I have two programs (namely dwm and slock). I want to trigger a function in dwm depending on events happening in slock and vice versa. The requirement is that both should be independent and run without the other program and also work together.
What is the easiest and/or the best (most efficient) IPC solution/method?
I've done it like Milag sugested in the comments:
a signal could trigger activity in the other proc; if you need a block of data as well, maybe use shared memory or R/W with a named pipe
Related
This is what says on http://invisible-island.net/ncurses/ncurses.faq.html#multithread
If you have a program which uses curses in more than one thread, you will almost certainly see odd behavior. That is because curses relies upon static variables for both input and output. Using one thread for input and other(s) for output cannot solve the problem, nor can extra screen updates help. This FAQ is not a tutorial on threaded programming.
Specifically, it mentions it is not safe even if input and output are done on separate threads. Would it be safe if we further use a mutex for the whole ncurses library so that at most one thread can be calling any ncurses function at a time? If not, what would be other cheap workarounds to use ncurses safely in multi-thread application?
I'm asking this question because I notice a real application often has its own event loop but relies on ncurses getch function to get keyboard input. But if the main thread is block waiting in its own event loop, then it has no chance to call getch. A seemingly applicable solution is to call getch in a different thread, which hasn't caused me a problem yet, but as what says above is actually not safe, and was verified by another user here. So I'm wondering what is the best way to merge getch into an application's own event loop.
I'm considering making getch non-blocking and waking up the main thread regularly (every 10-100 ms) to check if there is something to read. But this adds an additional delay between key events and makes the application less responsive. Also, I'm not sure if that would cause any problems with some ncurses internal delay such as ESCDELAY.
Another solution I'm considering is to poll stdin directly. But I guess ncurses should also be doing something like that and reading the same stream from two different places looks bad.
The text also mentions the "ncursest" or "ncursestw" libraries, but they seem to be less available, for example, if you are using a different language binding of curses. It would be great if there is a viable solution with the standard ncurses library.
Without the thread-support, you're out of luck for using curses functions in more than one thread. That's because most of the curses calls use static or global data. The getch function for instance calls refresh which can update the whole screen—using the global pointers curscr and stdscr. The difference in the thread-support configuration is that global values are converted to functions and mutex's added.
If you want to read stdin from a different thread and run curses in one thread, you probably can make that work by checking the file descriptor (i.e., 0) for pending activity and alerting the thread which runs curses to tell it to read data.
I want to look for files with given extensions recursively from a given root directory and to display the number of files currently found in my GUI.
Since this kind of processing may be long, the GUI may be blocked.
I could just wait for the end of the processing and get the file count, but I am learning Qt (PyQt), so I see this as a training.
So I have read Qt doc:
When to Use Alternatives to Threads, and I don't think it's for me.
Then I read:
Choosing an Appropriate Approach, and I think my solution is the first one:
Run a new linear function within another thread, optionally with
progress updates during the run
But in this case you have 3 choices:
Qt provides different solutions:
Place the function in a reimplementation of QThread::run() and start the QThread. Emit signals to update progress. OR
Place the function in a reimplementation of QRunnable::run() and add the QRunnable to a QThreadPool. Write to a thread-safe variable
to update progress. OR
Run the function using QtConcurrent::run(). Write to a thread-safe variable to update progress.
Could you tell me how to choose the best one?
I have read some "solutions" but I'd like to understand why you should use one methodology instead of another one.
And also since I am looking for files, I may have a directory in which many files would match the search criteria. So it would mean lots of interruptions. Is there something special to keep in mind regarding this?
Thank you!
From what I know (hopefully more can chime in).
QThread offers support with signal interaction. For example, you'd be able to stop your concurrent function with a signal. Not sure how you'd do that with the other options, if at all.
Things to keep in mind: widgets all have to live in the main thread, but can communicate with other other threads via signals & slots.
Another quick thread on the topic w/ some decent bullet-points.
https://qt-project.org/forums/viewthread/50165/
Best of luck on your project, and welcome to Qt!
