Previously we presented atomic sets, memory locations that share some consistency property, and units of work, code fragments that preserve consistency of atomic sets on which they are declared. We also proposed atomic-set serializability as a correctness criterion for concurrent programs, stating that units of work must be serializable for each atomic set. We showed that a set of problematic data access patterns characterize executions that are not atomic-set serializable. Our criterion subsumes data races (single-location atomic sets) and serializability (all locations in one set).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hammer et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: