I got some troubles when I am doing my operating system program homework. And I didn't get it even thought a lot of time.So I do hope some one can help me. Thanks a lot! Here is my code.
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#include <semaphore.h>
#include <time.h>
#include "buffer.h"
// Global variables
buffer_item buffer[BUFFER_SIZE];
pthread_mutex_t mutex;
sem_t full, empty;
int count, in, out;
// Function prototypes
int insert_item(buffer_item item);
int remove_item(buffer_item *item);
void *consumer(void *param);
void *producer(void *param);
int main(int argc, char **argv){
if (argc != 4){
printf("ERROR: Provide exactly three arguments.\n");
exit(1);
}
// Retrieve command line arguments
const long int stime = strtol(argv[1], NULL, 0);
const long int num_producer = strtol(argv[2], NULL, 0);
const long int num_consumer = strtol(argv[3], NULL, 0);
// Initialize
int i;
srand(time(NULL));
pthread_mutex_init(&mutex, NULL);
sem_init(&empty, 0, BUFFER_SIZE); // All of buffer is empty
sem_init(&full, 0, 0);
count = in = out = 0;
// Create the producer and consumer threads
pthread_t producers[num_producer];
pthread_t consumers[num_consumer];
for(i = 0; i < num_producer; i++)
pthread_create(&producers[i], NULL, producer, NULL);
for(i = 0; i < num_consumer; i++)
pthread_create(&consumers[i], NULL, consumer, NULL);
// Sleep before terminating
sleep(stime);
return 0;
}
// Insert item into buffer.
//Returns 0 if successful, -1 indicating error
int insert_item(buffer_item item){
int success;
sem_wait(&empty);
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
// Add item to buffer
if( count != BUFFER_SIZE){
buffer[in] = item;
in = (in + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
count++;
success = 0;
}
else
success = -1;
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
sem_post(&full);
return success;
}
// Remove an object from the buffer, placing it in item.
// Returns 0 if successful, -1 indicating error
int remove_item(buffer_item *item){
int success;
sem_wait(&full);
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
// Remove item from buffer to item
if( count != 0){
*item = buffer[out];
out = (out + 1) % BUFFER_SIZE;
count--;
success = 0;
}
else
success = -1;
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
sem_post(&empty);
return success;
}
void *producer(void *param){
buffer_item item;
while(1){
sleep(rand() % 5 + 1); // Sleep randomly between 1 and 5 seconds
item = rand();
if(insert_item(item))
printf("Error occured\n");
else
printf("Producer produced %d\n", item);
}
}
void *consumer(void *param){
buffer_item item;
while(1){
sleep(rand() % 5 + 1); // Sleep randomly between 1 and 5 seconds
if(remove_item(&item))
printf("Error occured\n");
else
printf("Consumer consumed %d\n", item);
}
}
After I running this code many times. I got results like this.
piltover#ubuntu:~/OS_experiments/os__4$ ./producer-consumer 3 3 3
Producer produced 892960721
Consumer consumed 892960721
piltover#ubuntu:~/OS_experiments/os__4$ ./producer-consumer 3 3 3
Producer produced 475993778
Producer produced 392780203
Producer produced 394885920
piltover#ubuntu:~/OS_experiments/os__4$ ./producer-consumer 3 3 3
Producer produced 1594225387
Producer produced 1294344241
Consumer consumed 1594225387
Consumer consumed 1294344241
piltover#ubuntu:~/OS_experiments/os__4$ ./producer-consumer 3 3 3
Producer produced 114010022
Producer produced 750521244
Producer produced 1956360586
piltover#ubuntu:~/OS_experiments/os__4$ ./producer-consumer 3 3 3
piltover#ubuntu:~/OS_experiments/os__4$ ./producer-consumer 3 3 3
Producer produced 1882393161
Producer produced 242009076
Consumer consumed 1882393161
Consumer consumed 1882393161
piltover#ubuntu:~/OS_experiments/os__4$ ./producer-consumer 3 3 3
Producer produced 395560134
Consumer consumed 395560134
Producer produced 1352548714
Producer produced 1419998606
Consumer consumed 1352548714
Consumer consumed 1419998606
piltover#ubuntu:~/OS_experiments/os__4$
I am confused why the results have totally different amount and sequence. For example, the number of producer and consumer is not same.
Related
I am trying to implement a simple producer/consumer code using pthreads. The only common shared data between producer and consumer thread is the count variable used for counting the number of available elements in the shared array. What is happening is the count updated in one thread is not getting reflected in other. How can I make sure the writes to count in one thread appear in other as well? Am I missing something?
