Thread safety

Last updated

Thread safety is a computer programming concept applicable to multi-threaded code. Thread-safe code only manipulates shared data structures in a manner that ensures that all threads behave properly and fulfill their design specifications without unintended interaction. There are various strategies for making thread-safe data structures. [1] [2]


A program may execute code in several threads simultaneously in a shared address space where each of those threads has access to virtually all of the memory of every other thread. Thread safety is a property that allows code to run in multithreaded environments by re-establishing some of the correspondences between the actual flow of control and the text of the program, by means of synchronization.

Levels of thread safety

Software libraries can provide certain thread-safety guarantees. For example, concurrent reads might be guaranteed to be thread-safe, but concurrent writes might not be. Whether a program using such a library is thread-safe depends on whether it uses the library in a manner consistent with those guarantees.

Different vendors use slightly different terminology for thread-safety: [3] [4] [5] [6]

Thread safety guarantees usually also include design steps to prevent or limit the risk of different forms of deadlocks, as well as optimizations to maximize concurrent performance. However, deadlock-free guarantees cannot always be given, since deadlocks can be caused by callbacks and violation of architectural layering independent of the library itself.

Implementation approaches

Below we discuss two classes of approaches for avoiding race conditions to achieve thread-safety.

The first class of approaches focuses on avoiding shared state and includes:

Writing code in such a way that it can be partially executed by a thread, executed by the same thread, or simultaneously executed by another thread and still correctly complete the original execution. This requires the saving of state information in variables local to each execution, usually on a stack, instead of in static or global variables or other non-local state. All non-local states must be accessed through atomic operations and the data-structures must also be reentrant.
Thread-local storage
Variables are localized so that each thread has its own private copy. These variables retain their values across subroutine and other code boundaries and are thread-safe since they are local to each thread, even though the code which accesses them might be executed simultaneously by another thread.
Immutable objects
The state of an object cannot be changed after construction. This implies both that only read-only data is shared and that inherent thread safety is attained. Mutable (non-const) operations can then be implemented in such a way that they create new objects instead of modifying existing ones. This approach is characteristic of functional programming and is also used by the string implementations in Java, C#, and Python. (See Immutable object.)

The second class of approaches are synchronization-related, and are used in situations where shared state cannot be avoided:

Mutual exclusion
Access to shared data is serialized using mechanisms that ensure only one thread reads or writes to the shared data at any time. Incorporation of mutual exclusion needs to be well thought out, since improper usage can lead to side-effects like deadlocks, livelocks, and resource starvation.
Atomic operations
Shared data is accessed by using atomic operations which cannot be interrupted by other threads. This usually requires using special machine language instructions, which might be available in a runtime library. Since the operations are atomic, the shared data is always kept in a valid state, no matter how other threads access it. Atomic operations form the basis of many thread locking mechanisms, and are used to implement mutual exclusion primitives.


In the following piece of Java code, the Java keyword synchronized makes the method thread-safe:


In the C programming language, each thread has its own stack. However, a static variable is not kept on the stack; all threads share simultaneous access to it. If multiple threads overlap while running the same function, it is possible that a static variable might be changed by one thread while another is midway through checking it. This difficult-to-diagnose logic error, which may compile and run properly most of the time, is called a race condition. One common way to avoid this is to use another shared variable as a "lock" or "mutex" (from mutual exclusion).

In the following piece of C code, the function is thread-safe, but not reentrant:

# include <pthread.h>intincrement_counter(){staticintcounter=0;staticpthread_mutex_tmutex=PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;// only allow one thread to increment at a timepthread_mutex_lock(&mutex);++counter;// store value before any other threads increment it furtherintresult=counter;pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);returnresult;}

In the above, increment_counter can be called by different threads without any problem since a mutex is used to synchronize all access to the shared counter variable. But if the function is used in a reentrant interrupt handler and a second interrupt arises while the mutex is locked, the second routine will hang forever. As interrupt servicing can disable other interrupts, the whole system could suffer.

