be thought of as an unforgeable key, programs would be written as follows: std::stringstream ss; // produce ss member itself; rather, the data it points to is protected by the auto& ss2 = ss << ” Hello ” ; // consume ss given capability. auto& ss3 = ss2 << ” World . ” ; // consume ss2 return ss3 . s t r ( ) ; // consume ss3 Mutex mu; i n t ∗p2 PT GUARDED BY(mu ) ; Notice that each stream variable is used exactly once. A linear type system is unaware that ss and ss2 refer to the same void t e s t ( ) f stream; the calls to << conceptually consume one stream and ∗p2 = 42; / / Warning ! p2 = new i n t ; / / OK ( no GUARDED BY) .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lecture 4 Resource Protection and Thread Safety
    Concurrency and Correctness – Resource Protection and TS Lecture 4 Resource Protection and Thread Safety 1 Danilo Piparo – CERN, EP-SFT Concurrency and Correctness – Resource Protection and TS This Lecture The Goals: 1) Understand the problem of contention of resources within a parallel application 2) Become familiar with the design principles and techniques to cope with it 3) Appreciate the advantage of non-blocking techniques The outline: § Threads and data races: synchronisation issues § Useful design principles § Replication, atomics, transactions and locks § Higher level concrete solutions 2 Danilo Piparo – CERN, EP-SFT Concurrency and Correctness – Resource Protection and TS Threads and Data Races: Synchronisation Issues 3 Danilo Piparo – CERN, EP-SFT Concurrency and Correctness – Resource Protection and TS The Problem § Fastest way to share data: access the same memory region § One of the advantages of threads § Parallel memory access: delicate issue - race conditions § I.e. behaviour of the system depends on the sequence of events which are intrinsically asynchronous § Consequences, in order of increasing severity § Catastrophic terminations: segfaults, crashes § Non-reproducible, intermittent bugs § Apparently sane execution but data corruption: e.g. wrong value of a variable or of a result Operative definition: An entity which cannot run w/o issues linked to parallel execution is said to be thread-unsafe (the contrary is thread-safe) 4 Danilo Piparo – CERN, EP-SFT Concurrency and Correctness – Resource Protection and TS To Be Precise: Data Race Standard language rules, §1.10/4 and /21: • Two expression evaluations conflict if one of them modifies a memory location (1.7) and the other one accesses or modifies the same memory location.
    [Show full text]
  • Clojure, Given the Pun on Closure, Representing Anything Specific
    dynamic, functional programming for the JVM “It (the logo) was designed by my brother, Tom Hickey. “It I wanted to involve c (c#), l (lisp) and j (java). I don't think we ever really discussed the colors Once I came up with Clojure, given the pun on closure, representing anything specific. I always vaguely the available domains and vast emptiness of the thought of them as earth and sky.” - Rich Hickey googlespace, it was an easy decision..” - Rich Hickey Mark Volkmann [email protected] Functional Programming (FP) In the spirit of saying OO is is ... encapsulation, inheritance and polymorphism ... • Pure Functions • produce results that only depend on inputs, not any global state • do not have side effects such as Real applications need some changing global state, file I/O or database updates side effects, but they should be clearly identified and isolated. • First Class Functions • can be held in variables • can be passed to and returned from other functions • Higher Order Functions • functions that do one or both of these: • accept other functions as arguments and execute them zero or more times • return another function 2 ... FP is ... Closures • main use is to pass • special functions that retain access to variables a block of code that were in their scope when the closure was created to a function • Partial Application • ability to create new functions from existing ones that take fewer arguments • Currying • transforming a function of n arguments into a chain of n one argument functions • Continuations ability to save execution state and return to it later think browser • back button 3 ..
