How can you get the Linux thread Id of a std::thread() - c++

I was playing with std::thread and I was wondering how is it possible to get the thread id of a new std::thread(), I am not talking about std::thread::id but rather the OS Id given to the thread ( you can view it using pstree).
This is only for my knowledge, and it's targeted only to Linux platforms (no need to be portable).
I can get the Linux Thread Id within the thread like this :
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <sys/syscall.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
void SayHello()
{
std::cout << "Hello ! my id is " << (long int)syscall(SYS_gettid) << std::endl;
}
int main (int argc, char *argv[])
{
std::thread t1(&SayHello);
t1.join();
return 0;
}
But how can I retrieve the same id within the main loop ? I did not find a way using std::thread::native_handle. I believed it was possible to get it trough pid_t gettid(void); since the c++11 implementation relies on pthreads, but i must be wrong.
Any advices ?
Thank you.

Assuming you're using GCC standard library, std::thread::native_handle() returns the pthread_t thread ID returned by pthread_self(), not the OS thread ID returned by gettid(). std::thread::id() is a wrapper around that same pthread_t, and GCC's std::thread doesn't provide any way to get the OS thread ID, but you could create your own mapping:
std::mutex m;
std::map<std::thread::id, pid_t> threads;
void add_tid_mapping()
{
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> l(m);
threads[std::this_thread::get_id()] = syscall(SYS_gettid);
}
void wrap(void (*f)())
{
add_tid_mapping();
f();
}
Then create your thread with:
std::thread t1(&wrap, &SayHello);
then get the ID with something like:
pid_t tid = 0;
while (tid == 0)
{
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> l(m);
if (threads.count(t1.get_id()))
tid = threads[t1.get_id()];
}

Some pthread implementations, e.g. Android 21+, provide
pid_t pthread_gettid_np(pthread_t);
The implementation may use the internal structure of struct pthread_t to retrieve the native thread id, same as the one returned by gettid() or syscall(SYS_gettid) when called in the context of that thread.

How about this:
pid_t gettid (void)
{
return syscall(__NR_gettid);
}
http://yusufonlinux.blogspot.com/2010/11/get-thread-id-from-linux.html
Looks like __NR_gettid is defined in unistd.h

Related

How do I get the native handle of the current thread, with standard C++11? [duplicate]