The same function can be implemented to be both thread-safe and reentrant using the lock-free atomics in C++11:

# include <atomic>intincrement_counter(){staticstd::atomic<int>counter(0);// increment is guaranteed to be done atomicallyintresult=++counter;returnresult;}

See also

Related Research Articles

Mutual exclusion

In computer science, mutual exclusion is a property of concurrency control, which is instituted for the purpose of preventing race conditions. It is the requirement that one thread of execution never enters a critical section while a concurrent thread of execution is already accessing critical section, which refers to an interval of time during which a thread of execution accesses a shared resource, such as [Shared data objects, shared resources, shared memory].

Thread (computing) Smallest sequence of programmed instructions that can be managed independently by a scheduler

In computer science, a thread of execution is the smallest sequence of programmed instructions that can be managed independently by a scheduler, which is typically a part of the operating system. The implementation of threads and processes differs between operating systems, but in most cases a thread is a component of a process. Multiple threads can exist within one process, executing concurrently and sharing resources such as memory, while different processes do not share these resources. In particular, the threads of a process share its executable code and the values of its dynamically allocated variables and non-thread-local global variables at any given time.

In computing, a computer program or subroutine is called reentrant if multiple invocations can safely run concurrently on a single processor system, where a reentrant procedure can be interrupted in the middle of its execution and then safely be called again ("re-entered") before its previous invocations complete execution. The interruption could be caused by an internal action such as a jump or call, or by an external action such as an interrupt or signal, unlike recursion, where new invocations can only be caused by internal call.

Semaphore (programming) Variable used in a concurrent system

In computer science, a semaphore is a variable or abstract data type used to control access to a common resource by multiple processes and avoid critical section problems in a concurrent system such as a multitasking operating system. A trivial semaphore is a plain variable that is changed depending on programmer-defined conditions.

In software engineering, double-checked locking is a software design pattern used to reduce the overhead of acquiring a lock by testing the locking criterion before acquiring the lock. Locking occurs only if the locking criterion check indicates that locking is required.

In computer science, a lock or mutex is a synchronization primitive: a mechanism that enforces limits on access to a resource when there are many threads of execution. A lock is designed to enforce a mutual exclusion concurrency control policy, and with a variety of possible methods there exists multiple unique implementations for different applications.

Race condition Problem in electronics and software

A race condition or race hazard is the condition of an electronics, software, or other system where the system's substantive behavior is dependent on the sequence or timing of other uncontrollable events. It becomes a bug when one or more of the possible behaviors is undesirable.

In computer science and software engineering, busy-waiting, busy-looping or spinning is a technique in which a process repeatedly checks to see if a condition is true, such as whether keyboard input or a lock is available. Spinning can also be used to generate an arbitrary time delay, a technique that was necessary on systems that lacked a method of waiting a specific length of time. Processor speeds vary greatly from computer to computer, especially as some processors are designed to dynamically adjust speed based on current workload. Consequently spinning as a time-delay technique can produce unpredictable or even inconsistent results on different systems unless code is included to determine the time a processor takes to execute a "do nothing" loop, or the looping code explicitly checks a real-time clock.

Resource acquisition is initialization (RAII) is a programming idiom used in several object-oriented, statically-typed programming languages to describe a particular language behavior. In RAII, holding a resource is a class invariant, and is tied to object lifetime: resource allocation is done during object creation, by the constructor, while resource deallocation (release) is done during object destruction, by the destructor. In other words, resource acquisition must succeed for initialization to succeed. Thus the resource is guaranteed to be held between when initialization finishes and finalization starts, and to be held only when the object is alive. Thus if there are no object leaks, there are no resource leaks.

A memory barrier, also known as a membar, memory fence or fence instruction, is a type of barrier instruction that causes a central processing unit (CPU) or compiler to enforce an ordering constraint on memory operations issued before and after the barrier instruction. This typically means that operations issued prior to the barrier are guaranteed to be performed before operations issued after the barrier.

In computer programming, particularly in the C, C++, C#, and Java programming languages, the volatile keyword indicates that a value may change between different accesses, even if it does not appear to be modified. This keyword prevents an optimizing compiler from optimizing away subsequent reads or writes and thus incorrectly reusing a stale value or omitting writes. Volatile values primarily arise in hardware access, where reading from or writing to memory is used to communicate with peripheral devices, and in threading, where a different thread may have modified a value.