    [Show full text]
  • Java Concurrency in Practice
    Java Concurrency in practice Chapters: 1,2, 3 & 4 Bjørn Christian Sebak ([email protected]) Karianne Berg ([email protected]) INF329 – Spring 2007 Chapter 1 - Introduction Brief history of concurrency Before OS, a computer executed a single program from start to finnish But running a single program at a time is an inefficient use of computer hardware Therefore all modern OS run multiple programs (in seperate processes) Brief history of concurrency (2) Factors for running multiple processes: Resource utilization: While one program waits for I/O, why not let another program run and avoid wasting CPU cycles? Fairness: Multiple users/programs might have equal claim of the computers resources. Avoid having single large programs „hog“ the machine. Convenience: Often desirable to create smaller programs that perform a single task (and coordinate them), than to have one large program that do ALL the tasks What is a thread? A „lightweight process“ - each process can have many threads Threads allow multiple streams of program flow to coexits in a single process. While a thread share process-wide resources like memory and files with other threads, they all have their own program counter, stack and local variables Benefits of threads 1) Exploiting multiple processors 2) Simplicity of modeling 3) Simplified handling of asynchronous events 4) More responsive user interfaces Benefits of threads (2) Exploiting multiple processors The processor industry is currently focusing on increasing number of cores on a single CPU rather than increasing clock speed. Well-designed programs with multiple threads can execute simultaneously on multiple processors, increasing resource utilization.
    [Show full text]
  • Programming Clojure Second Edition
    Extracted from: Programming Clojure Second Edition This PDF file contains pages extracted from Programming Clojure, published by the Pragmatic Bookshelf. For more information or to purchase a paperback or PDF copy, please visit http://www.pragprog.com. Note: This extract contains some colored text (particularly in code listing). This is available only in online versions of the books. The printed versions are black and white. Pagination might vary between the online and printer versions; the content is otherwise identical. Copyright © 2010 The Pragmatic Programmers, LLC. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior consent of the publisher. The Pragmatic Bookshelf Dallas, Texas • Raleigh, North Carolina Many of the designations used by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks. Where those designations appear in this book, and The Pragmatic Programmers, LLC was aware of a trademark claim, the designations have been printed in initial capital letters or in all capitals. The Pragmatic Starter Kit, The Pragmatic Programmer, Pragmatic Programming, Pragmatic Bookshelf, PragProg and the linking g device are trade- marks of The Pragmatic Programmers, LLC. Every precaution was taken in the preparation of this book. However, the publisher assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions, or for damages that may result from the use of information (including program listings) contained herein. Our Pragmatic courses, workshops, and other products can help you and your team create better software and have more fun.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficient Scalable Thread-Safety-Violation Detection Finding Thousands of Concurrency Bugs During Testing
    Efficient Scalable Thread-Safety-Violation Detection Finding thousands of concurrency bugs during testing Guangpu Li Shan Lu Madanlal Musuvathi University of Chicago University of Chicago Microsoft Research Suman Nath Rohan Padhye Microsoft Research University of California, Berkeley Abstract Keywords thread-safety violation; concurrency bugs; Concurrency bugs are hard to find, reproduce, and debug. debugging; reliability; scalability They often escape rigorous in-house testing, but result in ACM Reference Format: large-scale outages in production. Existing concurrency- Guangpu Li, Shan Lu, Madanlal Musuvathi, Suman Nath, bug detection techniques unfortunately cannot be part and Rohan Padhye. 2019. Efficient Scalable Thread-Safety- of industry’s integrated build and test environment due Violation Detection: Finding thousands of concurrency bugs to some open challenges: how to handle code developed during testing. In ACM SIGOPS 27th Symposium on Oper- by thousands of engineering teams that uses a wide ating Systems Principles (SOSP ’19), October 27–30, 2019, variety of synchronization mechanisms, how to report lit- Huntsville, ON, Canada. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 19 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341301.3359638 tle/no false positives, and how to avoid excessive testing resource consumption. This paper presents TSVD, a thread-safety violation detector that addresses these challenges through a new design point in the domain of active testing. Unlike pre- 1 Introduction vious techniques that inject delays randomly or employ Concurrency bugs are hard to find, reproduce, and debug. expensive synchronization analysis, TSVD uses light- Race conditions can hide in rare thread interleavings weight monitoring of the calling behaviors of thread- that do not occur during testing but nevertheless show unsafe methods, not any synchronization operations, to up in production.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of Concurrency in Rust and C
    A Comparison of Concurrency in Rust and C Josh Pfosi Riley Wood Henry Zhou [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract tion. One rule that Rust enforces is the concept of ownership As computer architects are unable to scale clock frequency due to a to ensure memory safety. When a variable binding is assigned, power wall, parallel architectures have begun to proliferate. With this such as let x = y, the ownership of the data referenced by shift, programmers will need to write increasingly concurrent applica- y is transferred to x. Any subsequent usages of y are invalid. tions to maintain performance gains. Parallel programming is difficult In this way, Rust enforces a one-to-one binding between sym- for programmers and so Rust, a systems programming language, has bols and data. Ownership is also transferred when passing data been developed to statically guarantee memory- and thread-safety and to functions. Data can be borrowed, meaning it is not deallo- catch common concurrency errors. This work draws comparisons be- cated when its binding goes out of scope, but the programmer tween the performance of concurrency features and idioms in Rust, and must make this explicit. Data can be borrowed as mutable or im- the low level and distinctly unsafe implementation of Pthreads in C. We mutable, also specified explicitly, and the compiler makes sure find that while Rust catches common concurrency errors and does not that permissions to borrowed data are not violated by the bor- demonstrate additional threading overhead, it generally executes slower rower.
    [Show full text]
  • Thread Safety Annotations for Clang
    Thread Safety Annotations for Clang DeLesley Hutchins <[email protected]> Google Confidential and Proprietary Outline of Talk ● Why... we need thread annotations. ● What... the annotations are, and what they do. ● How... thread annotations are implemented in clang. ● Huh? (Current challenges and future work). Google Confidential and Proprietary Why... ...we need thread safety annotations Google Confidential and Proprietary The problem with threads... ● Everybody wants to write multi-threaded code. ○ ... multi-core ... Moore's law ... power wall ... etc. ● Threading bugs (i.e. race conditions) are insidious. ● Race conditions are hard to see in source code: ○ Caused by interactions with other threads. ○ Not locally visible when examining code. ○ Not necessarily caught by code review. ● Race conditions are hard to find and eliminate: ○ Bugs are intermittent. ○ Hard to reproduce, especially in debugger. ○ Often don't appear in unit tests. Google Confidential and Proprietary Real World Example: ● Real world example at Google. ● Several man-weeks spent tracking down this bug. // a global shared cache class Cache { public: // find value, and pin within cache Value* lookup(Key *K); // allow value to be reclaimed void release(Key *K); }; Mutex CacheMutex; Cache GlobalCache; Google Confidential and Proprietary Example (Part II): A Helper... // Automatically release key when variable leaves scope class ScopedLookup { public: ScopedLookup(Key* K) : Ky(K), Val(GlobalCache.lookup(K)) { } ~ScopedLookup() { GlobalCache.release(Ky); } Value* getValue() { return Val; } private: Key* Ky; Value* Val; }; Google Confidential and Proprietary Example (Part III): The Bug ● Standard threading pattern: ○ lock, do something, unlock... void bug(Key* K) { CacheMutex.lock(); ScopedLookup lookupVal(K); doSomethingComplicated(lookupVal.getValue()); CacheMutex.unlock(); // OOPS! }; Google Confidential and Proprietary The Fix void bug(Key* K) { CacheMutex.lock(); { ScopedLookup lookupVal(K); doSomethingComplicated(lookupVal.getValue()); // force destructor to be called here..
