I have an application with 2 QThreads which behave like it in the pseudocode below (the semaphores are of type QSemaphore):
Thread1 {
print("about to wait on semaphore 1");
sem1.acquire(1);
print("finished waiting on semaphore 1");
sem2.release(1);
}
Thread2 {
print("signaling semaphore 1");
sem1.release(1);
print("about to wait on semaphore 2");
sem2.acquire(1);
}
The issue is that the first thread does NOT wake up when the first semaphore is signalled, i.e. the application produces the following output:
about to wait on semaphore 1
signaling semaphore 1
about to wait on semaphore 2
And that's it. The first thread no longer wakes up.
Now I change the first thread to do the following:
Thread1 {
print("about to wait on semaphore 1");
while (!sem1.tryAcquire(1, 200));
print("finished waiting on semaphore 1");
sem2.release(1);
}
In this case the first thread sleeps for at most 200ms before it tries to acquire the semaphore again. Now I get the following error:
QWaitCondition::wait(): mutex unlock failure: Invalid argument
No other mutexes or other synchronisation primitives are used by the application. What could be the issue?
Update:
I've removed the Semaphores and replaced each with a QWaitCondition and a QMutex and now it works just fine. I didn't make any other changes and I still don't know why the version with semaphores was incorrect. They were both initialised to 0.
Probably you do something wrong somewhere else (e.g., semaphore initialization code).
The following example compiles and runs (gcc).
threads.h:
#pragma once
#include <QThread>
class Thread1 : public QThread
{
protected:
virtual void run();
};
class Thread2 : public QThread
{
protected:
virtual void run();
};
threads.cpp:
#include "threads.h"
#include <QSemaphore>
#include <iostream>
namespace
{
QSemaphore sem1, sem2;
}
void Thread1::run()
{
std::cout << "about to wait on semaphore 1\n";
sem1.acquire(1);
//while (!sem1.tryAcquire(1, 200)); //works too
std::cout << "finished waiting on semaphore 1\n";
sem2.release(1);
}
void Thread2::run()
{
std::cout << "signaling semaphore 1\n";
sem1.release(1);
std::cout << "about to wait on semaphore 2\n";
sem2.acquire(1);
}
main.cpp:
#include "threads.h"
#include <iostream>
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
Thread1 t1;
Thread2 t2;
t1.start();
t2.start();
t1.wait();
t2.wait();
std::cout << "Success\n";
}
possible output:
signaling semaphore 1
about to wait on semaphore 2
about to wait on semaphore 1
finished waiting on semaphore 1
Success
Related
Scenario:
I have a condition_variable based wait and signal mechanism. This works! But I need a little more than just the classic wait and signal mechanism. I need to be able to do a timed wait as well as an infinite wait "on the same condition_variable". Hence, I created a wrapper class around a condition_variable which takes care of the spurious wake up issue as well. Following is the code for that:
Code:
// CondVarWrapper.hpp
#pragma once
#include <mutex>
#include <chrono>
#include <condition_variable>
class CondVarWrapper {
public:
void Signal() {
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> unique_lock(cv_mutex);
cond_var_signalled = true;
timed_out = false;
unique_lock.unlock();
cond_var.notify_one();
}
bool WaitFor(const std::chrono::seconds timeout) {
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> unique_lock(cv_mutex);
timed_out = true;
cond_var.wait_for(unique_lock, timeout, [this] {
return cond_var_signalled;
});
cond_var_signalled = false;
return (timed_out == false);
}
bool Wait() {
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> unique_lock(cv_mutex);
timed_out = true;
cond_var.wait(unique_lock, [this] {
return cond_var_signalled;
});
cond_var_signalled = false;
return (timed_out == false);
}
private:
bool cond_var_signalled = false;
bool timed_out = false;
std::mutex cv_mutex;
std::condition_variable cond_var;
};
// main.cpp
#include "CondVarWrapper.hpp"
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <thread>
int main() {
CondVarWrapper cond_var_wrapper;
std::thread my_thread = std::thread([&cond_var_wrapper]{
std::cout << "Thread started" << std::endl;
if (cond_var_wrapper.WaitFor(std::chrono::seconds(10))) {
std::cout << "Thread stopped by signal from main" << std::endl;
} else {
std::cout << "ERROR: Thread stopping because of timeout" << std::endl;
}
});
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::seconds(3));
// Uncomment following line to see the timeout working
cond_var_wrapper.Signal();
my_thread.join();
}
Question:
Above code is good but I think there is one problem? Would I really be able to do a wait as as well do a wait_for on the same condition_variable? What if a thread has acquired cv_mutex by calling CondVarWrapper::Wait() and this one never returned for some reason. And then another thread comes in calling CondVarWrapper::WaitFor(std::chrono::seconds(3)) expecting to return out if it does not succeed in 3 seconds. Now, this second thread would not be able to return out of WaitFor after 3 seconds isnt it? In fact it wouldn't ever return. Because the condition_variable wait is a timed wait but not the lock on cv_mutex. Am I correct or Am I wrong in understanding here?