In concurrent programming, a monitor is a synchronization construct that allows threads to have both mutual exclusion and the ability to wait (block) for a certain condition to become false. Monitors also have a mechanism for signaling other threads that their condition has been met. A monitor consists of a mutex (lock) object and condition variables. A condition variable essentially is a container of threads that are waiting for a certain condition. Monitors provide a mechanism for threads to temporarily give up exclusive access in order to wait for some condition to be met, before regaining exclusive access and resuming their task.

In computer science, the reentrant mutex is a particular type of mutual exclusion (mutex) device that may be locked multiple times by the same process/thread, without causing a deadlock.

Thread-local storage (TLS) is a computer programming method that uses static or global memory local to a thread.

In computer science, a readers–writer is a synchronization primitive that solves one of the readers–writers problems. An RW lock allows concurrent access for read-only operations, while write operations require exclusive access. This means that multiple threads can read the data in parallel but an exclusive lock is needed for writing or modifying data. When a writer is writing the data, all other writers or readers will be blocked until the writer is finished writing. A common use might be to control access to a data structure in memory that cannot be updated atomically and is invalid until the update is complete.

In computer science, Synchronization refers to one of two distinct but related concepts: synchronization of processes, and synchronization of data. Process synchronization refers to the idea that multiple processes are to join up or handshake at a certain point, in order to reach an agreement or commit to a certain sequence of action. Data synchronization refers to the idea of keeping multiple copies of a dataset in coherence with one another, or to maintain data integrity. Process synchronization primitives are commonly used to implement data synchronization.

The Java programming language and the Java virtual machine (JVM) have been designed to support concurrent programming, and all execution takes place in the context of threads. Objects and resources can be accessed by many separate threads; each thread has its own path of execution but can potentially access any object in the program. The programmer must ensure read and write access to objects is properly coordinated between threads. Thread synchronization ensures that objects are modified by only one thread at a time and that threads are prevented from accessing partially updated objects during modification by another thread. The Java language has built-in constructs to support this coordination.

In computing, the producer–consumer problem is a classic example of a multi-process synchronization problem, the first version of which was proposed by Edsger W. Dijkstra in 1965 in his unpublished manuscript, in which the buffer was unbounded, and subsequently published with a bounded buffer in 1972. In the first version of the problem, there are two cyclic processes, a producer and a consumer, which share a common, fixed-size buffer used as a queue. The producer repeatedly generates data and writes it into the buffer. The consumer repeatedly reads the data in the buffer, removing it in the course of reading it, and using that data in some way. In the first version of the problem, with an unbounded buffer, the problem is how to design the producer and consumer code so that, in their exchange of data, no data is lost or duplicated, data is read by the consumer in the order it is written by the producer, and both processes make as much progress as possible. In the later formulation of the problem, Dijkstra proposed multiple producers and consumers sharing a finite collection of buffers. This added the additional problem of preventing producers from trying to write into buffers when all were full, and trying to prevent consumers from reading a buffer when all were empty.

Wrapper libraries consist of a thin layer of code which translates a library's existing interface into a compatible interface. This is done for several reasons:

The Java programming language's Java Collections Framework version 1.5 and later defines and implements the original regular single-threaded Maps, and also new thread-safe Maps implementing the java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentMapinterface among other concurrent interfaces. In Java 1.6, the java.util.NavigableMap interface was added, extending java.util.SortedMap, and the java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentNavigableMap interface was added as a subinterface combination.


  1. Kerrisk, Michael (2010). The Linux Programing Interface. No Starch Press. p. 655.
  2. "Multithreaded Programming Guide". Oracle Corporation. November 2010. A procedure is thread safe when the procedure is logically correct when executed simultaneously by several threads.
  3. "Reentrancy and Thread-Safety | Qt 5.6". Qt Project. Retrieved 2016-04-20.
  4. "ip::tcp – 1.51.0". Retrieved 2013-10-16.
  5. "API thread safety classifications". 1998-06-09. Retrieved 2013-10-16.[ dead link ]
  6. "MT Interface Safety Levels – Multithreaded Programming Guide". 2010-11-01. Retrieved 2013-10-16.