Summary: A Comparison of Entry Consistency and
Lazy Release Consistency Implementations
Sarita V. Adve, Alan L. Cox, Sandhya Dwarkadas, Ramakrishnan Rajamony, Willy Zwaenepoel
Departments of Computer Science and Electrical and Computer Engineering
Rice University
Houston, TX 77005­1892
fsarita,alc,sandhya,rrk,willyg@rice.edu
Abstract
This paper compares several implementations of
entry consistency (EC) and lazy release consistency
(LRC), two relaxed memory models in use with soft­
ware distributed shared memory (DSM) systems. We
use six applications in our study: SOR, Quicksort,
Water, Barnes­Hut, IS, and 3D­FFT. For these ap­
plications, EC's requirement that all shared data be
associated with a synchronization object leads to a fair
amount of additional programming effort. We identify,
in particular, extra synchronization, lock rebinding,
and object granularity as sources of extra complexity.
In terms of performance, for the set of applications

Source: Adve, Sarita - Department of Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Dwarkadas, Sandhya - Departments of Computer Science, Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Rochester

Collections: Computer Technologies and Information Sciences