If I am correct above then I need to replace std::mutex cv_mutex with a std::timed_mutex cv_mutex and do a timed_wait in CondVarWrapper::WaitFor and do a infinite wait on CondVarWrapper::Wait? Or are there any better/easier ways of handling it?
The mutex is released when calling std::condition::wait on the condition variable cond_var. Thus, when you call CondVarWrapper::Wait from one thread, it releases the mutex when calling std::condition::wait and it hangs in there forever, the second thread can still call CondVarWrapper::WaitFor and successfully lock the mutex cv_mutex.
I have a simpale program that should create two threads with a function hundler that will run infnite and a main thread.
Whenever I try to do pthread_join or pthread_exit to the main thread (in order to demonstrate that the children threads are still working after pthread_exit from main) there is never seems to be a context switch back to the main thread in order to print the message saying he is ending his job "Goodbye" (even the goodbye message before the thread creation is not printed, so I am not exactly sure what is the problem).Only the function handlers of the threads are printing what they should. I set sleep of 4 secs in the other threads in order to see this message before they start, there should have been a context switch to the only thread available that isn't sleeping (main)..
Here is the code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <pthread.h>
void *thread(void *vargp) {
sleep(4);
while(1)
printf("First Thread No' %ld\n",pthread_self());
}
void *thread2(void *vargp) {
sleep(4);
while(1)
printf("Second Thread No' %ld\n",pthread_self());
}
int main() {
int j,i = 42;
pthread_t tid, tid2;
printf("Good bye1");
pthread_create(&tid, NULL, thread, (void*)&i);
pthread_create(&tid2, NULL, thread2, (void*)&i);
printf("Good bye");
pthread_exit(NULL);
//pthread_join(tid, (void**)&i);
//pthread_join(tid2, (void**)&j);
}
I have a program where I start multiple, long running threads (such as a REST-API). On primed signals (e.g SIGHUP) I would like to be able to shut down all threads cleanly (by waiting for them to exit). Below follows some code from a thispointer article that illustrated a good idea on how to do this
#include <thread>
#include <iostream>
#include <assert.h>
#include <chrono>
#include <future>
void threadFunction(std::future<void> futureObj)
{
std::cout << "Thread Start" << std::endl;
while (futureObj.wait_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(1)) ==
std::future_status::timeout)
{
std::cout << "Doing Some Work" << std::endl;
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(1000));
}
std::cout << "Thread End" << std::endl;
}
int main()
{
// Create a std::promise object
std::promise<void> exitSignal;
//Fetch std::future object associated with promise
std::future<void> futureObj = exitSignal.get_future();
// Starting Thread & move the future object in lambda function by reference
std::thread th(&threadFunction, std::move(futureObj));
//Wait for 10 sec
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::seconds(10));
std::cout << "Asking Thread to Stop" << std::endl;
//Set the value in promise
exitSignal.set_value();
//Wait for thread to join
th.join();
std::cout << "Exiting Main Function" << std::endl;
return 0;
}
However, as one might have noticed this concept has a critical drawback: the exitSignal will have to be emitted before th.join() is called.
In a situation where one wants to listen to a signal, e.g using signal(SIGHUP, callback) this is of course impractical.
My question is: are there better concepts for shutting down multiple threads? How would I go about them? I think using a promise is not a bad idea, I just haven't found a way with it to solve my problem.
You can use std::notify_all_at_thread_exit() on a std::condition_variable.
Here is an example:
#include <mutex>
#include <thread>
#include <condition_variable>
#include <cassert>
#include <string>
std::mutex m;
std::condition_variable cv;
bool ready = false;
std::string result; // some arbitrary type
void thread_func()
{
thread_local std::string thread_local_data = "42";
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> lk(m);
// assign a value to result using thread_local data
result = thread_local_data;
ready = true;
std::notify_all_at_thread_exit(cv, std::move(lk));
} // 1. destroy thread_locals;
// 2. unlock mutex;
// 3. notify cv.
int main()
{
std::thread t(thread_func);
t.detach();
// do other work
// ...
// wait for the detached thread
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> lk(m);
cv.wait(lk, [] { return ready; });
// result is ready and thread_local destructors have finished, no UB
assert(result == "42");
}
Source: cppreference.com
I am running this very simple program, on Ubuntu 13.04 Desktop, however if I comment out the line sleep_for, it hangs after printing cout from main. Can anyone explain why ? As far as I understand, main is a thread and t is another thread and in this case the mutex manages synchronization for shared cout object.
#include <thread>
#include <iostream>
#include <mutex>
using namespace std;
std::mutex mu;
void show()
{
std::lock_guard<mutex> locker(mu);
cout<<"this is from inside the thread"<<endl;
}
int main()
{
std::thread t(show);
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(1000));
std::lock_guard<mutex> locker(mu);
cout<<"This is from inside the main"<<endl;
t.join();
return 0;
}
If you change to main function as follows, the code will work as expected:
int main()
{
std::thread t(show);
{
std::lock_guard<mutex> locker(mu);
cout << "This is from inside the main" << endl;
} // automatically release lock
t.join();
}
In your code, there is a unfortunate race condition. If the thread t gets the lock first, everything works fine. But if the main threads gets the lock first, it holds the lock until the end of the main function. That means, the thread t has no chance to get the lock, can't finish and the main thread will block on t.join().