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#define ARRAY_SIZE 100
int array[ARRAY_SIZE];
volatile int count;
int head;
int tail;
pthread_cond_t full = PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER;
pthread_cond_t empty = PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER;
pthread_mutex_t mutex = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
void *producer(void *args)
{
int res = 0;
while (1) {
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
if (count == ARRAY_SIZE) {
printf("\nNo space for new items waiting for consumer to consume");
pthread_cond_wait(&empty, &mutex);
// Sometimes, why is count variable still ARRAY_SIZE.
// How do I make sure writes to 'count' variable in
// consumer thread is visible immediately in producer
// thread?
if (count == ARRAY_SIZE) {
printf("\ncount is still ARRAY_SIZE");
exit(0);
}
}
head %= ARRAY_SIZE;
count++;
array[head] = head;
printf("\nproduced %d/%d", head, count);
head++;
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
pthread_cond_signal(&full);
}
}
void *consumer(void *args)
{
int res = 0;
while (1) {
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
if (count == 0) {
printf("\nNo items available waiting for producer to produce");
pthread_cond_wait(&full, &mutex);
// Sometimes, why is count variable still zero. How do I
// make sure writes to 'count' variable in producer
// thread is visible immediately in consumer thread?
if (count == 0) {
printf("\ncount is still zero");
exit(0);
}
}
tail %= ARRAY_SIZE;
int ele = array[tail];
count--;
printf("\nconsumed %d/%d", tail, count);
tail++;
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
pthread_cond_signal(&empty);
}
}
int main()
{
pthread_t producer_thread;
pthread_t consumer_thread;
int ret = 0;
setbuf(stdout, NULL);
ret = pthread_create(&producer_thread, NULL, producer, NULL);
if (ret != 0) {
printf("\nUnable to create producer thread %d", ret);
goto exit;
}
ret = pthread_create(&consumer_thread, NULL, consumer, NULL);
if (ret != 0) {
printf("\nUnable to create consumer thread %d", ret);
goto exit;
}
pthread_join(producer_thread, NULL);
pthread_join(consumer_thread, NULL);
exit:
return ret;
}
produced 72/99
produced 73/100
No space for new items waiting for consumer to consume
consumed 74/99
consumed 75/98
consumed 76/97
consumed 77/96
produced 74/97
produced 75/98
produced 76/99
produced 77/100
No space for new items waiting for consumer to consume
count is still ARRAY_SIZE <------ incorrect
consumed 21/2
consumed 22/1
consumed 23/0
No items available waiting for producer to produce
produced 24/1
consumed 24/0
No items available waiting for producer to produce
produced 25/1
produced 26/2
produced 27/3
consumed 25/2
consumed 26/1
consumed 27/0
No items available waiting for producer to produce
count is still zero <------ incorrect
Solution that worked after the fix from Zan Lynx
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#define ARRAY_SIZE 100
int array[ARRAY_SIZE];
volatile int count;
int head;
int tail;
pthread_cond_t full = PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER;
pthread_cond_t empty = PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER;
pthread_mutex_t mutex = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
void *producer(void *args)
{
int res = 0;
while (1) {
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
if (count == ARRAY_SIZE) {
printf("\nNo space for new items waiting for consumer to consume");
// Spurious wakeups from the pthread_cond_timedwait() or
// pthread_cond_wait() functions may occur. Since the
// return from pthread_cond_timedwait() or
// pthread_cond_wait() does not imply anything about the
// value of this predicate, the predicate should be
// re-evaluated upon such return.
while (count == ARRAY_SIZE)
pthread_cond_wait(&empty, &mutex);
}
head %= ARRAY_SIZE;
count++;
array[head] = head;
printf("\nproduced %d/%d", head, count);
head++;
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
pthread_cond_signal(&full);
}
return NULL;
}
void *consumer(void *args)
{
int res = 0;
while (1) {
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
if (count == 0) {
printf("\nNo items available waiting for producer to produce");
// Spurious wakeups from the pthread_cond_timedwait() or
// pthread_cond_wait() functions may occur. Since the
// return from pthread_cond_timedwait() or
// pthread_cond_wait() does not imply anything about the
// value of this predicate, the predicate should be
// re-evaluated upon such return.
while (count == 0)
pthread_cond_wait(&full, &mutex);
}
tail %= ARRAY_SIZE;
int ele = array[tail];
count--;
printf("\nconsumed %d/%d", tail, count);
tail++;
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
pthread_cond_signal(&empty);
}
return NULL;
}
int main()
{
pthread_t producer_thread;
pthread_t consumer_thread;
int ret = 0;
setbuf(stdout, NULL);
ret = pthread_create(&producer_thread, NULL, producer, NULL);
if (ret != 0) {
printf("\nUnable to create producer thread %d", ret);
goto exit;
}
ret = pthread_create(&consumer_thread, NULL, consumer, NULL);
if (ret != 0) {
printf("\nUnable to create consumer thread %d", ret);
goto exit;
}
pthread_join(producer_thread, NULL);
pthread_join(consumer_thread, NULL);
exit:
return ret;
}
I believe you missed the fact that condition waits must always check the predicate again after the wait returns. There must be a loop.
