Class 8 CS 170 28 October 2020 On the board ------------ 1. Last time 2. Standard and advice for concurrent programming 3. Practice with concurrent programming --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Last time condition variables monitors 2. Standards [and advice] for concurrent programming A. Standards --see Mike D's "Programming With Threads", linked from lab 3 --You are required to follow this document --You will lose points (potentially many!) on the lab and on the exam if you stray from these standards --Note that in his example in section 4, there needs to be another line: --right before mutex->release(), he should have: assert(invariants hold) --the primitives may seem strange, and the rules may seem arbitrary: why one thing and not another? --there is no absolute answer here --**However**, history has tested the approach that we're using. If you use the recommended primitives and follow their suggested use, you will find it easier to write correct code --For now, just take the recommended approaches as a given, and use them for a while. If you can come up with something better after that, by all means do so! --But please remember three things: a. lots of really smart people have thought really hard about the right abstractions, so a day or two of thinking about a new one or a new use is unlikely to yield an advance over the best practices. b. the consequences of getting code wrong can be atrocious. see for example: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/health/24radiation.html http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/therac.pdf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-25 c. people who tend to be confident about their abilities tend to perform *worse*, so if you are confident you are a Threading and Concurrency Ninja and/or you think you truly understand how these things work, then you may wish to reevaluate..... --Dunning-Kruger effect --http://www.nytimes.com/2000/01/23/weekinreview/january-16-22-i-m-no-doofus-i-m-a-genius.html --Mike Dahlin stands on the desk when proclaiming the standards B. Top-level piece of advice: SAFETY FIRST. --Locking at coarse grain is easiest to get right, so do that (one big lock for each big object or collection of them) --Don't worry about performance at first --In fact, don't even worry about liveness at first --In other words don't view deadlock as a disaster --Key invariant: make sure your program never does the wrong thing C. More detailed advice: design approach [We will use the producer/consumer example in last lecture as a case study.....] --Here's a four-step design approach: 1. Getting started: 1a. Identify units of concurrency. Make each a thread with a go() method or main loop. Write down the actions a thread takes at a high level. 1b. Identify shared chunks of state. Make each shared *thing* an object. Identify the methods on those objects, which should be the high-level actions made *by* threads *on* these objects. Plan to have these objects be monitors. 1c. Write down the high-level main loop of each thread. Advice: stay high level here. Don't worry about synchronization yet. Let the objects do the work for you. Separate threads from objects. The code associated with a thread should not access shared state directly (and so there should be no access to locks/condition variables in the "main" procedure for the thread). Shared state and synchronization should be encapsulated in shared objects. --QUESTION: how does this apply to our producer/consumer example? --separate loops for producer(), consumer(), and synchronization happens inside MyBuffer. Now, for each object: 2. Write down the synchronization constraints on the solution. Identify the type of each constraint: mutual exclusion or scheduling. For scheduling constraints, ask, "when does a thread wait"? --NOTE: usually, the mutual exclusion constraint is satisfied by the fact that we're programming with monitors. --QUESTION: how does this apply to the producer/consumer example? --Only one thread can manipulate the buffer at a time (mutual exclusion constraint) --Producer must wait for consumer to empty slots if all full (scheduling constraint) --Consumer must wait for producer to fill slots if all empty (scheduling constraint) 3. Create a lock or condition variable corresponding to each constraint --QUESTION: how does this apply to the producer/consumer example? --Answer: need a lock and two condition variables. (lock was sort of a given from the fact of a monitor). 4. Write the methods, using locks and condition variables for coordination D. More advice 1. Don't manipulate synchronization variables or shared state variables in the code associated with a thread; do it with the code associated with a shared object. --Threads tend to have "main" loops. These loops tend to access shared objects. *However*, the "thread" piece of it should not include locks or condition variables. Instead, locks and CVs should be encapsulated in the shared objects. --Why? (a) Locks are for synchronizing across multiple threads. Doesn't make sense for one thread to "own" a lock. (b) Encapsulation -- details of synchronization are internal details of a shared object. Caller should not know about these details. "Let the shared objects do the work." --Common confusion: trying to acquire and release locks inside the threads' code (i.e., not following this advice). Bad idea! Synchronization should happen within the shared objects. Mantra: "let the shared objects do the work". --Note: our first example of condition variables doesn't actually follow the advice, but that is in part so you can see all of the parts working together. 2. Different way to state what's above: --You want to decompose your problem into objects, as in object-oriented style of programming. --Thus: (1) Shared object encapsulates code, synchronization variables, and state variables (2) Shared objects are separate from threads 3. Practice with concurrent programming --we guarantee to test concurrent programming in this course --today, we work a different example: --workers interact with a database --motivation: banking, airlines, etc. --readers never modify database --writers read and modify data --using only a single mutex lock would be overly restrictive. Instead, want --many readers at the same time --only one writer at a time --let's follow the concurrency advice ..... 1. Getting started a. what are units of concurrency? [readers/writers] b. what are shared chunks of state? [database] c. what does the main function look like? read() check in -- wait until no writers access DB check out -- wake up waiting writer, if appropriate write() check in -- wait until no readers or writers access DB check out -- wake up waiting readers or writers 2. and 3. Synchronization constraints and objects --reader can access DB when no writers (condition: okToRead) --writer can access DB when no other readers or writers (condition: okToWrite) --only one thread manipulates shared variables at a time. NOTE: **this does not mean only one thread in the DB at a time** (mutex) 4. write the methods --inspiration required: int AR = 0; // # active readers int AW = 0; // # active writers int WR = 0; // # waiting readers int WW = 0; // # waiting writers --see lecture for the code --QUESTION: why not just hold the lock all the way through "Execute req"? (Answer: the whole point was to expose more concurrency, i.e., to move away from exclusive access.) 4. Recap last few lectures --what is concurrency? --strategies for managing it: --provide atomicity --more generally, protect critical sections. how? Mutexes! (and below we will see how mutexes themselves are implemented) --another synchronization primitive: condition variables! conceptually is a queue a bit confusing, but: --a waiter is waiting for something to happen --a signaler expresses that that something has happened --unfortunately for programmability, the waiter has to be prepared to wake up even if nothing happened (or if something happened, but the core condition is no longer true) --both mutexes and condition variables are designed when multiple execution contexts (usually threads) share memory. --a good way to express programs in this environment is with monitors --we covered standards, advice, and practice for programming with monitors