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Memory and Thread Safety Practices and Issues in Real-World Rust Programs
    Understanding Memory and Thread Safety Practices and Issues in Real-World Rust Programs Boqin Qin∗ Yilun Chen2 Zeming Yu BUPT, Pennsylvania State University Purdue University Pennsylvania State University USA USA USA Linhai Song Yiying Zhang Pennsylvania State University University of California, San Diego USA USA Abstract Keywords: Rust; Memory Bug; Concurrency Bug; Bug Study Rust is a young programming language designed for systems ACM Reference Format: software development. It aims to provide safety guarantees Boqin Qin, Yilun Chen, Zeming Yu, Linhai Song, and Yiying Zhang. like high-level languages and performance efficiency like 2020. Understanding Memory and Thread Safety Practices and low-level languages. The core design of Rust is a set of strict Issues in Real-World Rust Programs. In Proceedings of the 41st safety rules enforced by compile-time checking. To support ACM SIGPLAN International Conference on Programming Language more low-level controls, Rust allows programmers to bypass Design and Implementation (PLDI ’20), June 15ś20, 2020, London, UK. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 17 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/ these compiler checks to write unsafe code. 3385412.3386036 It is important to understand what safety issues exist in real Rust programs and how Rust safety mechanisms impact 1 Introduction programming practices. We performed the first empirical study of Rust by close, manual inspection of 850 unsafe code Rust [30] is a programming language designed to build ef- usages and 170 bugs in five open-source Rust projects, five ficient and safe low-level software [8, 69, 73, 74]. Its main widely-used Rust libraries, two online security databases, and idea is to inherit most features in C and C’s good runtime the Rust standard library.
    [Show full text]
  • Fully Automatic and Precise Detection of Thread Safety Violations
    Fully Automatic and Precise Detection of Thread Safety Violations Michael Pradel and Thomas R. Gross Department of Computer Science ETH Zurich 1 Motivation Thread-safe classes: Building blocks for concurrent programs 2 Motivation Thread-safe classes: Building blocks for concurrent programs 2 Motivation Thread-safe classes: Building blocks for concurrent programs 2 Example from JDK StringBuffer b = new StringBuffer() b.append("abc") Thread 1 Thread 2 b.insert(1, b) b.deleteCharAt(1) 3 Example from JDK StringBuffer b = new StringBuffer() b.append("abc") Thread 1 Thread 2 b.insert(1, b) b.deleteCharAt(1) ! IndexOutOfBoundsException Confirmed as bug: Issue #7100996 3 Example from JDK StringBuffer b = new StringBuffer() b.append("abc") ThreadHow 1 toThread test 2 b.insert(1,thread b) b.deleteCharAt(1) safety? ! IndexOutOfBoundsException Confirmed as bug: Issue #7100996 3 Goal Automatic and precise bug detection Thread Class Tool safety violations 4 Goal Automatic and precise bug detection Tests Thread Class Tool safety violations Formal False specs positives 4 Goal Automatic and precise bug detection Thread Class Tool safety violations 4 Thread-Safe Classes “behaves correctly when accessed from multiple threads ... with no additional synchronization ... (in the) calling code” page 18 5 Thread-Safe Classes “behaves correctly when accessed from multiple threads ... with no additional synchronization ... (in the) calling code” page 18 5 Thread-Safe Classes “behaves correctly when accessed from multiple threads ... with no additional synchronization ... (in the) calling code” page 18 5 Thread-Safe Classes “behaves correctly when accessed from multiple threads ... with no additional synchronization ... (in the) calling code” page 18 “operations ... behave as if they occur in some serial order that is consistent with the order of the method calls made by each of the individual threads” StringBuffer API documentation, JDK 6 5 Thread-Safe Classes “behaves correctly when accessed from multiple threads ..
