Contents | Prev | Next | Index | The JavaTM Virtual Machine Specification |
CHAPTER 8
This chapter details the low-level actions that may be used to explain the interaction of Java Virtual Machine threads with a shared main memory. It has been reprinted with minimal changes from The Java Language Specification, by James Gosling, Bill Joy, and Guy Steele.
Every thread has a working memory in which it keeps its own working copy of variables that it must use or assign. As the thread executes a Java program, it operates on these working copies. The main memory contains the master copy of every variable. There are rules about when a thread is permitted or required to transfer the contents of its working copy of a variable into the master copy or vice versa.
The main memory also contains locks; there is one lock associated with each object. Threads may compete to acquire a lock.
For the purposes of this chapter, the verbs use, assign, load, store, lock, and unlock name actions that a thread can perform. The verbs read, write, lock, and unlock name actions that the main memory subsystem can perform. Each of these operations is atomic (indivisible).
A use or assign operation is a tightly coupled interaction between a thread's execution engine and the thread's working memory. A lock or unlock operation is a tightly coupled interaction between a thread's execution engine and the main memory. But the transfer of data between the main memory and a thread's working memory is loosely coupled. When data is copied from the main memory to a working memory, two actions must occur: a read operation performed by the main memory, followed some time later by a corresponding load operation performed by the working memory. When data is copied from a working memory to the main memory, two actions must occur: a store operation performed by the working memory, followed some time later by a corresponding write operation performed by the main memory. There may be some transit time between main memory and a working memory, and the transit time may be different for each transaction; thus, operations initiated by a thread on different variables may viewed by another thread as occurring in a different order. For each variable, however, the operations in main memory on behalf of any one thread are performed in the same order as the corresponding operations by that thread. (This is explained in greater detail later.)
A single Java thread issues a stream of use, assign, lock, and unlock operations as dictated by the semantics of the Java program it is executing. The underlying Java implementation is then required additionally to perform appropriate load, store, read, and write operations so as to obey a certain set of constraints, explained later. If the Java implementation correctly follows these rules and the Java application programmer follows certain other rules of programming, then data can be reliably transferred between threads through shared variables. The rules are designed to be "tight" enough to make this possible, but "loose" enough to allow hardware and software designers considerable freedom to improve speed and throughput through such mechanisms as registers, queues, and caches.
Here are the detailed definitions of each of the operations:
Threads do not interact directly; they communicate only through the shared main memory. The relationships between the actions of a thread and the actions of main memory are constrained in three ways:
In the rules that follow, the phrasing "B must intervene between A and C" means that action B must follow action A and precede action C.
+
operator requires that a single use operation occur on V; an occurrence of V as the left-hand operand of the assignment operator =
requires that a single assign operation occur. All use and assign actions by a given thread must occur in the order specified by the program being executed by the thread. If the following rules forbid T to perform a required use as its next action, it may be necessary for T to perform a load first in order to make progress.
There are also certain constraints on the read and write operations performed by main memory:
volatile
variables (§8.7).
double
or long
variable is not declared volatile
, then for the purposes of
load, store, read, and write operations it is treated as if it were two variables of
32 bits each: wherever the rules require one of these operations, two such operations are performed, one for each 32-bit half. The manner in which the 64 bits of
a double
or long
variable are encoded into two 32-bit quantities and the order
of the operations on the halves of the variables are not defined by The Java Language Specification.
This matters only because a read or write of a double
or long
variable may be handled by an actual main memory as two 32-bit read or write operations that may be separated in time, with other operations coming between them. Consequently, if two threads concurrently assign distinct values to the same shared non-volatile
double
or long
variable, a subsequent use of that variable may obtain a value that is not equal to either of the assigned values, but some implementation-dependent mixture of the two values.
An implementation is free to implement load, store, read, and write operations for double
and long
values as atomic 64-bit operations; in fact, this is strongly encouraged. The model divides them into 32-bit halves for the sake of several currently popular microprocessors that fail to provide efficient atomic memory transactions on 64-bit quantities. It would have been simpler for Java to define all memory transactions on single variables as atomic; this more complex definition is a pragmatic concession to current hardware practice. In the future this concession may be eliminated. Meanwhile, programmers are cautioned always to explicitly synchronize access to shared double
and long
variables.
volatile
, then the rules in the previous sections are
relaxed slightly to allow store operations to occur earlier than would otherwise be
permitted. The purpose of this relaxation is to allow optimizing Java compilers to
perform certain kinds of code rearrangement that preserve the semantics of properly synchronized programs, but might be caught in the act of performing memory
operations out of order by programs that are not properly synchronized.
Suppose that a store by T of V would follow a particular assign by T of V according to the rules of the previous sections, with no intervening load or assign by T of V. Then that store operation would send to the main memory the value that the assign operation put into the working memory of thread T. The special rule allows the store operation actually to occur before the assign operation instead, if the following restrictions are obeyed:
synchronized
methods are a convenient way to follow this convention. In other applications, it may suffice to use a single lock to synchronize
access to a large collection of objects.