In the following code snippet,
void foo() {
std::this_thread::native_handle().... //error here
}
int main() {
std::thread t1(foo);
t1.join();
return 0;
}
How do you get the native_handle from std::this_thread from within the function foo?
There is no way for a thread to autonomously gain access to its own std::thread. This is on purpose since std::thread is a move-only type.
I believe what you're requesting is a native_handle() member of std::thread::id, and that is an interesting suggestion. As far as I know it is not currently possible. It would be used like:
void foo()
{
auto native_me = std::this_thread::get_id().native_handle();
// ...
}
It wouldn't be guaranteed to work, or even exist. However I imagine most POSIX platforms could support it.
One way to try to change the C++ standard is to submit issues. Here are directions on how to do so.
C++11 does not provide a mechanism for getting the current threads native_handle. You must use platform specific calls, i.e. GetCurrentThread() on Windows:
void foo()
{
auto native_me = ::GetCurrentThread();
}
As Howard pointed, there is no support for this in ISO C++ yet.
But thread::id has an overloaded operator<< to print itself to an ostream.
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
int main()
{
std::cout << "Current thread ID: " << std::this_thread::get_id() << std::endl;
}
Without knowing the semantics of the actual value (which is highly platform-dependent), printing it or using it as a key in a map is the most you should be doing anyway.
Currently(C++17) you can't get native_handle from std::this_thread
The most possible interface might be std::this_thread::native_handle(). But not std::this_thread::get_id().native_handle(); by #Howard
Since Win/Linux/MacOS implement thread and thread::id differently: (below is informal pseudo code)
On Linux native_handle is stored at thread._M_id(of type id)._M_thread.
On Windows native_handle is stored at thread._Thr(of type _Thrd_t, not of type id)._Hnd.
On MacOS native_handle is stored at thread.__t_.
As you can see only in Linux source there is native_hanlde object implemented in thread::id structure. Thus on Win/MacOS you can't get the native_handle from an id object.
Finally, if your code runs only in Linux, there is a dirty trick to get native_handle from this_thread which I will never recommend:
auto thread_id = std::this_thread::get_id();
auto native_handle = *reinterpret_cast<std::thread::native_handle_type*>(&thread_id);
In fact, there is one funny way to circumvent the problem and access it via std::thread , which may work in some cases.
The original example was posted on this blog. I rewritten it.
You can save the code below to test.cpp and compile & run it
:
// g++ ./test.cpp -lpthread && ./a.out
//
#include <thread>
#include <vector>
#include <iostream>
#include <mutex>
#include <sched.h>
#include <pthread.h>
int main(int argc, const char** argv) {
constexpr unsigned num_threads = 4;
// A mutex ensures orderly access to std::cout from multiple threads.
std::mutex iomutex;
std::vector<std::thread> threads(num_threads);
for (unsigned i = 0; i < num_threads; ++i) {
threads[i] = std::thread([&iomutex, i,&threads] {
// Create a cpu_set_t object representing a set of CPUs. Clear it and mark
// only CPU i as set.
cpu_set_t cpuset;
CPU_ZERO(&cpuset);
CPU_SET(i, &cpuset);
int rc = pthread_setaffinity_np(threads[i].native_handle(),
sizeof(cpu_set_t), &cpuset);
if (rc != 0) {
std::cerr << "Error calling pthread_setaffinity_np: " << rc << "\n";
}
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(20));
while (1) {
{
// Use a lexical scope and lock_guard to safely lock the mutex only
// for the duration of std::cout usage.
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> iolock(iomutex);
std::cout << "Thread #" << i << ": on CPU " << sched_getcpu() << "\n";
}
// Simulate important work done by the tread by sleeping for a bit...
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(900));
}
});
}
for (auto& t : threads) {
t.join();
}
return 0;
}

proper way of handling std::thread termination in child process after fork()

Frown as much as you want, I'm going to do it anyway :)
My question is: in the following code, what is the proper way to handle the termination of the std::thread in the subprocess generated by fork()? std::thread::detach() or std::thread::join()?
#include <thread>
#include <iostream>
#include <unistd.h>
struct A {
void Fork()
{
std::thread t(&A::Parallel, this);
pid_t pid = fork();
if(pid) {
//parent
t.join();
} else {
//child
t.join(); // OR t.detach()?
}
}
void Parallel()
{
std::cout << "asd" << std::endl;
}
};
int main() {
A a;
a.Fork();
return 0;
}
I know that only the thread that calls fork() is duplicated, which means that the std::thread is actually doing nothing in the child process right? Hence my doubt.
According to fork description, the proper way is to call t.join() only from parent process, as child one only replicates caller thread.
Note also, that child process in multithreaded program is allowed only to call functions available for signal handlers and exec.