    [Show full text]
  • Issues in Developing a Thread-Safe MPI Implementation
    Issues in Developing a Thread-Safe MPI Implementation William Gropp and Rajeev Thakur Mathematics and Computer Science Division Argonne National Laboratory Argonne, IL 60439, USA {gropp, thakur}@mcs.anl.gov Abstract. The MPI-2 Standard has carefully specified the interaction between MPI and user-created threads, with the goal of enabling users to write multithreaded programs while also enabling MPI implementations to deliver high performance. In this paper, we describe and analyze what the MPI Standard says about thread safety and what it implies for an im- plementation. We classify the MPI functions based on their thread-safety requirements and discuss several issues to consider when implementing thread safety in MPI. We use the example of generating new context ids (required for creating new communicators) to demonstrate how a sim- ple solution for the single-threaded case cannot be used when there are multiple threads and how a na¨ıve thread-safe algorithm can be expen- sive. We then present an algorithm for generating context ids that works efficiently in both single-threaded and multithreaded cases. 1 Introduction With SMP machines being commonly available and multicore chips becoming the norm, the mixing of the message-passing programming model with multithread- ing on a single multicore chip or SMP node is becoming increasingly important. The MPI-2 Standard has clearly defined the interaction between MPI and user- created threads in an MPI program [5]. This specification was written with the goal of enabling users to write multithreaded MPI programs easily, without un- duly burdening MPI implementations to support more than what a user might need.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Software Construction: Objects, Design, and Concurrency
    Principles of Software Construction: Objects, Design, and Concurrency Concurrency: Safety Christian Kästner Bogdan Vasilescu School of Computer Science 15-214 1 15-214 2 Example: Money-Grab public class BankAccount { private long balance; public BankAccount(long balance) { this.balance = balance; } static void transferFrom(BankAccount source, BankAccount dest, long amount) { source.balance -= amount; dest.balance += amount; } public long balance() { return balance; } } 15-214 3 What would you expect this to print? public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException { BankAccount bugs = new BankAccount(100); BankAccount daffy = new BankAccount(100); Thread bugsThread = new Thread(()-> { for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) transferFrom(daffy, bugs, 100); }); Thread daffyThread = new Thread(()-> { for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) transferFrom(bugs, daffy, 100); }); bugsThread.start(); daffyThread.start(); bugsThread.join(); daffyThread.join(); System.out.println(bugs.balance() + daffy.balance()); } 15-214 4 What went wrong? • Daffy & Bugs threads were stomping each other • Transfers did not happen in sequence • Constituent reads and writes interleaved randomly • Random results ensued 15-214 5 Fix: Synchronized access (visibility) @ThreadSafe public class BankAccount { @GuardedBy(“this”) private long balance; public BankAccount(long balance) { this.balance = balance; } static synchronized void transferFrom(BankAccount source, BankAccount dest, long amount) { source.balance -= amount; dest.balance += amount; } public synchronized
    [Show full text]
  • Modified Skip List in Concurrent Environment Ranjeet Kaur, Dr
    International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 8,August-2014 417 ISSN 2229-5518 Modified Skip List in Concurrent Environment Ranjeet Kaur, Dr. Pushpa Rani Suri, Professor. [email protected] Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra Abstract— Traditional data structures give few considerations to their execution in concurrent environments. It is not sufficient to simply move a traditional data structure into a concurrent environment and expect an improvement in performance by allocating additional resources and processing power. In that direction we present an efficient and practical lock based MSL (modified skip list). MSL is a modified version of basic skip list; we describe methods for performing concurrent access and update using MSL. Experimental result shows that MSL structure is faster than original skip list structure for representation of dictionaries Index Terms—Concurrency, Lock, Linearizability, MSL Skiplist, Thread. —————————— —————————— 1. INTRODUCTION n past decades, with the emergence of multiprocessing sys- tems. There is a steady increase in the number of processors KIP LIST AND MODIFIED SKIP LIST I 2. S available on commercial multiprocessors. This increase in the Skip-lists [1] are an increasingly important data structure for availability of large computing platform has not been met by a storing and retrieving ordered in-memory data. SkipLists have matching improvement in our ability to construct new data received little attention in the parallel computing world, in structure. There is a requirement to shift the way we think and spite of their highly decentralized nature. This structure uses construct data structures. randomization and has a probabilistic time complexity of A data structure in a concurrent environment is access by O(logN) where N is the maximum number of elements in the multiple computing threads (or processes) on a computer.
    [Show full text]