0

I have read that Livelock is special case of Resource Starvation here. I have also read that in Livelock Process are not in a waiting state here.

A/c to Galvin Book on OS, Starvation is Process waiting indefinitely, be it for acquiring resource or be it for getting scheduled by scheduler or be it in queue of Semaphore etc.

My question: Is it possible for the Processes to suffer from Livelock without Starvation in any case? If someone is willing to say no and have explanations for it, I would request you to once go through the scheme mentioned here. For that scheme I don't think that there is starvation but obviously there is livelock. I have explained my thoughts on the cs.se link mentioned below.

I have already asked my specific doubts on the cs.se here, but don't have any response yet.

sgoel
  • 1
  • What? I guess that two threads of a process could livelock while the other threads progress on the remaining cores. It's a bit academic to me - I have never suffered from livelock in application code. – Martin James Feb 23 '21 at 14:45
  • @MartinJames, Sir, Is it possible that livelock may happen but threads wouldn't starve? – sgoel Feb 23 '21 at 17:13
  • Surely if they're not starved then it's not anythinglock? – user253751 Feb 25 '21 at 17:22
  • @user253751, Sir, Can you please Elaborate? I'm unable to catch your point. – sgoel Feb 25 '21 at 21:44

0 Answers0