Documents
Resources
Learning Center
Upload
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out
Get this document free

Chapter 4.1 Message Passing Communication

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 18

									Chapter 4.1

Message Passing
Communication



               Prepared by:
          Karthik V Puttaparthi
          kputtaparthi1@student.gsu.edu
        OUTLINE

   Interprocess Communication
   Message Passing Communication
   Basic Communication Primitives
   Message Design Issues
   Synchronization and Buffering
   References
INTERPROCESS COMMUNICATION
   Processes executing concurrently in the operating system may be either
    independent or cooperating processes.

   Reasons for providing an environment that allows process cooperation.
    1) Information Sharing
       Several users may be interested in the same piece of information.
    2) Computational Speed up
       Process can be divided into sub tasks to run faster, speed up can be
    achieved if the computer has multiple processing elements.
    3) Modularity
       Dividing the system functions into separate processes or threads.
    4) Convenience
       Even an individual user may work on many tasks at the same time.
            COMMUNICATION MODELS
        Cooperating processes require IPC mechanism that allow them to exchange data and information.
        Communication can take place either by Shared memory or Message passing Mechanisms.

Shared Memory:

1) Processes can exchange information by
reading and writing data to the shared region.
2) Faster than message passing as it can be
 done at memory speeds when within a computer.
3) System calls are responsible only to establish
 shared memory regions.

Message Passing:

Mechanism to allow processes to communicate and
synchronize their actions without sharing the same
address space and is particularly useful in distributed
environment.

             Message Passing Communication
   Messages are collection of data objects and their structures
   Messages have a header containing system dependent control information and a message body
    that can be fixed or variable size.
   When a process interacts with another, two requirements
    have to be satisfied.
    Synchronization and Communication.

Fixed Length

   Easy to implement
   Minimizes processing and storage overhead.

Variable Length

   Requires dynamic memory allocation, so
    fragmentation could occur.
Basic Communication Primitives

   Two generic message passing primitives for sending and receiving messages.
    send (destination, message)
    receive (source, message)       source or dest={ process name, link, mailbox, port}

Addressing - Direct and Indirect

1) Direct Send/ Receive communication primitives
    Communication entities can be addressed by process names (global process identifiers)
    Global Process Identifier can be made unique by concatenating the network host address
     with the locally generated process id. This scheme implies that only one direct logical
     communication path exists between any pair of sending and receiving processes.

Symmetric Addressing : Both the processes have to explicitly name in the communication
     primitives.
Asymmetric Addressing : Only sender needs to indicate the recipient.
2) Indirect Send/ Receive communication primitives
  Messages are not sent directly from sender to receiver, but sent to shared data
  structure.

                                                Multiple clients might request services
                                                from one of multiple servers. We use
                                                mail boxes.




                                                Abstraction of a finite size FIFO queue
                                                maintained by kernel.
Synchronization and Buffering
   These are the three typical combinations.

    1) Blocking Send, Blocking Receive
      Both receiver and sender are blocked until the message is delivered.
    (provides tight synchronization between processes)

    2) Non Blocking Send, Blocking Receive
      Sender can continue the execution after sending a message, the
    receiver is blocked until message arrives. (most useful combination)

    3) Non Blocking Send, Non Blocking Receive
      Neither party waits.
                Message Synchronization Stages

Sender                  source                   network               destination                receiver

                1                2        message                  3                       4    request
            8                    7         ack                     6                        5   reply




Message passing depends on Synchronization at several points.
When sending a message to remote destination, the message is passed to sender system kernel which transmits it to
    communication network.
Non blocking Send 1+8
                         Sender process is released after message has been composed and copied into senders kernel.
Blocking Send 1+2+7+8
                  Sender process is released after message has been transmitted to Network.
Reliable Blocking Send 1+2+3+6+7+8
                                  Released after message has been received by kernel.
Explicit Blocking Send 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8
                                  Sender process is released after Message has been received by receiver process.
Request & Reply 1-4 service 5-8
                                  Released after message has been processed by the receiver and response returned to the sender.
      Message Design Issues

Synchronization
    Blocking vs. Non-blocking
Addressing
    Direct
    Indirect
Message transmission
    Through value
    Through reference
Format
    Content
    Length
        Fixed

