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

  • Zahra Aghazadeh
  • Philipp Woelfel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8878)


We provide several space- and time-efficient implementations of randomized long-lived Test-And-Set (TAS) objects from registers, in the standard asynchronous shared memory system with n processes. Our main construction uses O(n) registers, which is optimal, and TAS() and Reset() methods have expected step-complexity O(loglogn) against the oblivious adversary. Prior to this work, no long-lived TAS implementation from O(n) registers was known, where all methods have sub-linear (expected) step complexity. Another construction achieves expected step-complexity O(log ∗  n) for TAS() against the oblivious adversary, constant worst-case step-complexity for Reset(), but requires O(n 1.5) registers. These results are obtained from general transformations of randomized one-time TAS implementations (e.g.,[3, 11, 13]) into long-lived ones.


test-and-set long-lived memory management space efficiency 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Afek, Y., Gafni, E., Tromp, J., Vitanyi, P.M.B.: Wait-free test-and-set. In: Segall, A., Zaks, S. (eds.) WDAG 1992. LNCS, vol. 647, pp. 85–94. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aghazadeh, Z., Golab, W., Woelfel, P.: Making objects writable. In: Proc. of 33rd PODC, pp. 385–395 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alistarh, D., Aspnes, J.: Sub-logarithmic test-and-set against a weak adversary. In: Peleg, D. (ed.) DISC 2011. LNCS, vol. 6950, pp. 97–109. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alistarh, D., Aspnes, J., Censor-Hillel, K., Gilbert, S., Zadimoghaddam, M.: Optimal-time adaptive strong renaming, with applications to counting. In: Proc. of 30th PODC, pp. 239–248 (2011)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alistarh, D., Aspnes, J., Gilbert, S., Guerraoui, R.: The complexity of renaming. In: Proc. of 52nd FOCS, pp. 718–727 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alistarh, D., Attiya, H., Gilbert, S., Giurgiu, A., Guerraoui, R.: Fast randomized test-and-set and renaming. In: Lynch, N.A., Shvartsman, A.A. (eds.) DISC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6343, pp. 94–108. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Braginsky, A., Kogan, A., Petrank, E.: Drop the anchor: Lightweight memory management for non-blocking data structures. In: Proc. of 25th SPAA, pp. 33–42 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Buhrman, H., Panconesi, A., Silvestri, R., Vitányi, P.: On the importance of having an identity or, is consensus really universal? Distributed Computing 18(3), 167–176 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burns, J., Lynch, N.: Bounds on shared memory for mutual exclusion. Information and Computation 107(2), 171–184 (1993)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eberly, W., Higham, L., Warpechowska-Gruca, J.: Long-lived, fast, waitfree renaming with optimal name space and high throughput. In: Kutten, S. (ed.) DISC 1998. LNCS, vol. 1499, pp. 149–160. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giakkoupis, G., Helmi, M., Higham, L., Woelfel, P.: An \(O(\sqrt n)\) space bound for obstruction-free leader election. In: Afek, Y. (ed.) DISC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8205, pp. 46–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Giakkoupis, G., Helmi, M., Higham, L., Woelfel, P.: Test-and-set in optimal space (2014) (manuscript submitted for publication)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Giakkoupis, G., Woelfel, P.: On the time and space complexity of randomized test-and-set. In: Proc. of 31th PODC, pp. 19–28 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gidenstam, A., Papatriantafilou, M., Sundell, H., Tsigas, P.: Efficient and reliable lock-free memory reclamation based on reference counting. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 20(8), 1173–1187 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Herlihy, M.: Wait-free synchronization. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 13(1), 124–149 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Herlihy, M., Luchangco, V., Moir, M.: The repeat offender problem: A mechanism for supporting dynamic-sized, lock-free data structures. In: Malkhi, D. (ed.) DISC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2508, pp. 339–353. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hoepman, J.-H.: Long-lived test-and-set using bounded space. Technical report, University of Twente (1999)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Israeli, A., Li, M.: Bounded time-stamps. In: Proc. of 28th FOCS, pp. 371–382 (1987)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kruskal, C., Rudolph, L., Snir, M.: Efficient synchronization on multiprocessors with shared memory. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 10(4), 579–601 (1988)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Loui, M., Abu-Amara, H.: Memory requirements for agreement among unreliable asynchronous processes. Advances in Computing Research 4(163-183), 31 (1987)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Michael, M.: Hazard pointers: Safe memory reclamation for lock-free objects. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 15(6), 491–504 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Panconesi, A., Papatriantafilou, M., Tsigas, P., Vitányi, P.: Randomized naming using wait-free shared variables. Distributed Computing 11(3), 113–124 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Styer, E., Peterson, G.: Tight bounds for shared memory symmetric mutual exclusion problems. In: Proc. of 8th PODC, pp. 177–192 (1989)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tromp, J., Vitányi, P.: Randomized two-process wait-free test-and-set. Distributed Computing 15(3), 127–135 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zahra Aghazadeh
    • 1
  • Philipp Woelfel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of CalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations