(7) Assume val is an atomic integer in a Linux system. What is the value of val after the following operations have been completed? atomic set(&val, 10); atomic sub(8,&val); atomic inc(&val); atomic inc(&val); atomic add(6,&val); atomic sub(3,&val); Show your work (Clearly outline the results of the implementation of each statement)

(7) Assume val is an atomic integer in a Linux system. What is the value of val after the following operations have been completed? atomic set(&val, 10); atomic sub(8,&val); atomic inc(&val); atomic inc(&val); atomic add(6,&val); atomic sub(3,&val); Show your work (Clearly outline the results of the implementation of each statement)

Microsoft Visual C#

7th Edition

ISBN:9781337102100

Author:Joyce, Farrell.

Publisher:Joyce, Farrell.

Chapter8: Advanced Method Concepts

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 7RQ

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

In the below stack allocation, what is the current value of top after execution of the following code (i.e. after the function using the second activation record)? Hint: remember that stacks grow from highest address toward lower address. StackAllocatr m = new StackAllocatr(5); m.push(1); m.push(2); m.pop
Forking a new process in Linux is claimed to use a copy-on-write policy so that although the text heap and stack are the same for a parent and child before and after the fork they change as soon as a data item is written by either the parent or child. Write a small program that verifies whether this is true or not
Please write in C++ and run in linux. This assignment is about fork(), exec(), and wait() system calls, and commandline arguments. Write two C++ programs, to be named parent.cc and child.cc and compiled into executable parent and child, respectively that, when run, will work as follows: parent takes in a list of gender-name pairs from the commandline arguments creates as many child processes as there are in the gender-name pairs and passes to each child process a child number and a gender-name pair waits for all child processes to terminate outputs “All child processes terminated. Parent exits.” And terminates. child receives a child number and one gender-name pair arguments from parent outputs “Child # x, a boy (or girl), name xxxxxx.” Note: content of output depends on data received from parent Sample run To invoke the execution: >parent girl Nancy boy Mark boy Joseph parent process does the following: outputs “I have 3 children.” -- Note: the number 3…
A reference parameter differs from an output parameter in that a reference parameter ______________________ but an output parameter does not. a. occupies a unique memory address b. must be a simple data type c. receives a memory address d. requires an initial value
I'm having a hard time seeing the problem with this buffer overflow problem can someone please elaborate if its secure or not, and if there are any other issues with the implementation in the problem? Someone tries to fix the stack based buffer overflow problem as follows, is it secure now? why? Are there any other issues within the function's implementation below? Explain your reasoning. int bof(char *str, int size) { char *buffer = (char *) malloc(size); strcpy(buffer, str); return 1; }
For the following program, considering a() as call to fork(),during execution, show the number ofprocesses that will be spawned and number of times “Created” will be printed? Justify your answers.#include <stdio.h>#include <unistd.h>int main(){a();a() && a() || a();a();printf("Created\n");return 0;}
Someone tries to fix the stack based buffer overflow problem as follows, is it secure now? why?why not? Are there any other issues within the function's implementation below? Please explain your reasoning. int bof(char *str, int size) { char *buffer = (char *) malloc(size); strcpy(buffer, str); return 1; }
When dealing with Linux, it provides a set of operations that ensure atomic operations on a variable, and these operations can be used to avoid basic race problems, so what happens when working with uniprocessor and multiprocessor systems?
When using a C++ inclusion guard on a library interface file, why is it essential that the symbol or name used in the guard not be identical to any other uses of the symbol or name in the guard? Assuming that the symbol does not need to be unique and then showing what occurs when two libraries that are to be #included in the same application share the same symbol is an effective use of the proof by contradiction technique in this circumstance. Here, we have an actual application.
How does this method cause memory leaks? How do I make it multi-thread safe? I have this JUnit test method that checks if my method is working. What it does is to. Inherit @Before and @After methods from BaseTest Since for every class, a session is created before, use it for ServiceTest.testUpdate() when we have to use session.save. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- public class BaseTest{ @Autowired protected SessionFactory sessionFactory; protected Session session; @Before public void createSession() { session = sessionFactory.openSession(); } @After public void closeSession(){ if (session != null) { session.flush(); session.close(); } } } public class ServiceTest extends BaseTest{ @Autowired private FoodService foodService; @Test public void testUpdate() { Food food= new Food("Japanese", "Ramen"); session.save(student); int id = (int) session.getIdentifier(student); session.flush();…
Someone tries to fix the stack based buffer overflow problem as follows, is it secure now? why? Are there any other issues within the function's implementation below? Explain your reasoning. int bof(char *str, int size) { char *buffer = (char *) malloc(size); strcpy(buffer, str); return 1; }
Is there a special reason why the symbol or name used in the C++ inclusion guard on a library interface file has to be special? A helpful tactic in this situation is to use proof by contradiction: assume that the symbol doesn't need to be unique, and then show what happens when two libraries that are both #included in the same application use the same symbol.