To evaluate these statements, we must analyze how preemptive scheduling interacts with process synchronization and critical sections.
1. Analyzing Assertion (A):
Preemptive scheduling allows the operating system to interrupt a currently running process to assign the CPU to another process. If a process is interrupted while it is inside a critical section (modifying shared data) and another process is scheduled that accesses the same shared data, a race condition occurs. Thus, Assertion (A) is correct.
2. Analyzing Reason (R):
Preemption does not allow multiple processes to access shared data "simultaneously" on a single-core system; it allows them to access it concurrently via interleaving. More importantly, the goal of synchronization primitives (like semaphores or mutexes) is specifically to prevent such simultaneous access. The reason race conditions occur is due to the interruption and subsequent inconsistent state of data, not because the OS intentionally allows simultaneous access to shared variables. Therefore, Reason (R) is incorrect.
3. Final Conclusion:
Since the assertion is a true statement about the risks of preemptive kernels, but the reason provides a fundamentally incorrect description of how data access is managed, Option (3) is the most appropriate.