Fill an array from different threads concurrently c++ - c++

Question

First of all, I think it is important to say that I am new to multithreading and know very little about it. I was trying to write some programs in C++ using threads and ran into a problem (question) that I will try to explain to you now:
I wanted to use several threads to fill an array, here is my code:
static const int num_threads = 5;
int A[50], n;
//------------------------------------------------------------
void ThreadFunc(int tid)
{
for (int q = 0; q < 5; q++)
{
A[n] = tid;
n++;
}
}
//------------------------------------------------------------
int main()
{
thread t[num_threads];
n = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < num_threads; i++)
{
t[i] = thread(ThreadFunc, i);
}
for (int i = 0; i < num_threads; i++)
{
t[i].join();
}
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
cout << A[i] << endl;
return 0;
}
As a result of this program I get:
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
and so on.
As I understand, the second thread starts writing elements to an array only when the first thread finishes writing all elements to an array.
The question is why threads dont't work concurrently? I mean why don't I get something like that:
0
1
2
0
3
1
4
and so on.
Is there any way to solve this problem?
Thank you in advance.

Answer 1

Since n is accessed from more than one thread, those accesses need to be synchronized so that changes made in one thread don't conflict with changes made in another. There are (at least) two ways to do this.
First, you can make n an atomic variable. Just change its definition, and do the increment where the value is used:
std::atomic<int> n;
...
A[n++] = tid;
Or you can wrap all the accesses inside a critical section:
std::mutex mtx;
int next_n() {
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> lock(mtx);
return n++;
}
And in each thread, instead of directly incrementing n, call that function:
A[next_n()] = tid;
This is much slower than the atomic access, so not appropriate here. In more complex situations it will be the right solution.

Answer 2

The worker function is so short, i.e., finishes executing so quickly, that it's possible that each thread is completing before the next one even starts. Also, you may need to link with a thread library to get real threads, e.g., -lpthread. Even with that, the results you're getting are purely by chance and could appear in any order.
There are two corrections you need to make for your program to be properly synchronized. Change:
int n;
// ...
A[n] = tid; n++;
to
std::atomic_int n;
// ...
A[n++] = tid;
Often it's preferable to avoid synchronization issues altogether and split the workload across threads. Since the work done per iteration is the same here, it's as easy as dividing the work evenly:
void ThreadFunc(int tid, int first, int last)
{
for (int i = first; i < last; i++)
A[i] = tid;
}
Inside main, modify the thread create loop:
for (int first = 0, i = 0; i < num_threads; i++) {
// possible num_threads does not evenly divide ASIZE.
int last = (i != num_threads-1) ? std::size(A)/num_threads*(i+1) : std::size(A);
t[i] = thread(ThreadFunc, i, first, last);
first = last;
}
Of course by doing this, even though the array may be written out of order, the values will be stored to the same locations every time.