        Variable

Queuing discipline
    FIFO
    Priority
The Producer Consumer
Problem
   The producer-consumer problem illustrates
    the need for synchronization in systems
    where many processes share a resource. In
    the problem, two processes share a fixed-size
    buffer. One process produces information and
    puts it in the buffer, while the other process
    consumes information from the buffer. These
    processes do not take turns accessing the
    buffer, they both work concurrently. Herein
    lies the problem. What happens if the
    producer tries to put an item into a full
    buffer? What happens if the consumer tries to
    take an item from an empty buffer?
Producer
Consumer
            Pipe & Socket API’s
   More convenient to the users and to the system if the communication is achieved through a well
    defined set of standard API’s.


Pipe

   Pipes are implemented with finite size, FIFO byte stream buffer maintained by the kernel.
   Used by 2 communicating processes, a pipe serves as unidirectional communication link so that one
    process can write data into tail end of pipe while another process may read from head end of the
    pipe.
   Pipe is created by a system call which returns 2 file descriptors, one for reading and another for
    writing.
   Pipe concept can be extended to include messages.
   For unrelated processes, there is need to uniquely identify a pipe since pipe descriptors cannot be
    shared. So concept of Named pipes.
   With a unique path name, named pipes can be shared among disjoint processes across different
    machines with a common file system.
                 SOCKETS
   A Socket is a communication end point of a communication link managed by the
    transport services.
     It is not feasible to name a communication channel across different domains.
     A Communication channel can be visualized as a pair of 2 communication endpoints.
   Sockets have become most popular message passing API.
     Most recent version of the Windows Socket which is developed by WinSock Standard
    Group which has 32 companies (including Microsoft) also includes a SSL (Secure Socket
    Layer) in the specification.
     The goal of SSL is to provide:
      Privacy in socket communication by using symmetric cryptographic data encryption.
      Integrity in socket data by using message integrity check.
      Authenticity of servers and clients by using asymmetric public key cryptography.
    References
   Operating System Concepts, Silberschatz, Galvin and Gange 2002
   Sameer Ajmani ``Automatic Software Upgrades for Distributed Systems'' Ph.D.
    dissertation, MIT, Sep. 2004
   Message passing information from The University of Edinburgh
   MPI-2: standards beyond the message-passing model
    Lusk, E.;
    Massively Parallel Programming Models, 1997. Proceedings. Third Working Conference on
    12-14 Nov. 1997 Page(s):43 - 49
    Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPPM.1997.715960

    .
    A N. Bessani, M. Correia, J. S. Fraga, and L. C. Lung. Sharing memory between Byzantine
    processes using policy-enforced tuple spaces. In Proceedings of the 26th International
    Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, July 2006
   A multithreaded message-passing system for high performance distributed
    computing applications
    Park, S.-Y.; Lee, J.; Hariri, S.;
    Distributed Computing Systems, 1998. Proceedings. 18th International Conference on
    26-29 May 1998 Page(s):258 - 265
    Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ICDCS.1998.679521
   A message passing standard for MPP and workstations J. J. Dongarra, S. W. Otto, M. Snir,
    and D. Walker, CACM, 39(7), 1996, pp. 84-90
   N. Alon, M. Merrit, O. Reingold, G. Taubenfeld, and R. Wright. Tight bounds for shared
    memory systems acessed by Byzantine processes. Distributed Computing, 18(2):99–109,
    2005
    References
   Lessons for massively parallel applications on message passing computers
    Fox, G.C.;
    Compcon Spring '92. Thirty-Seventh IEEE Computer Society International Conference,
    Digest of Papers.
    24-28 Feb. 1992 Page(s):103 - 114
    Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/CMPCON.1992.186695
   An analysis of message passing systems for distributed memory computers
    Clematis, A.; Tavani, O.;
    Parallel and Distributed Processing, 1993. Proceedings. Euromicro Workshop on
    27-29 Jan. 1993 Page(s):299 - 306
    Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/EMPDP.1993.336388
   An analysis of message passing systems for distributed memory computers
    Clematis, A.; Tavani, O.;
    Parallel and Distributed Processing, 1993. Proceedings. Euromicro Workshop on
    27-29 Jan. 1993 Page(s):299 - 306
    Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/EMPDP.1993.336388
Thank You!

								
To top