Synchronise two threads passing events between each other

I am new to windows c++ programming. Please see the below code where I want to make the two threads synchronized. The first thread should print "Hello" then pass the control/event to the second thread. Not sure how to do it. As of now I am using Sleep(1000). But if I dont use Sleep it result into undefined behavior. Please help...
#include <windows.h>
#include <process.h>
#include <iostream>
void thread1(void*);
void thread2(void*);
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
_beginthread(&thread1,0,(void*)0);
_beginthread(&thread2,0,(void*)0);
Sleep(1000);
}
void thread1(void*)
{
std::cout<<"Hello "<<std::endl;
}
void thread2(void*)
{
std::cout<<"World"<<std::endl;
}
The problem is the question you are asking really doesn't make sense. Multiple threads are designed to run at the same time and you're trying to play a game of pass the buck from one thread to another to get sequential serialised behavoir. Its like taking a really complicated tool and ask how it solves what is normally a really easy question.
However, multithreading is a really important topic to learn so I'll try to answer what you need to the best of my ability.
Firstly, I'd recommend using the new, standard C++11 functions and libraries. For windows, you can download Visual Studio 2012 Express Edition to play about with.
With this you can use std::thread, std::mutex and a lot [but not all] of the other C++11 goodies (like std::condition_variable).
To solve your problem you really need a condition variable. This lets you signal to another thread that something is ready for them:
#include <iostream>
#include <mutex>
#include <atomic>
#include <condition_variable>
#include <thread>
static std::atomic<bool> ready;
static std::mutex lock;
static std::condition_variable cv;
// ThreadOne immediately prints Hello then 'notifies' the condition variable
void ThreadOne()
{
std::cout << "Hello ";
ready = true;
cv.notify_one();
}
// ThreadTwo waits for someone to 'notify' the condition variable then prints 'World'
// Note: The 'cv.wait' must be in a loop as spurious wake-ups for condition_variables are allowed
void ThreadTwo()
{
while(true)
{
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> stackLock(lock);
cv.wait(stackLock);
if(ready) break;
}
std::cout << "World!" << std::endl;
}
// Main just kicks off two 'std::thread's. We must wait for both those threads
// to finish before we can return from main. 'join' does this - its the std
// equivalent of calling 'WaitForSingleObject' on the thread handle. its necessary
// to call join as the standard says so - but the underlying reason is that
// when main returns global destructors will start running. If your thread is also
// running at this critical time then it will possibly access global objects which
// are destructing or have destructed which is *bad*
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
std::thread t1([](){ThreadOne();});
std::thread t2([](){ThreadTwo();});
t1.join();
t2.join();
}
Here is the simplified version to handle your situation.
You are creating 2 threads to call 2 different function.
Ideally thread synchronization is used to serialize same code between threads but in your case it is not the need. You are trying to serialize 2 threads which are no way related to one another.
Any how you can wait for each thread to finish by not making async call.
#include <windows.h>
#include <process.h>
#include <iostream>
#include<mutex>
using namespace std;
void thread1(void*);
void thread2(void*);
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
HANDLE h1 = (HANDLE)_beginthread(&thread1,0,(void*)0);
WaitForSingleObject(h1,INFINITE);
HANDLE h2 = (HANDLE)_beginthread(&thread2,0,(void*)0);
WaitForSingleObject(h2,INFINITE);
}
void thread1(void*)
{
std::cout<<"Hello "<<std::endl;
}
void thread2(void*)
{
std::cout<<"World"<<std::endl;
}
You can group both beginthread in single function and call that function in while loop if you want to print multiple times.
void fun()
{
HANDLE h1 = (HANDLE)_beginthread(&thread1,0,(void*)0);
WaitForSingleObject(h1,INFINITE);
HANDLE h2 = (HANDLE)_beginthread(&thread2,0,(void*)0);
WaitForSingleObject(h2,INFINITE);
}

C++11 'native_handle' is not a member of 'std::this_thread'