If a thread uses a particular shared variable only after locking a particular lock and before the corresponding unlocking of that same lock, then the thread will read the shared value of that variable from main memory after the lock operation, if necessary, and will copy back to main memory the value most recently assigned to that variable before the unlock operation. This, in conjunction with the mutual exclusion rules for locks, suffices to guarantee that values are correctly transmitted from one thread to another through shared variables.
The rules for volatile variables effectively require that main memory be touched exactly once for each use or assign of a volatile variable by a thread, and that main memory be touched in exactly the order dictated by the thread execution semantics. However, such memory operations are not ordered with respect to read and write operations on nonvolatile variables.
a
and b
and methods hither
and yon
:
class Sample {
int a = 1, b = 2; void hither() { a = b; } void yon() b = a; } }Now suppose that two threads are created, and that one thread calls
hither
while
the other thread calls yon
. What is the required set of actions and what are the
ordering constraints?
Let us consider the thread that calls hither
. According to the rules, this thread must perform a use of b
followed by an assign of a
. That is the bare minimum required to execute a call to the method hither
.
Now, the first operation on variable b
by the thread cannot be use. But it may be assign or load. An assign to b
cannot occur because the program text does not call for such an assign operation, so a load of b
is required. This load operation by the thread in turn requires a preceding read operation for b
by the main memory.
The thread may optionally store the value of a
after the assign has occurred. If it does, then the store operation in turn requires a following write operation for a
by the main memory.
The situation for the thread that calls yon
is similar, but with the roles of a
and b
exchanged.
The total set of operations may be pictured as follows:
Here an arrow from action A to action B indicates that A must precede B.
In what order may the operations by the main memory occur? The only constraint is that it is not possible both for the write of a
to precede the read of a
and for the write of b
to precede the read of b
, because the causality arrows in the diagram would form a loop so that an action would have to precede itself, which is not allowed. Assuming that the optional store and write operations are to occur, there are three possible orderings in which the main memory might legitimately perform its operations. Let ha
and hb
be the working copies of a
and b
for the hither
thread, let ya
and yb
be the working copies for the yon
thread, and let ma
and mb
be the master copies in main memory. Initially ma=1
and mb=2
. Then the three possible orderings of operations and the resulting states are as follows:
a
read a
, read b
write b
(then ha=2
, hb=2
, ma=2
, mb=2
, ya=2
, yb=2
)
a
write a
, write b
read b
(then ha=1
, hb=1
, ma=1
, mb=1
, ya=1
, yb=1
)
a
write a
, read b
write b
(then ha=2
, hb=2
, ma=2
, mb=1
, ya=1
, yb=1
)
b
is copied into a
, a
is copied
into b
, or the values of a
and b
are swapped; moreover, the working copies of the
variables might or might not agree. It would be incorrect, of course, to assume that
any one of these outcomes is more likely than another. This is one place in which
the behavior of a Java program is necessarily timing-dependent.
Of course, an implementation might also choose not to perform the store and write operations, or only one of the two pairs, leading to yet other possible results.
Now suppose that we modify the example to use synchronized
methods:
class SynchSample {
int a = 1, b = 2; synchronized void hither() { a = b; } synchronized void yon() b = a; } }Let us again consider the thread that calls
hither
. According to the rules, this
thread must perform a lock operation (on the Class
object for class SynchSample
)
before the body of method hither
is executed. This is followed by a use of b
and
then an assign of a
. Finally, an unlock operation on the Class
object must be performed after the body of method hither
completes. That is the bare minimum
required to execute a call to the method hither
.
As before, a load of b
is required, which in turn requires a preceding read operation for b
by the main memory. Because the load follows the lock operation, the corresponding read must also follow the lock operation.
Because an unlock operation follows the assign of a
, a store operation on a
is mandatory, which in turn requires a following write operation for a
by the main memory. The write must precede the unlock operation.
The situation for the thread that calls yon
is similar, but with the roles of a
and b
exchanged.
The total set of operations may be pictured as follows:
The lock and unlock operations provide further constraints on the order of operations by the main memory; the lock operation by one thread cannot occur between the lock and unlock operations of the other thread. Moreover, the unlock operations require that the store and write operations occur. It follows that only two sequences are possible:
a
read a
, read b
write b
(then ha=2
, hb=2
, ma=2
, mb=2
, ya=2
, yb=2
)
a
write a
, write b
read b
(then ha=1
, hb=1
, ma=1
, mb=1
, ya=1
, yb=1
)
a
and b
.
a
and b
and methods to
and fro
:
class Simple {
int a = 1, b = 2; void to() { a = 3; b = 4; } void fro() System.out.println("a= " + a + ", b=" + b); } }Now suppose that two threads are created, and that one thread calls
to
while the
other thread calls fro
. What is the required set of actions and what are the ordering constraints?
Let us consider the thread that calls to
. According to the rules, this thread must perform an assign of a
followed by an assign of b
. That is the bare minimum required to execute a call to the method to
. Because there is no synchronization, it is at the option of the implementation whether or not to store the assigned values back to main memory! Therefore, the thread that calls fro
may obtain either 1
or 3
for the value of a
, and independently may obtain either 2
or 4
for the value of b
.
Now suppose that to
is synchronized
but fro
is not:
class SynchSimple {
int a = 1, b = 2; synchronized void to() { a = 3; b = 4; } void fro() System.out.println("a= " + a + ", b=" + b); } }In this case the method
to
will be forced to store the assigned values back to main
memory before the unlock operation at the end of the method. The method fro
must, of course, use a
and b
(in that order) and so must load values for a
and b
from main memory.
The total set of operations may be pictured as follows:
Here an arrow from action A to action B indicates that A must precede B.
In what order may the operations by the main memory occur? Note that the rules do not require that write a
occur before write b
; neither do they require that read a
occur before read b
. Also, even though method to
is synchronized, method fro
is not synchronized, so there is nothing to prevent the read operations from occurring between the lock and unlock operations. (The point is that declaring one method synchronized
does not of itself make that method behave as if it were atomic.)
As a result, the method fro
could still obtain either 1
or 3
for the value of a
, and independently could obtain either 2
or 4
for the value of b
. In particular, fro
might observe the value 1
for a
and 4
for b
. Thus, even though to
does an assign to a
and then an assign to b
, the write operations to main memory may be observed by another thread to occur as if in the opposite order.
Finally, suppose that to
and fro
are both synchronized
:
class SynchSynchSimple {
int a = 1, b = 2; synchronized void to() { a = 3; b = 4; } synchronized void fro() System.out.println("a= " + a + ", b=" + b); } }In this case, the actions of method
fro
cannot be interleaved with the actions of method to
, and so fro
will print either "a=1, b=2
" or "a=3, b=4
".Thread
and ThreadGroup
. Creating a Thread
object creates a thread, and that is the only way to create a thread.
When the thread is created, it is not yet active; it begins to run when its start
method is called.
The synchronized
statement computes a reference to an object; it then attempts to perform a lock operation on that object and does not proceed further until the lock operation has successfully completed. (A lock operation may be delayed because the rules about locks can prevent the main memory from participating until some other thread is ready to perform one or more unlock operations.) After the lock operation has been performed, the body of the synchronized
statement is executed. If execution of the body is ever completed, either normally or abruptly, an unlock operation is automatically performed on that same lock.
A synchronized
method automatically performs a lock operation when it is invoked; its body is not executed until the lock operation has successfully completed. If the method is an instance method, it locks the lock associated with the instance for which it was invoked (that is, the object that will be known as this
during execution of the body of the method). If the method is static
, it locks the lock associated with the Class
object that represents the class in which the method is defined. If execution of the method's body is ever completed, either normally or abruptly, an unlock operation is automatically performed on that same lock.
Best practice is that if a variable is ever to be assigned by one thread and used or assigned by another, then all accesses to that variable should be enclosed in synchronized
methods or synchronized
statements.
Wait sets are used by the methods wait
, notify
, and notifyAll
of class Object
. These methods also interact with the scheduling mechanism for threads.
The method wait
should be invoked for an object only when the current thread (call it T) has already locked the object's lock. Suppose that thread T has in fact performed N lock operations that have not been matched by unlock operations. The wait
method then adds the current thread to the wait set for the object, disables the current thread for thread scheduling purposes, and performs N unlock operations to relinquish the lock. The thread T then lies dormant until one of three things happens:
notify
method for that object, and thread T happens to be the one arbitrarily chosen as the one to notify.
notifyAll
method for that object.
wait
method specified a time-out interval, then the specified amount of real time has elapsed.
wait
method. Thus, on return from the wait
method, the state of the object's lock is exactly as it was when the wait
method was invoked.
The notify
method should be invoked for an object only when the current thread has already locked the object's lock, or an IllegalMonitorState
-Exception
will be thrown. If the wait set for the object is not empty, then some arbitrarily chosen thread is removed from the wait set and re-enabled for thread scheduling. (Of course, that thread will not be able to proceed until the current thread relinquishes the object's lock.)
The notifyAll
method should be invoked for an object only when the current thread has already locked the object's lock, or an IllegalMonitorState
Exception
will be thrown. Every thread in the wait set for the object is removed from the wait set and re-enabled for thread scheduling. (Of course, those threads will not be able to proceed until the current thread relinquishes the object's lock.)
Contents | Prev | Next | Index
Java Virtual Machine Specification
Copyright © 1996, 1997 Sun Microsystems, Inc.
All rights reserved
Please send any comments or corrections to jvm@java.sun.com