Consider the following program that monitors two sensors. Here sensor1 and sensor2 denote
the variables storing the readouts from two sensors. The actual read is performed by the
functions readSensor1() and readSensor2(), respectively, which are called in the interrupt
service routine ISR.

char flag = 0;
char* display;
short sensor1, sensor2;

void ISR() {
if (flag) {
sensor1 = readSensor1();
} else {
sensor2 = readSensor2();
}
}

int main() {

// ... set up interrupts ...
// ... enable interrupts ...
while(1) {
if (flag) {
if isFaulty2(sensor2) {
display = "Sensor2 Faulty";
}
} else {
if isFaulty1(sensor1) {
display = "Sensor1 Faulty";
}
}
flag = !flag;
}

}

Functions isFaulty1() and isFaulty2() check the sensor readings for any discrepancies,
returning 1 if there is a fault and 0 otherwise. Assume that the variable display defines what is
shown on the monitor to alert a human operator about faults. Also, you may assume that flag
is modified only in the body of main. Answer the following questions:
a) Is it possible for the ISR to update the value of sensor1 while the main function is
checking whether sensor1 is faulty? Why or why not?
b) Suppose a spurious error occurs that causes sensor1 or sensor2 to be a faulty value for
one measurement. Is it possible for that this code would not report "Sensor1 faulty" or
"Sensor2 faulty"?
c) Assuming the interrupt source for ISR() is timer-driven, what conditions would cause this
code to never check whether the sensors are faulty?

Check the explanation

Explanation:

a)

It is a technical impossible for the update in the value of sensor1 in ISR while the main function is still evaluating whether sensor1 is with a fault or not at the point of execution in the critical section block because in this block no other instructions are not executed until the completion of instructions in the critical section.

Also semaphores are used to execute instructions when they are get lock to execute. if we write the code in operating system in such a way that at any instant of time shared resources cannot be executed in parallel, then only it is not possible to update ISR value of sensor1 while main function checking for sensor1 faultiness.

-> It is possible that  to update ISR value of sensor1 while main function checking for sensor1 faultiness if operating system and compilers are coded for parallel execution even though shared resources.

for example:

int i=5;

main()

if (i==5)

{print "i is %d",i}

other()

i=7;

//if above program executes parallel boh main() and other() functions are parallel executed

then at first clock cycle in main method i=5 so goes to next instruction print.

but in the first clock cycle also in other method i value changes to 7.

so in the next clock cycle in main method result as " i is 7.

b)

if there is an occurrence of error related to only for faulty value of sensor 1 or sensor 2 then only it is possible for this code would report "Sensor1 faulty" or "Sensor2 faulty" when there is no error related to other issues.

Like power interrupt etc.

if a spurious error can cause not only sensor1 or sensor2 to be a faulty value but also interrupting whole program or suspending entire program etc may possible for this code would not report  "Sensor1 faulty" or "Sensor2 faulty".

c)

if we Assume the interrupt source for ISR() is timer-driven , then there are conditions could cause this code to never check whether sensors are faulty or not.

timer driven means set a clock for its execution how can we set the clock. if we set clock for ISR() method to stop the entire program or repeated continuously at setting up interrupts and enabling interrupts.

these two conditions 1)set clock to stop the program would not enter into checking sensors faultiness.

2)set the clock to spare entire time to execute  at setting up interrupts and enabling interrupts. repeated continuously.

It means never run ":while(1) {} " block instructions for checking faultiness of the sensors.

the answer would be 2

since they are only saying that the couple has 20 daughters and so on but they never said that they went to the movies as well therefore the couple was the only people that went to the movies.

hope this ! : 3

add the following