The wait may end for all sorts of reasons besides a signal/notify call.
I have a problem with my code. I want to make communication between 2 children process. One of them is a server, which opens a file and sends each letter to the second process. The second process is counting letters and it should make a new file and save results. I have problems with the last step because the first process gonna finish faster than the second, what causes the end of the program. I have no idea how fix it. Looking for some tips :).
Here you got result.
My code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <string.h>
//stale
#define FIFO "my_fifo"
#define SIZE 26
//zmienne globalne
int desk; //deskryptor pliku
int tab[SIZE];
//prototypy funkcji
void parentKillAll();
void server(FILE * file);
void client();
void cleanUp(FILE * file);
int checkEntryData(int argc, char *argv);
void replaceTabWithZero(int * tab);
void countLetters(int * tab, char ch);
void saveResults(int * tab, char *title);
void showTab(int * tab);
int main(int argc, char *argv[]) {
if (!checkEntryData(argc, argv[1]))
return 1;
replaceTabWithZero(tab);
FILE *file = fopen(argv[1], "r");
umask(0);
mkfifo(FIFO, 0666);
if (file) {
if (fork() == 0) {
server(file);
exit(0);
} else if (fork() == 0) {
client();
saveResults(tab, strcat(argv[1], "Result"));
showTab(tab);
exit(0);
} else {
cleanUp(file);
parentKillAll();
}
} else {
perror("Error");
}
return 0;
}
void parentKillAll() {
sleep(1);
kill(0, SIGKILL);
exit(0);
}
void server(FILE * file) {
char ch;
while ((ch = fgetc(file)) != EOF) {
desk = open(FIFO, O_WRONLY);
write(desk, &ch, 1);
}
}
void client() {
char ch;
while (1) {
desk = open(FIFO, O_RDONLY);
read(desk, &ch, 1);
countLetters(tab, ch);
printf("%c", ch);
}
}
void cleanUp(FILE *file) {
wait(0);
fclose(file);
close(desk);
}
int checkEntryData(int argc, char *argv) {
if (argc < 2) {
fprintf(stderr, "Nie poprawna ilosc argumentow\n");
return 0;
}
if (access(argv, F_OK)) {
fprintf(stderr, "Podany plik \'%s\' nie istnieje\n", argv);
return 0;
}
if (access(argv, R_OK)) {
fprintf(stderr, "Brak uprawnien do odczytu pliku \'%s\'\n", argv);
return 0;
}
return 1;
}
void replaceTabWithZero(int * tab) {
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE; i++)
tab[i] = 0;
}
void countLetters(int *tab, char ch) {
int chVal = ch;
if (chVal > 92)
chVal -= 32;
if (chVal > 64 && chVal < 91)
tab[chVal-65] += 1;
}
void saveResults(int *tab, char * title) {
FILE *plik = fopen(title, "w");
if (plik) {
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE; i++)
fprintf(plik, "%c - %d\n", (i+97), tab[i]);
} else {
perror("Error");
}
fclose(plik);
}
void showTab(int * tab) {
for (int i = 0; i < SIZE; i++)
printf("\n%d", tab[i]);
}
The real problem is that the client process can never finish, because it runs an infinite while(1) loop without any exit conditions.
You should rewrite it so that it exits after reading all available data:
void client() {
char ch;
// Open the fifo only once, instead of once per character
desk = open(FIFO, O_RDONLY);
// Loop until there is no more data to read
while(read(desk, &ch, 1) > 0) {
countLetters(tab, ch);
printf("%c", ch);
}
}
This is technically sufficient to make it work, but you should also look into a series of other issues:
You should have two wait(0) calls so that you wait for both processes, and you shouldn't try to kill anything.
The server process should only be opening the fifo once, not once per character.
You should be comparing fgetc output to EOF before forcing the value into a char. Since you do it after, running your program on a ISO-8859-1 terminal will cause it to confuse EOF and the letter ΓΏ
You are using strcat on argv[1], even though you don't know how much space that array has. You should use your own buffer of a known length.
You should check the return value of all your system calls to ensure they succeed. Checking with access and then assuming it'll be fine is not as good since calls can fail for other reasons.
