二进制信号量和互斥量之间有区别吗?或者它们本质上是相同的?
当前回答
修改问题是-互斥量和“二进制”信号量在“Linux”中的区别是什么?
答:以下是它们的区别 i)作用域——互斥锁的作用域在创建它的进程地址空间内,用于线程同步。而信号量可以跨进程空间使用,因此它可以用于进程间同步。
ii)互斥量是轻量级的,比信号量更快。Futex甚至更快。
iii)同一线程可以成功多次获得互斥锁,条件是互斥锁释放次数相同。其他线程试图获取将阻塞。而对于信号量,如果同一个进程试图再次获取它,它会阻塞,因为它只能获得一次。
其他回答
以上几乎所有人都说对了。如果有人还有疑问,让我来澄清一下。
互斥->用于序列化 信号- >同步。
两者的目的是不同的,但是,通过精心的编程,可以实现相同的功能。
标准示例->生产者消费者问题。
initial value of SemaVar=0
Producer Consumer
--- SemaWait()->decrement SemaVar
produce data
---
SemaSignal SemaVar or SemaVar++ --->consumer unblocks as SemVar is 1 now.
希望我能澄清。
http://www.geeksforgeeks.org/archives/9102将详细讨论。
互斥是一种锁机制,用于同步对资源的访问。 信号量是一种信号机制。
如果他/她想使用二进制信号量来代替互斥量,这取决于程序员。
神话:
一些文章说“二进制信号量和互斥量是相同的”或“值为1的信号量是互斥量”,但基本的区别是互斥量只能由获得它的线程释放,而你可以从任何其他线程发出信号量
重点:
一个线程可以获得多个锁(互斥锁)。
只有递归互斥锁才能被锁多次,这里的锁和锁应该是一样的
•如果一个线程已经锁定了一个互斥锁,试图再次锁定互斥锁,它将进入该互斥锁的等待列表,这将导致死锁。
二进制信号量和互斥量相似但不相同。
互斥是昂贵的操作,因为与它相关的保护协议。
互斥的主要目的是实现对资源的原子访问或锁定
在理论层面上,它们在语义上并无不同。您可以使用信号量实现互斥量,反之亦然(参见这里的示例)。在实践中,实现是不同的,它们提供的服务也略有不同。
实际的区别(就围绕它们的系统服务而言)在于互斥锁的实现旨在成为一种更轻量级的同步机制。在oracle语言中,互斥锁被称为锁存器,而信号量被称为等待。
在最低级别,他们使用某种原子测试和设置机制。它读取内存位置的当前值,计算某种条件,并在一条不能中断的指令中写入该位置的值。这意味着您可以获得一个互斥锁,并测试是否有人在您之前拥有它。
典型的互斥量实现有一个进程或线程执行test-and-set指令,并评估是否有其他东西设置了互斥量。这里的关键点是与调度程序没有交互,因此我们不知道(也不关心)谁设置了锁。然后,我们要么放弃我们的时间片,并在任务重新调度时再次尝试它,要么执行自旋锁。自旋锁是这样一种算法:
Count down from 5000:
i. Execute the test-and-set instruction
ii. If the mutex is clear, we have acquired it in the previous instruction
so we can exit the loop
iii. When we get to zero, give up our time slice.
当我们完成执行受保护的代码(称为临界区)时,我们只需将互斥量的值设置为零或其他表示“清除”的值。如果有多个任务试图获取互斥量,那么下一个计划在互斥量释放后的任务将获得对资源的访问权。通常情况下,您可以使用互斥来控制同步资源,在这种资源中,只需要在很短的时间内对其进行独占访问,通常是对共享数据结构进行更新。
A semaphore is a synchronised data structure (typically using a mutex) that has a count and some system call wrappers that interact with the scheduler in a bit more depth than the mutex libraries would. Semaphores are incremented and decremented and used to block tasks until something else is ready. See Producer/Consumer Problem for a simple example of this. Semaphores are initialised to some value - a binary semaphore is just a special case where the semaphore is initialised to 1. Posting to a semaphore has the effect of waking up a waiting process.
一个基本的信号量算法如下所示:
(somewhere in the program startup)
Initialise the semaphore to its start-up value.
Acquiring a semaphore
i. (synchronised) Attempt to decrement the semaphore value
ii. If the value would be less than zero, put the task on the tail of the list of tasks waiting on the semaphore and give up the time slice.
Posting a semaphore
i. (synchronised) Increment the semaphore value
ii. If the value is greater or equal to the amount requested in the post at the front of the queue, take that task off the queue and make it runnable.
iii. Repeat (ii) for all tasks until the posted value is exhausted or there are no more tasks waiting.
在二进制信号量的情况下,两者之间的主要实际区别是围绕实际数据结构的系统服务的性质。
编辑:正如evan正确地指出的那样,自旋锁会降低单个处理器的速度。你只能在多处理器上使用自旋锁,因为在单处理器上,持有互斥锁的进程永远不会在另一个任务运行时重置它。自旋锁只在多处理器架构上有用。
互斥锁
Until recently, the only sleeping lock in the kernel was the semaphore. Most users of semaphores instantiated a semaphore with a count of one and treated them as a mutual exclusion lock—a sleeping version of the spin-lock. Unfortunately, semaphores are rather generic and do not impose any usage constraints. This makes them useful for managing exclusive access in obscure situations, such as complicated dances between the kernel and userspace. But it also means that simpler locking is harder to do, and the lack of enforced rules makes any sort of automated debugging or constraint enforcement impossible. Seeking a simpler sleeping lock, the kernel developers introduced the mutex.Yes, as you are now accustomed to, that is a confusing name. Let’s clarify.The term “mutex” is a generic name to refer to any sleeping lock that enforces mutual exclusion, such as a semaphore with a usage count of one. In recent Linux kernels, the proper noun “mutex” is now also a specific type of sleeping lock that implements mutual exclusion.That is, a mutex is a mutex.
互斥锁的简单性和效率来自于它在信号量要求之外强加给用户的附加约束。信号量是按照Dijkstra的原始设计来实现最基本的行为,而互斥锁则不同,它的用例更严格、更窄: n一次只能有一个任务持有互斥锁。也就是说,互斥锁的使用计数总是1。
Whoever locked a mutex must unlock it. That is, you cannot lock a mutex in one context and then unlock it in another. This means that the mutex isn’t suitable for more complicated synchronizations between kernel and user-space. Most use cases, however, cleanly lock and unlock from the same context. Recursive locks and unlocks are not allowed. That is, you cannot recursively acquire the same mutex, and you cannot unlock an unlocked mutex. A process cannot exit while holding a mutex. A mutex cannot be acquired by an interrupt handler or bottom half, even with mutex_trylock(). A mutex can be managed only via the official API: It must be initialized via the methods described in this section and cannot be copied, hand initialized, or reinitialized.
[1] Linux内核开发,第三版Robert Love
推荐文章
- 为什么pthreads的条件变量函数需要互斥?
- 并发HashSet<T>在。net框架?
- Trap和中断的区别是什么?
- 互斥实例/教程?
- 为什么Linux被称为单片内核?
- 如何检查Python的操作系统?
- 在Swift中,什么相当于Objective-C的“@synchronized”?
- 信号量和监视器——有什么不同?
- 如何使用JavaScript找到操作系统的详细信息?
- 我如何检查操作系统与预处理器指令?
- 如何在没有操作系统的情况下运行程序?
- 线程之间共享哪些资源?
- Windows、Mac OS X和Linux是用什么语言编写的?
- 什么时候应该使用自旋锁而不是互斥锁?
- context . start前台服务()没有调用service . start前台()