A mutual exclusion algorithm with optimally bounded bypasses

Alagarsamy, K.

doi:10.1016/j.ipl.2005.05.015

Cited by 7 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When p is competing and process q enters, q can indeed pass p when p executes push and therewith refreshes lwb [ p]. For q to reach CS, however, it seems that all j processes passed by q need to line up in turn [1] up to turn [ j] in such a way that they cannot be passed again by newcoming processes.…”

Section: Bounded Overtakingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A queue based mutual exclusion algorithm

Aravind

Hesselink

2008

Acta Informatica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A new elegant and simple algorithm for mutual exclusion of N processes is proposed. It only requires shared variables in a memory model where shared variables need not be accessed atomically. We prove mutual exclusion by reformulating the algorithm as a transition system (automaton), and applying simulation of automata. The proof has been verified with the higher-order interactive theorem prover PVS. Under an additional atomicity assumption, the algorithm is starvation free, and we conjecture that no competing process is passed by any other process more than once. This conjecture was verified by model checking for systems with at most five processes.

show abstract

Section: Bounded Overtakingmentioning

confidence: 99%

A queue based mutual exclusion algorithm

Aravind

Hesselink

2008

Acta Informatica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Through static code analysis, it is possible to determine the synchronisation algorithm's worst‐case execution time. This is because Alagarsamy's mutual‐exclusion algorithm promises bounded bypasses, limiting their number to n − 1 ,p. 36. This translates directly into the maximum number of times a compiled instruction will be executed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A more direct generalisation of the two-process algorithm is provided by Peterson although he acknowledges that it requires more memory than other solutions and, most importantly, satisfies fewer constraints [10, p. 116]. In particular, his generalised algorithm does not satisfy the constraint of being free from starvation [11], despite some suggestions to the contrary [12, p. 20]. That is, the algorithm cannot guarantee that a process using it will not be perpetually denied resources.…”

Section: Generalisations Of Peterson's Two-process Algorithmmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adapting FreeRTOS for multicores: an experience report

Mistry

Naylor

Woodcock

2013

Softw. Pract. Exper.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYMulticore processors are ubiquitous. Their use in embedded systems is growing rapidly, and given the constraints on uniprocessor clock speeds, their importance in meeting the demands of increasingly processor‐intensive embedded applications cannot be understated. To harness this potential, system designers need to have available to them embedded operating systems with built‐in multicore support for widely available embedded hardware. This paper documents our experience of adapting FreeRTOS, a popular embedded real‐time operating system, to support multiple processors. A working multicore version of FreeRTOS that is able to schedule tasks on multiple processors as well as provide full mutual‐exclusion support for use in concurrent applications is presented. Mutual exclusion is achieved in an almost completely platform‐agnostic manner, preserving one of FreeRTOS's most attractive features: portability. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

“…Surveys can be found in [3,15,16]. In particular, the solutions by Lamport [10] and Peterson [14] have inspired several variations [2,5,9,16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Queue based mutual exclusion with linearly bounded overtaking

Hesselink

Aravind

2011

Science of Computer Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe queue based mutual exclusion protocol establishes mutual exclusion for N > 1 threads by means of not necessarily atomic variables. In order to enter the critical section, a competing thread needs to traverse as many levels as there are currently competing threads. Competing threads can be overtaken by other competing threads. It is proved here, however, that every competing thread is overtaken less than N times, and that the overtaking threads were competing when the first one of them exits.

show abstract

A mutual exclusion algorithm with optimally bounded bypasses

Cited by 7 publications

References 13 publications

A queue based mutual exclusion algorithm

A queue based mutual exclusion algorithm

Adapting FreeRTOS for multicores: an experience report

Queue based mutual exclusion with linearly bounded overtaking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About