Canonical Unix behavior is to exit with 0 for success, and >= 1 for error.
It's good practice to use a larger buffer (e.g. 65536 bytes instead of 1) when using read/write directly. stdio functions like fgetc already uses a larger buffer behind the scenes.
Using a named pipe obviously works, but since you spawn both processes it would be more natural to use an unnamed one.
I created a simple program that shows the use of mutex lock. Here is the code...
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#define NUM_THREAD 2
pthread_mutex_t mutex;
int call_time;
void *makeCall(void *param)
{
call_time = 10;
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
printf("Hi I'm thread #%u making a call\n", (unsigned int) pthread_self());
do{
printf("%d\n", call_time);
call_time--;
sleep(1);
}
while(call_time > 0);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
return 0;
}
int main()
{
int i;
pthread_t thread[NUM_THREAD];
//init mutex
pthread_mutex_init(&mutex, NULL);
//create thread
for(i = 0; i < NUM_THREAD; i++)
pthread_create(&thread[i], NULL, makeCall, NULL);
//join thread
for(i = 0; i < NUM_THREAD; i++)
pthread_join(thread[i], NULL);
pthread_mutex_destroy(&mutex);
return 0;
}
The output is...
Hi I'm thread #3404384000 making a call
10
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Hi I'm thread #3412776704 making a call
0
However, if I modify the function makeCall and transfer the variable call_time inside the mutex locks...
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
call_time = 10;
/*
*
*
*
*/
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
The program now gives me the correct output where each of the thread counts down from 10 to 0. I don't understand the difference it makes transferring the variable call_time inside the locks. I hope someone can make me understand this behavior of my program. Cheers!
call_time is a shared variable that is accessed from 2 threads and so must be protected. What is happening is that the first thread starts, sets call_time to 10 and prints the first round.Then the second thread starts, resets call_time back to 10 and waits for the mutex. The first thread now comes back and keeps running with call_time reset to 10. After it is done and frees the mutex, the second thread can now run. call_time is now 0 since the first thread left it at 0, and so it just prints the last round.
Try this program, I think it will demonstrate threads better:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#define NUM_THREAD 2
pthread_mutex_t mutex;
int call_time;
void *makeCall(void *param)
{
int temp;
do{
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);
printf("Hi I'm thread #%u making a call\n", (unsigned int) pthread_self());
printf("%d\n", call_time);
temp = call_time--;
pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
//sleep(1); //try with and without this line and see the difference.
}
while(temp > 0);
return 0;
}
int main()
{
int i;
call_time = 100;
pthread_t thread[NUM_THREAD];
//init mutex
pthread_mutex_init(&mutex, NULL);
//create thread
for(i = 0; i < NUM_THREAD; i++)
pthread_create(&thread[i], NULL, makeCall, NULL);
//join thread
for(i = 0; i < NUM_THREAD; i++)
pthread_join(thread[i], NULL);
pthread_mutex_destroy(&mutex);
return 0;
}
I'm implementing a semaphore methods to understand synchronization and thread things.
By using my semaphore, I tried to solve the Dining Philosophers problem.
My plan was making deadlock situation first.
But I found that just only one philosopher eat repeatedly.
And I checked that my semaphore is working quite good by using other synchronization problems. I think there is some problem with grammar.
please let me know what is the problem.
Here is my code.
dinig.c (including main function)
#include "sem.h"
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <unistd.h>
static tsem_t *chopstick[5];
static tsem_t *updating;
static int update_status (int i, int eating)
{
static int status[5] = { 0, };
static int duplicated;
int idx;
int sum;
tsem_wait (updating);
status[i] = eating;
/* Check invalid state. */
duplicated = 0;
sum = 0;
for (idx = 0; idx < 5; idx++)
{
sum += status[idx];
if (status[idx] && status[(idx + 1) % 5])
duplicated++;
}
/* Avoid printing empty table. */
if (sum == 0)
{
tsem_signal (updating);
return 0;
}
for (idx = 0; idx < 5; idx++)
fprintf (stdout, "%3s ", status[idx] ? "EAT" : "...");
/* Stop on invalid state. */
if (sum > 2 || duplicated > 0)
{
fprintf (stdout, "invalid %d (duplicated:%d)!\n", sum, duplicated);
exit (1);
}
else
fprintf (stdout, "\n");
tsem_signal (updating);
return 0;
}
void *thread_func (void *arg)
{
int i = (int) (long) arg;
int k = (i + 1) % 5;
do
{
tsem_wait (chopstick[i]);
tsem_wait (chopstick[k]);
update_status (i, 1);
update_status (i, 0);
tsem_signal (chopstick[i]);
tsem_signal (chopstick[k]);
}
while (1);
return NULL;
}
int main (int argc,
char **argv)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < 5; i++)
chopstick[i] = tsem_new (1);
updating = tsem_new (1);
for (i = 0; i < 5; i++)
{
pthread_t tid;
pthread_create (&tid, NULL, thread_func, (void *) (long) i);
}
/* endless thinking and eating... */
while (1)
usleep (10000000);
return 0;
}
sem.c(including semaphore methods)
#include "sem.h"
.