I am trying to communicate with an arduino using the code from,
http://todbot.com/blog/2006/12/06/arduino-serial-c-code-to-talk-to-arduino/
which uses termios to open and talk to an arduino in a non blocking way which works fine. What I was wondering is when on Java using rxtx I can register a callback function that is called when ever there is data on the line so that I don't have to manually check. I googled but could not find any info on how to register a callback function?
I am on Linux/OS X and I am trying to avoid launching a new thread just to watch/read data on the line.
Posix itself does not define a way to assign a callback function to be called when serial data arrives. The standard way to do this type of processing if you don't want to use a seperate thread is to use the select library function. This allows you program to define a set of file descriptors your program is interested in and then go to sleep. Select will automatically wake up your process if something interesting happens to one of the file descriptors you've declared interest in (such as new data becoming available for reading). This avoids having to busy-wait and poll multiple descriptors for activity.
Another option would be to use a library like libevent which sits on top of the Posix layer and provides the callback infrastructure. http://monkey.org/~provos/libevent/
Boost.Asio can provide callback functionality when using serial ports. It runs on Linux and Mac OS X.
I would like to implement a socket-like object in user space. There's an important requirement that it should be pollable (i.e. it's state should be queryable via select or poll call).
Is there a platform neutral way of implementing such an object?
I'm aware that on Linux there's eventfd which kind of suits the needs except that there's no way to force it to signalize neither POLLIN nor POLLOUT.
You can use socketpair() to create a pair of connected AF_UNIX sockets. This is better than pipe() as it allows for bidirectional communication. If this isn't good enough for your needs, another option (which requires root for a daemon) would be to use the as-yet-not-in-mainline-Linux CUSE patches to create a device driver in userspace to do whatever you like. Or you can just hook into whatever event loop your user will be using...
The new linux eventfd can also emulate POLLIN/POLLOUT, although not both at once - set its value to 0xfffffffffffffffe for POLLIN but not POLLOUT, 0 for POLLOUT but not POLLIN, or anything else for both.
Other than these options, there's no platform-neutral way to do this, no. The usual pattern is to use a FIFO just to wake up the event loop, and have it poll using some other API once it's awake.
You want to build an user space object, that will be accessible through system call ?
ie open, read, write etc ... are redirected to your userspace object ?
You need either kernel support or libc support, otherwise I don't see how you can redirect your system call.
eventfd is not what you are asking for, it is implemented in kernel space. Did you describe your real problem ? Could fifo or unix domain socket fit your need ?
What about pseudo tty ? I don't know if you can block writing from the master side by faking the hardware flow control.
It's really not clear what you're trying to do; if you want a socket-like device, why not use sockets? You don't say ... And what's the deal with POLLIN and POLLOUT?
I kinda suspect you might be interested in using pseudo-terminal devices, see man 7 pty.
Use pipe(). It gives you two fd's, one to write, one to read.
Use the fd[1] to do your select/poll on.
Use the fd[0] to signal your select/poll for activity.
I'm referring to monitors as described here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monitor_(synchronization)
None of the definitions here seem apropos:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/monitor
So why are they called that?
== Update ==
Thank you for the answers, everyone!
I guess I was confused because I don't think of monitors usually as acting on themselves, which is what seems to be happening here. For example, you use a baby monitor to monitor a baby. I just don't think it would make much sense for a baby to monitor itself, but I could be wrong.
According to P. Brinch Hansen in Monitors and Concurrent Pascal: A personal history, the name originated from the original term for an operating system in the 60's and early 70's:
In the 1960s the resident part of an operating system was often known as
a monitor. The kernel of the RC 4000 multiprogramming system was called
the monitor and was defined as a program that "can execute a sequence of
instructions as an indivisible entity" (Brinch Hansen 1969).
Take producer consumer problem for example. Without using a monitor, you'd have to constantly check whether the queue is 1) full or not and 2) empty or not by writing busy loop. In effect, the monitor monitors the state for you by transferring the control atomically.
I think that definition 3a (from the dictionary) comes close
3a. A usually electronic device used to record, regulate, or control a process or system
I think a monitor monitors (and controls) access to a resource.
Of the definitions at The Free Dictionary for Monitor:
Definitions 3A and 4 for noun apply, more or less (a monitor is not a program but a program component).
Definitions 1, 2, 5 from the 'verb, transitive' section could also be said to apply.