Journal/Paper.thy
changeset 38 c89013dca1aa
parent 35 92f61f6a0fe7
child 41 66ed924aaa5c
equal deleted inserted replaced
37:c820ac0f3088 38:c89013dca1aa
   848 
   848 
   849   Like in the argument by Sha et al.~our finite bound does not
   849   Like in the argument by Sha et al.~our finite bound does not
   850   guarantee absence of indefinite Priority Inversion. For this we
   850   guarantee absence of indefinite Priority Inversion. For this we
   851   further have to assume that every thread gives up its resources
   851   further have to assume that every thread gives up its resources
   852   after a finite amount of time. We found that this assumption is
   852   after a finite amount of time. We found that this assumption is
   853   awkward to formalise in our model. There are mainly two reasons:
   853   awkward to formalise in our model. There are mainly two reasons for this:
   854   First, we do not specify what ``running'' the code of a thread
   854   First, we do not specify what ``running'' the code of a thread
   855   means, for example by giving an operational semantics for machine
   855   means, for example by giving an operational semantics for machine
   856   instructions. Therefore we cannot characterise what are ``good''
   856   instructions. Therefore we cannot characterise what are ``good''
   857   programs that contain for every looking request also a corresponding
   857   programs that contain for every looking request also a corresponding
   858   unlocking request for a resource. Second, we would need to specify a
   858   unlocking request for a resource. Second, we would need to specify a