Space- and Time-Efficient Long-Lived Test-And-Set Objects

Aghazadeh, Zahra; Woelfel, Philipp

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14472-6_27

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Applying this to the construction described in the proof of Theorem 2, yields a long-lived TAS object implemented from O(n log n) registers, where the expected step complexity of the test&set() operation is O(log * n) and worst-case step complexity of the reset() operation is O(1). Previously, the best space bound for achieving similar step complexities for test&set() and reset() was O(n 3/2 ) registers, achieved by, again, combining previous results [2,11]. The space lower bound for mutual exclusion [8] implies that any long-lived TAS implementation requires at least n registers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Since B has three registers, after any clean-sweep on B, a subsequent clean-sweep on B requires (at least) two processes to over-write the previous clean-sweep. These over-writers must have signature s, because, otherwise, an over-writer has a signature different from that of A and would signature-lose on B, implying that I already has an associated losing process via (2). If there are two processes with signature s then I can have at most one clean-sweep, and if there are three processes then I can have at most two clean-sweeps.…”

Section: Intuition For Correctness Proofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, at least one of the two or three processes competing on B with signature s cannot return win, and (3) one such process is associated with I. Notice, however, that this process could withhold its last write in order to be assigned to a later interval via (2).…”

Section: Intuition For Correctness Proofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, Aghazadeh and Woelfel [2] gave a general transformation of any (one-shot) TAS object implemented from m b-bit registers into a long-lived one using O(m · n) registers of size max{b, log(n + m)} + O(1) bits. A reset() operation takes only constant time in the worst-case, and the step complexity of a test&set() operation of the longlived object is the same (up to a constant additive term) as the one of the one-shot TAS.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Test-and-Set in Optimal Space

Giakkoupis

Helmi

Highám

et al. 2015

Proceedings of the Forty-Seventh Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The test-and-set object is a fundamental synchronization primitive for shared memory systems. This paper addresses the number of registers (supporting atomic reads and writes) required to implement a one-shot test-and-set object in the standard asynchronous shared memory model with n processes. The best lower bound is log n − 1 [12, 21] for obstruction-free and deadlock-free implementations, and recently a deterministic obstruction-free implementation using O( √ n) registers was presented [11]. This paper closes the gap between these existing upper and lower bounds by presenting a deterministic obstructionfree implementation of a one-shot test-and-set object from Θ(log n) registers of size Θ(log n) bits. Combining our obstruction-free algorithm with techniques from previous research [11,12], we also obtain a randomized wait-free testand-set algorithm from Θ(log n) registers, with expected step-complexity Θ(log * n) against the oblivious adversary. The core tool in our algorithm is the implementation of a deterministic obstruction-free sifter object, using only 6 registers. If k processes access a sifter, then when they have terminated, at least one and at most (2k + 1)/3 processes return "win" and all others return "lose".

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: Intuition For Correctness Proofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Intuition For Correctness Proofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Test-and-Set in Optimal Space

Giakkoupis

Helmi

Highám

et al. 2015

Proceedings of the Forty-Seventh Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reset() operation can only be executed by a process if its preceding operation on the object was a successful test&set(); in that case the reset() operation unconditionally resets the value of the TAS object to 0. Recently, Aghazadeh and Woelfel [3] showed that any TAS object implemented from m ℓ-bit registers can be transformed into a long-lived TAS object, using O(m • n) registers of size max{ℓ, log(n + m)} + O(1) bits. A reset() operation takes only constant time in the worstcase, and the step complexity of a test&set() operation of the long-lived object is the same (up to a constant additive term) as the one of the (one-shot) TAS object.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deterministic and Fast Randomized Test-and-Set in Optimal Space

Giakkoupis,

Helmi,

Higham

et al. 2016

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The test-and-set object is a fundamental synchronization primitive for shared memory systems. A test-and-set object stores a bit, initialized to 0, and supports one operation, test&set(), which sets the bit's value to 1 and returns its previous value. This paper studies the number of atomic registers required to implement a test-and-set object in the standard asynchronous shared memory model with n processes. The best lower bound is log n − 1 for obstruction-free [19] and deadlock-free [30] implementations. Recently a deterministic obstruction-free implementation using O( √ n) registers was presented [17]. This paper closes the gap between these known upper and lower bounds by presenting a deterministic obstruction-free implementation of a test-and-set object from Θ(log n) registers of size Θ(log n) bits.We also provide a technique to transform any deterministic obstruction-free algorithm, in which, from any configuration, any process can finish if it runs for b steps without interference, into a randomized wait-free algorithm for the oblivious adversary, in which the expected step complexity is polynomial in n and b. This transformation allows us to combine our obstructionfree algorithm with the randomized test-and-set algorithm by Giakkoupis and Woelfel [19], to obtain a randomized wait-free test-and-set algorithm from Θ(log n) registers, with expected step-complexity Θ(log * n) against the oblivious adversary.

show abstract

Upper Bounds for Boundless Tagging with Bounded Objects

Aghazadeh

Woelfel

2016

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Space- and Time-Efficient Long-Lived Test-And-Set Objects

Cited by 4 publications

References 22 publications

Test-and-Set in Optimal Space

Test-and-Set in Optimal Space

Deterministic and Fast Randomized Test-and-Set in Optimal Space

Upper Bounds for Boundless Tagging with Bounded Objects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About