Data Flow Implementation of Generalized Guarded Commands
Earlier approaches to execute generalized alternative/repetitive commands of Communicating Sequential Processes (CSP) attempt the selection of guards in a sequential order. Also, these implementations are based on either shared memory or message passing multiprocessor systems, which exploit parallelism only among the processes of a CSP program. In contrast, we propose a data flow implementation for CSP with generalized guarded commands in which both inter-process and intra-process concurrencies are exploited. A significant feature of our implementation is that it attempts the selection of guards of a process in parallel. A simulated model empirically demonstrates correctness properties, namely ‘safety’ and ‘liveness’, of our implementation. The simulation experiments are also helpful in obtaining certain efficiency and fairness parameters of the implementation.
KeywordsData Flow Shared Memory Communicate Sequential Process Data Flow Graph Complement Process
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Back, R.J.R, Ekslund, P., and Kurki-Suonia, R., “A Fair and Efficient Implementation of CSP with Output Guards”, Technical Report, Ser. A, No. 38, Abo Akademic, Finland, 1984.Google Scholar
- Bagrodia, R., “A Distributed Algorithm to Implement the Generalized Alternative Command in CSP”, In: Proc. of the 6th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 422–427, 1986.Google Scholar
- Govindarajan, R. and Yu. S, “Attempting Guards in Parallel: A Data Flow Approach to Execute Generalized Guarded Commands”, Technical Report # 273, Department of Computer Science, University of Western Ontario, London, May 1990.Google Scholar
- Ramesh, S., “A New Implementation of CSP with Output Guards” In: Proc. of the 7th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 266–273, 1987.Google Scholar
- Reed, D.A., Malony, A.D., and McCredie, B.D., “Parallel Discrete Event Simulation: A Shared Memory Approach”, In: Proc. of the ACM SIGMETRIC S Conference on Measuring and Modeling Computer Systems, vol. 15, no.1, pp. 36–38, May 1987.Google Scholar