In the following code snippet,
void foo() {
std::this_thread::native_handle().... //error here
}
int main() {
std::thread t1(foo);
t1.join();
return 0;
}
How do you get the native_handle from std::this_thread from within the function foo?
There is no way for a thread to autonomously gain access to its own std::thread. This is on purpose since std::thread is a move-only type.
I believe what you're requesting is a native_handle() member of std::thread::id, and that is an interesting suggestion. As far as I know it is not currently possible. It would be used like:
void foo()
{
auto native_me = std::this_thread::get_id().native_handle();
// ...
}
It wouldn't be guaranteed to work, or even exist. However I imagine most POSIX platforms could support it.
One way to try to change the C++ standard is to submit issues. Here are directions on how to do so.
C++11 does not provide a mechanism for getting the current threads native_handle. You must use platform specific calls, i.e. GetCurrentThread() on Windows:
void foo()
{
auto native_me = ::GetCurrentThread();
}
As Howard pointed, there is no support for this in ISO C++ yet.
But thread::id has an overloaded operator<< to print itself to an ostream.
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
int main()
{
std::cout << "Current thread ID: " << std::this_thread::get_id() << std::endl;
}
Without knowing the semantics of the actual value (which is highly platform-dependent), printing it or using it as a key in a map is the most you should be doing anyway.
Currently(C++17) you can't get native_handle from std::this_thread
The most possible interface might be std::this_thread::native_handle(). But not std::this_thread::get_id().native_handle(); by #Howard
Since Win/Linux/MacOS implement thread and thread::id differently: (below is informal pseudo code)
On Linux native_handle is stored at thread._M_id(of type id)._M_thread.
On Windows native_handle is stored at thread._Thr(of type _Thrd_t, not of type id)._Hnd.
On MacOS native_handle is stored at thread.__t_.
As you can see only in Linux source there is native_hanlde object implemented in thread::id structure. Thus on Win/MacOS you can't get the native_handle from an id object.
Finally, if your code runs only in Linux, there is a dirty trick to get native_handle from this_thread which I will never recommend:
auto thread_id = std::this_thread::get_id();
auto native_handle = *reinterpret_cast<std::thread::native_handle_type*>(&thread_id);
In fact, there is one funny way to circumvent the problem and access it via std::thread , which may work in some cases.
The original example was posted on this blog. I rewritten it.
You can save the code below to test.cpp and compile & run it
:
// g++ ./test.cpp -lpthread && ./a.out
//
#include <thread>
#include <vector>
#include <iostream>
#include <mutex>
#include <sched.h>
#include <pthread.h>
int main(int argc, const char** argv) {
constexpr unsigned num_threads = 4;
// A mutex ensures orderly access to std::cout from multiple threads.
std::mutex iomutex;
std::vector<std::thread> threads(num_threads);
for (unsigned i = 0; i < num_threads; ++i) {
threads[i] = std::thread([&iomutex, i,&threads] {
// Create a cpu_set_t object representing a set of CPUs. Clear it and mark
// only CPU i as set.
cpu_set_t cpuset;
CPU_ZERO(&cpuset);
CPU_SET(i, &cpuset);
int rc = pthread_setaffinity_np(threads[i].native_handle(),
sizeof(cpu_set_t), &cpuset);
if (rc != 0) {
std::cerr << "Error calling pthread_setaffinity_np: " << rc << "\n";
}
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(20));
while (1) {
{
// Use a lexical scope and lock_guard to safely lock the mutex only
// for the duration of std::cout usage.
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> iolock(iomutex);
std::cout << "Thread #" << i << ": on CPU " << sched_getcpu() << "\n";
}
// Simulate important work done by the tread by sleeping for a bit...
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(900));
}
});
}
for (auto& t : threads) {
t.join();
}
return 0;
}

