std::thread throwing "resource dead lock would occur" - c++

Question

I have a list of objects, each object has member variables which are calculated by an "update" function. I want to update the objects in parallel, that is I want to create a thread for each object to execute it's update function.
Is this a reasonable thing to do? Any reasons why this may not be a good idea?
Below is a program which attempts to do what I described, this is a complete program so you should be able to run it (I'm using VS2015). The goal is to update each object in parallel. The problem is that once the update function completes, the thread throws an "resource dead lock would occur" exception and aborts.
Where am I going wrong?
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
#include <thread>
#include <mutex>
#include <chrono>
class Object
{
public:
Object(int sleepTime, unsigned int id)
: m_pSleepTime(sleepTime), m_pId(id), m_pValue(0) {}
void update()
{
if (!isLocked()) // if an object is not locked
{
// create a thread to perform it's update
m_pThread.reset(new std::thread(&Object::_update, this));
}
}
unsigned int getId()
{
return m_pId;
}
unsigned int getValue()
{
return m_pValue;
}
bool isLocked()
{
bool mutexStatus = m_pMutex.try_lock();
if (mutexStatus) // if mutex is locked successfully (meaning it was unlocked)
{
m_pMutex.unlock();
return false;
}
else // if mutex is locked
{
return true;
}
}
private:
// private update function which actually does work
void _update()
{
m_pMutex.lock();
{
std::cout << "thread " << m_pId << " sleeping for " << m_pSleepTime << std::endl;
std::chrono::milliseconds duration(m_pSleepTime);
std::this_thread::sleep_for(duration);
m_pValue = m_pId * 10;
}
m_pMutex.unlock();
try
{
m_pThread->join();
}
catch (const std::exception& e)
{
std::cout << e.what() << std::endl; // throws "resource dead lock would occur"
}
}
unsigned int m_pSleepTime;
unsigned int m_pId;
unsigned int m_pValue;
std::mutex m_pMutex;
std::shared_ptr<std::thread> m_pThread; // store reference to thread so it doesn't go out of scope when update() returns
};
typedef std::shared_ptr<Object> ObjectPtr;
class ObjectManager
{
public:
ObjectManager()
: m_pNumObjects(0){}
void updateObjects()
{
for (int i = 0; i < m_pNumObjects; ++i)
{
m_pObjects[i]->update();
}
}
void removeObjectByIndex(int index)
{
m_pObjects.erase(m_pObjects.begin() + index);
}
void addObject(ObjectPtr objPtr)
{
m_pObjects.push_back(objPtr);
m_pNumObjects++;
}
ObjectPtr getObjectByIndex(unsigned int index)
{
return m_pObjects[index];
}
private:
std::vector<ObjectPtr> m_pObjects;
int m_pNumObjects;
};
void main()
{
int numObjects = 2;
// Generate sleep time for each object
std::vector<int> objectSleepTimes;
objectSleepTimes.reserve(numObjects);
for (int i = 0; i < numObjects; ++i)
objectSleepTimes.push_back(rand());
ObjectManager mgr;
// Create some objects
for (int i = 0; i < numObjects; ++i)
mgr.addObject(std::make_shared<Object>(objectSleepTimes[i], i));
// Print expected object completion order
// Sort from smallest to largest
std::sort(objectSleepTimes.begin(), objectSleepTimes.end());
for (int i = 0; i < numObjects; ++i)
std::cout << objectSleepTimes[i] << ", ";
std::cout << std::endl;
// Update objects
mgr.updateObjects();
int numCompleted = 0; // number of objects which finished updating
while (numCompleted != numObjects)
{
for (int i = 0; i < numObjects; ++i)
{
auto objectRef = mgr.getObjectByIndex(i);
if (!objectRef->isLocked()) // if object is not locked, it is finished updating
{
std::cout << "Object " << objectRef->getId() << " completed. Value = " << objectRef->getValue() << std::endl;
mgr.removeObjectByIndex(i);
numCompleted++;
}
}
}
system("pause");
}

Answer 1

Looks like you've got a thread that is trying to join itself.

Answer 2

While I was trying to understand your solution I was simplifying it a lot. And I come to point that you use std::thread::join() method in a wrong way.
std::thread provide capabilities to wait for it completion (non-spin wait) -- In your example you wait for thread completion in infinite loop (snip wait) that will consume CPU time heavily.
You should call std::thread::join() from other thread to wait for thread completion. Mutex in Object in your example is not necessary. Moreover, you missed one mutex to synchronize access to std::cout, which is not thread-safe. I hope the example below will help.
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
#include <thread>
#include <mutex>
#include <chrono>
#include <cassert>
// cout is not thread-safe
std::recursive_mutex cout_mutex;
class Object {
public:
Object(int sleepTime, unsigned int id)
: _sleepTime(sleepTime), _id(id), _value(0) {}
void runUpdate() {
if (!_thread.joinable())
_thread = std::thread(&Object::_update, this);
}
void waitForResult() {
_thread.join();
}
unsigned int getId() const { return _id; }
unsigned int getValue() const { return _value; }
private:
void _update() {
{
{
std::lock_guard<std::recursive_mutex> lock(cout_mutex);
std::cout << "thread " << _id << " sleeping for " << _sleepTime << std::endl;
}
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::seconds(_sleepTime));
_value = _id * 10;
}
std::lock_guard<std::recursive_mutex> lock(cout_mutex);
std::cout << "Object " << getId() << " completed. Value = " << getValue() << std::endl;
}
unsigned int _sleepTime;
unsigned int _id;
unsigned int _value;
std::thread _thread;
};
class ObjectManager : public std::vector<std::shared_ptr<Object>> {
public:
void runUpdate() {
for (auto it = this->begin(); it != this->end(); ++it)
(*it)->runUpdate();
}
void waitForAll() {
auto it = this->begin();
while (it != this->end()) {
(*it)->waitForResult();
it = this->erase(it);
}
}
};
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
enum {
TEST_OBJECTS_NUM = 2,
};
srand(static_cast<unsigned int>(time(nullptr)));
ObjectManager mgr;
// Generate sleep time for each object
std::vector<int> objectSleepTimes;
objectSleepTimes.reserve(TEST_OBJECTS_NUM);
for (int i = 0; i < TEST_OBJECTS_NUM; ++i)
objectSleepTimes.push_back(rand() * 9 / RAND_MAX + 1); // 1..10 seconds
// Create some objects
for (int i = 0; i < TEST_OBJECTS_NUM; ++i)
mgr.push_back(std::make_shared<Object>(objectSleepTimes[i], i));
assert(mgr.size() == TEST_OBJECTS_NUM);
// Print expected object completion order
// Sort from smallest to largest
std::sort(objectSleepTimes.begin(), objectSleepTimes.end());
for (size_t i = 0; i < mgr.size(); ++i)
std::cout << objectSleepTimes[i] << ", ";
std::cout << std::endl;
// Update objects
mgr.runUpdate();
mgr.waitForAll();
//system("pause"); // use Ctrl+F5 to run the app instead. That's more reliable in case of sudden app exit.
}

Answer 3

About is it a reasonable thing to do...
A better approach is to create an object update queue. Objects that need to be updated are added to this queue, which can be fulfilled by a group of threads instead of one thread per object.
The benefits are:
No 1-to-1 correspondence between thread and objects. Creating a thread is a heavy operation, probably more expensive than most update code for a single object.
Supports thousands of objects: with your solution you would need to create thousands of threads, which you will find exceeds your OS capacity.
Can support additional features like declaring dependencies between objects or updating a group of related objects as one operation.