sem.h(Header for sem.c)
#ifndef __SEM_H__
#define __SEM_H__
#include <pthread.h>
typedef struct test_semaphore tsem_t;
tsem_t *tsem_new (int value);
void tsem_free (tsem_t *sem);
void tsem_wait (tsem_t *sem);
int tsem_try_wait (tsem_t *sem);
void tsem_signal (tsem_t *sem);
#endif /* __SEM_H__ */
compile command
gcc sem.c dining.c -pthread -o dining
One problem is that in tsem_wait() you have the following code sequence outside of a lock:
while(sem->count <= 0)
continue;
There's no guarantee that the program will actually re-read sem->count - the compiler is free to produce machine code that does something like the following:
int temp = sem->count;
while(temp <= 0)
continue;
In fact, this will likely happen in an optimized build.
Try changing your busy wait loop to something like this so the count is checked while holding the lock:
void tsem_wait (tsem_t *sem)
{
pthread_mutex_lock(&(sem->mutexLock));
while (sem->count <= 0) {
pthread_mutex_unlock(&(sem->mutexLock));
usleep(1);
pthread_mutex_lock(&(sem->mutexLock));
}
// sem->mutexLock is still held here...
sem->count--;
pthread_mutex_unlock(&(sem->mutexLock));
}
Strictly speaking, you should do something similar for tsem_try_wait() (which you're not using yet).
Note that you might want to consider using a pthread_cond_t to make waiting on the counter changing more efficient.
Finally, your code to 'get' the chopsticks in thread_func() has the classic Dining Philosopher deadlock problem in the situation where each philosopher simultaneously acquires the 'left' chopstick (chopstick[i]) and ends up waiting forever to get the 'right' chopstick (chopstick[k]) since all the chopsticks are in some philosopher's left hand.
I have a Thread which has to run every millisecond. When no other thread of the program is active, everything is fine. But if more than 3 other threads are running, the Timer-Thread is only called less than 100 times per second (on my test machine).
It seems that the priority settings of the Timer are ignored.
I have tested this with Kernel Versions 3.12 and 3.18.
Test code, which prints some values after 10000 calls of the timer thread (so normally after 10 seconds):
#define NTHREADS 3
#include <sched.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#include <signal.h>
timer_t timer;
unsigned long long val = 0;
pthread_attr_t attrHigh, attrLow;
void TimerTestThread()
{
val++;
if(val >= 10000)
printf("%i ", val);
}
void BusyThread()
{
int a;
while(1)
{
a++;
}
}
int main()
{
pthread_attr_init(&attrHigh);
pthread_attr_setinheritsched(&attrHigh, PTHREAD_EXPLICIT_SCHED);
pthread_attr_setschedpolicy(&attrHigh, SCHED_FIFO);
struct sched_param paramHigh;
paramHigh.sched_priority = 90;
pthread_attr_setschedparam(&attrHigh, ¶mHigh);
pthread_attr_init(&attrLow);
pthread_attr_setinheritsched(&attrLow, PTHREAD_EXPLICIT_SCHED);
pthread_attr_setschedpolicy(&attrLow, SCHED_FIFO);
struct sched_param paramLow;
paramLow.sched_priority = 1;
pthread_attr_setschedparam(&attrLow, ¶mLow);
struct sigevent evp;
evp.sigev_notify = SIGEV_THREAD;
evp.sigev_notify_function = TimerTestThread;
evp.sigev_notify_attributes = &attrHigh;
struct itimerspec value;
value.it_interval.tv_sec = 0; // Interval
value.it_interval.tv_nsec = 1000000;
value.it_value.tv_sec = 0; // Initial Expiration
value.it_value.tv_nsec = 1000000;
int i;
pthread_t threads[NTHREADS];
for(i=0; i<NTHREADS;i++)
{
pthread_create(&(threads[i]), &attrLow, BusyThread, NULL);
}
if(timer_create(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &evp, &timer) != 0)
{
i = 5;
}
if(timer_settime(timer, 0, &value, NULL) != 0)
{
i = 6;
}
while(1);
}
I do not understand why the behavior is like this. Maybe you see something i missed.
EDIT: Corrected a silly source copy error