Simple example of threading in C++

This question's answers are a community effort. Edit existing answers to improve this post. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.
Can someone post a simple example of starting two (Object Oriented) threads in C++.
I'm looking for actual C++ thread objects that I can extend run methods on (or something similar) as opposed to calling a C-style thread library.
I left out any OS specific requests in the hopes that whoever replied would reply with cross platform libraries to use. I'm just making that explicit now.
Create a function that you want the thread to execute, for example:
void task1(std::string msg)
{
std::cout << "task1 says: " << msg;
}
Now create the thread object that will ultimately invoke the function above like so:
std::thread t1(task1, "Hello");
(You need to #include <thread> to access the std::thread class.)
The constructor's first argument is the function the thread will execute, followed by the function's parameters. The thread is automatically started upon construction.
If later on you want to wait for the thread to be done executing the function, call:
t1.join();
(Joining means that the thread who invoked the new thread will wait for the new thread to finish execution, before it will continue its own execution.)
The Code
#include <string>
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
using namespace std;
// The function we want to execute on the new thread.
void task1(string msg)
{
cout << "task1 says: " << msg;
}
int main()
{
// Constructs the new thread and runs it. Does not block execution.
thread t1(task1, "Hello");
// Do other things...
// Makes the main thread wait for the new thread to finish execution, therefore blocks its own execution.
t1.join();
}
More information about std::thread here
On GCC, compile with -std=c++0x -pthread.
This should work for any operating-system, granted your compiler supports this (C++11) feature.
Well, technically any such object will wind up being built over a C-style thread library because C++ only just specified a stock std::thread model in C++0x, which was just nailed down and hasn't yet been implemented.
The problem is somewhat systemic. Technically the existing C++ memory model isn't strict enough to allow for well-defined semantics for all of the 'happens before' cases. Hans Boehm wrote an paper on the topic a while back and was instrumental in hammering out the C++0x standard on the topic.
Threads Cannot be Implemented as a Library
That said, there are several cross-platform thread C++ libraries that work just fine in practice. The Intel thread building blocks contains a tbb::thread object that closely approximates the C++0x standard and Boost has a boost::thread library that does the same.
oneAPI Threading Building Blocks
Chapter 19. Thread (Boost documentation)
Using boost::thread, you'd get something like:
#include <boost/thread.hpp>
void task1() {
// do stuff
}
void task2() {
// do stuff
}
int main (int argc, char ** argv) {
using namespace boost;
thread thread_1 = thread(task1);
thread thread_2 = thread(task2);
// do other stuff
thread_2.join();
thread_1.join();
return 0;
}
#include <thread>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
void doSomething(int id) {
cout << id << "\n";
}
/**
* Spawns n threads
*/
void spawnThreads(int n)
{
std::vector<thread> threads(n);
// spawn n threads:
for (int i = 0; i < n; i++) {
threads[i] = thread(doSomething, i + 1);
}
for (auto& th : threads) {
th.join();
}
}
int main()
{
spawnThreads(10);
}
There is also a POSIX library for POSIX operating systems.
Check for compatibility:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#include <iostream>
void *task(void *argument){
char* msg;
msg = (char*)argument;
std::cout << msg << std::endl;
}
int main(){
pthread_t thread1, thread2;
int i1, i2;
i1 = pthread_create(&thread1, NULL, task, (void*) "thread 1");
i2 = pthread_create(&thread2, NULL, task, (void*) "thread 2");
pthread_join(thread1, NULL);
pthread_join(thread2, NULL);
return 0;
}
Compile with -lpthread.
POSIX Threads
When searching for an example of a C++ class that calls one of its own instance methods in a new thread, this question comes up, but we were not able to use any of these answers that way. Here's an example that does that:
Class.h
class DataManager
{
public:
bool hasData;
void getData();
bool dataAvailable();
};
Class.cpp
#include "DataManager.h"
void DataManager::getData()
{
// perform background data munging
hasData = true;
// be sure to notify on the main thread
}
bool DataManager::dataAvailable()
{
if (hasData)
{
return true;
}
else
{
std::thread t(&DataManager::getData, this);
t.detach(); // as opposed to .join, which runs on the current thread
}
}
Note that this example doesn't get into mutex or locking.
Unless one wants a separate function in the global namespace, we can use lambda functions for creating threads.
One of the major advantage of creating a thread using lambda is that we don't need to pass local parameters as an argument list. We can use the capture list for the same and the closure property of lambda will take care of the lifecycle.
Here is sample code:
int main() {
int localVariable = 100;
thread th { [=]() {
cout << "The value of local variable => " << localVariable << endl;
}};
th.join();
return 0;
}
By far, I've found C++ lambdas to be the best way of creating threads especially for simpler thread functions.
It largely depends on the library you decide to use. For instance, if you use the wxWidgets library, the creation of a thread would look like this:
class RThread : public wxThread {
public:
RThread()
: wxThread(wxTHREAD_JOINABLE){
}
private:
RThread(const RThread &copy);
public:
void *Entry(void){
//Do...
return 0;
}
};
wxThread *CreateThread() {
//Create thread
wxThread *_hThread = new RThread();
//Start thread
_hThread->Create();
_hThread->Run();
return _hThread;
}
If your main thread calls the CreateThread method, you'll create a new thread that will start executing the code in your "Entry" method. You'll have to keep a reference to the thread in most cases to join or stop it.
More information is in the wxThread documentation.