Do we really need a mutex in this case?
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Wikipedia's solution for multi Producer-Consumer problem uses both mutexes and semaphores.
mutex buffer_mutex;
semaphore fillCount = 0;
semaphore emptyCount = BUFFER_SIZE;
procedure producer()
while (true)
item = produceItem();
down(emptyCount);
down(buffer_mutex);
putItemIntoBuffer(item);
up(buffer_mutex);
up(fillCount);
procedure consumer()
while (true)
down(fillCount);
down(buffer_mutex);
item = removeItemFromBuffer();
up(buffer_mutex);
up(emptyCount);
consumeItem(item);
The reason given for using a mutex is to enforce mutual exclusion when multiple producers and consumers are in the critical section. My question is, since the goal is to have a single thread in the critical section anyway, why not just use a binary semaphore, which ensures this? That is, can we do away with the mutexes if we use binary semaphores in that example?
linux synchronization mutex semaphore binary-semaphore
asked Nov 9 at 5:12
abjoshi
798
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Wikipedia's solution for multi Producer-Consumer problem uses both mutexes and semaphores.
mutex buffer_mutex;
semaphore fillCount = 0;
semaphore emptyCount = BUFFER_SIZE;
procedure producer()
while (true)
item = produceItem();
down(emptyCount);
down(buffer_mutex);
putItemIntoBuffer(item);
up(buffer_mutex);
up(fillCount);
procedure consumer()
while (true)
down(fillCount);
down(buffer_mutex);
item = removeItemFromBuffer();
up(buffer_mutex);
up(emptyCount);
consumeItem(item);
The reason given for using a mutex is to enforce mutual exclusion when multiple producers and consumers are in the critical section. My question is, since the goal is to have a single thread in the critical section anyway, why not just use a binary semaphore, which ensures this? That is, can we do away with the mutexes if we use binary semaphores in that example?
linux synchronization mutex semaphore binary-semaphore
asked Nov 9 at 5:12
abjoshi
798
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Wikipedia's solution for multi Producer-Consumer problem uses both mutexes and semaphores.
mutex buffer_mutex;
semaphore fillCount = 0;
semaphore emptyCount = BUFFER_SIZE;
procedure producer()
while (true)
item = produceItem();
down(emptyCount);
down(buffer_mutex);
putItemIntoBuffer(item);
up(buffer_mutex);
up(fillCount);
procedure consumer()
while (true)
down(fillCount);
down(buffer_mutex);
item = removeItemFromBuffer();
up(buffer_mutex);
up(emptyCount);
consumeItem(item);
The reason given for using a mutex is to enforce mutual exclusion when multiple producers and consumers are in the critical section. My question is, since the goal is to have a single thread in the critical section anyway, why not just use a binary semaphore, which ensures this? That is, can we do away with the mutexes if we use binary semaphores in that example?
linux synchronization mutex semaphore binary-semaphore
asked Nov 9 at 5:12
abjoshi
798
Wikipedia's solution for multi Producer-Consumer problem uses both mutexes and semaphores.
mutex buffer_mutex;
semaphore fillCount = 0;
semaphore emptyCount = BUFFER_SIZE;
procedure producer()
while (true)
item = produceItem();
down(emptyCount);
down(buffer_mutex);
putItemIntoBuffer(item);
up(buffer_mutex);
up(fillCount);
procedure consumer()
while (true)
down(fillCount);
down(buffer_mutex);
item = removeItemFromBuffer();
up(buffer_mutex);
up(emptyCount);
consumeItem(item);
The reason given for using a mutex is to enforce mutual exclusion when multiple producers and consumers are in the critical section. My question is, since the goal is to have a single thread in the critical section anyway, why not just use a binary semaphore, which ensures this? That is, can we do away with the mutexes if we use binary semaphores in that example?
linux synchronization mutex semaphore binary-semaphore
linux synchronization mutex semaphore binary-semaphore
asked Nov 9 at 5:12
abjoshi
798
asked Nov 9 at 5:12
abjoshi
798
asked Nov 9 at 5:12
abjoshi
798
asked Nov 9 at 5:12
abjoshi
798
asked Nov 9 at 5:12
abjoshi
798
798
add a comment |
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53220210%2fdo-we-really-need-a-mutex-in-this-case%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