That's just a classic deadlock: The main thread obtains the lock and then blocks on joining the other thread, but the other thread can only join if it manages to obtain the lock.
Using pthreads in linux 2.6.30 I am trying to send a single signal which will cause multiple threads to begin execution. The broadcast seems to only be received by one thread. I have tried both pthread_cond_signal and pthread cond_broadcast and both seem to have the same behavior. For the mutex in pthread_cond_wait, I have tried both common mutexes and separate (local) mutexes with no apparent difference.
worker_thread(void *p)
{
// setup stuff here
printf("Thread %d ready for action \n", p->thread_no);
pthread_cond_wait(p->cond_var, p->mutex);
printf("Thread %d off to work \n", p->thread_no);
// work stuff
}
dispatch_thread(void *p)
{
// setup stuff
printf("Wakeup, everyone ");
pthread_cond_broadcast(p->cond_var);
printf("everyone should be working \n");
// more stuff
}
main()
{
pthread_cond_init(cond_var);
for (i=0; i!=num_cores; i++) {
pthread_create(worker_thread...);
}
pthread_create(dispatch_thread...);
}
Output:
Thread 0 ready for action
Thread 1 ready for action
Thread 2 ready for action
Thread 3 ready for action
Wakeup, everyone
everyone should be working
Thread 0 off to work
What's a good way to send signals to all the threads?
First off, you should have the mutex locked at the point where you call pthread_cond_wait(). It's generally a good idea to hold the mutex when you call pthread_cond_broadcast(), as well.
Second off, you should loop calling pthread_cond_wait() while the wait condition is true. Spurious wakeups can happen, and you must be able to handle them.
Finally, your actual problem: you are signaling all threads, but some of them aren't waiting yet when the signal is sent. Your main thread and dispatch thread are racing your worker threads: if the main thread can launch the dispatch thread, and the dispatch thread can grab the mutex and broadcast on it before the worker threads can, then those worker threads will never wake up.
You need a synchronization point prior to signaling where you wait to signal till all threads are known to be waiting for the signal. That, or you can keep signaling till you know all threads have been woken up.
In this case, you could use the mutex to protect a count of sleeping threads. Each thread grabs the mutex and increments the count. If the count matches the count of worker threads, then it's the last thread to increment the count and so signals on another condition variable sharing the same mutex to the sleeping dispatch thread that all threads are ready. The thread then waits on the original condition, which causes it release the mutex.
If the dispatch thread wasn't sleeping yet when the last worker thread signals on that condition, it will find that the count already matches the desired count and not bother waiting, but immediately broadcast on the shared condition to wake workers, who are now guaranteed to all be sleeping.
Anyway, here's some working source code that fleshes out your sample code and includes my solution:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#include <err.h>
static const int num_cores = 8;
struct sync {
pthread_mutex_t *mutex;
pthread_cond_t *cond_var;
int thread_no;
};
static int sleeping_count = 0;
static pthread_cond_t all_sleeping_cond = PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER;
void *
worker_thread(void *p_)
{
struct sync *p = p_;
// setup stuff here
pthread_mutex_lock(p->mutex);
printf("Thread %d ready for action \n", p->thread_no);
sleeping_count += 1;
if (sleeping_count >= num_cores) {
/* Last worker to go to sleep. */
pthread_cond_signal(&all_sleeping_cond);
}
int err = pthread_cond_wait(p->cond_var, p->mutex);
if (err) warnc(err, "pthread_cond_wait");
printf("Thread %d off to work \n", p->thread_no);
pthread_mutex_unlock(p->mutex);
// work stuff
return NULL;
}
void *
dispatch_thread(void *p_)
{
struct sync *p = p_;
// setup stuff
pthread_mutex_lock(p->mutex);
while (sleeping_count < num_cores) {
pthread_cond_wait(&all_sleeping_cond, p->mutex);
}
printf("Wakeup, everyone ");
int err = pthread_cond_broadcast(p->cond_var);
if (err) warnc(err, "pthread_cond_broadcast");
printf("everyone should be working \n");
pthread_mutex_unlock(p->mutex);
// more stuff
return NULL;
}
int
main(void)
{
pthread_mutex_t mutex = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
pthread_cond_t cond_var = PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER;
pthread_t worker[num_cores];
struct sync info[num_cores];
for (int i = 0; i < num_cores; i++) {
struct sync *p = &info[i];
p->mutex = &mutex;
p->cond_var = &cond_var;
p->thread_no = i;
pthread_create(&worker[i], NULL, worker_thread, p);
}
pthread_t dispatcher;
struct sync p = {&mutex, &cond_var, num_cores};
pthread_create(&dispatcher, NULL, dispatch_thread, &p);
pthread_exit(NULL);
/* not reached */
return 0;
}