I am reading a blog post on the code quality of the Doom 3 source code, and I've gotten stuck on a piece of C++ code I can not make sense of. I should say that I am not a C++ programmer.
The offending code looks as follows:
Sys_StartAsyncThread(){ // The next look runs is a separate thread.
while ( 1 ){
usleep( 16666 ); // Run at 60Hz
common->Async(); // Do the job
Sys_TriggerEvent( TRIGGER_EVENT_ONE ); // Unlock other thread waiting for inputs
pthread_testcancel(); // Check if we have been cancelled by the main thread (on shutdown).
}
}
(taken from http://fabiensanglard.net/doom3/index.php, under the topic "Unrolling the loop")
This looks to me as a closure being passed as a parameter to the return value of Sys_StartAsyncThread() - but to my knowledge this is not possible in C++, and also Sys_StartAsyncThread() is of void type, so what's going on here?
The definition of Sys_StartAsyncThread() can be found here.
It looks like a typo. According to here, there should be a semicolon after Sys_StartAsyncThread();.
As people have mentioned this is just a notation that I use in order the content of each method: Unrolling the loop and methods.
In the example your provided the block between braces is actually the content of the method
Sys_StartAsyncThread
Hop
It's just a typo. The correct code is
Sys_StartAsyncThread();
{
// Create a thread that will block on hTimer in order to run at 60Hz (every 16 milliseconds).
// The Thread calls common->Async over and over for Sound mixing and input generation.
while ( 1 )
{
usleep( 16666 );
common->Async();
Sys_TriggerEvent( TRIGGER_EVENT_ONE );
pthread_testcancel();
}
}
You can see it here http://fabiensanglard.net/doom3/doom3_unrolled.php, as explained in the page you referred.
For more details here is the fully unrolled loop that I used as a map
while reading the code.
Related
I'm on ubuntu 16.10 with g++ 6.2, testing libaio feature:
1. I was trying to test io_set_callback() function
2. I was using main thread and a child thread to talk by a pipe
3. child thread writes periodically (by alarm timer, signal), and main thread reads
I hope to use "callback" function to receive notifications. It didn't work as expected: callback function "read_done" is never called
My questions:
1. I expected my program should call "read_done" function, but actually not.
2. Why the output prints 2 "Enter while" each time?
I hope it only print together with "thread write msg:..."
3. I tried to comment out "io_getevents" line, same result.
I'm not sure if callback mode still need io_getevents? So how to fix my program so it work as I expected? Thanks.
You need to integrate io_queue_run(3) and io_queue_init(3) into your program. Though these aren't new functions, they don't seem to be in the manpages for a bunch of currently shipping distros. Here's a couple of the manpages:
http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/precise/en/man3/io_queue_run.3.html
http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/precise/en/man3/io_queue_init.3.html
And, of course, the manpages don't actually say it, but io_queue_run is what calls the callbacks that you set in io_set_callback.
UPDATED: Ugh. Here's the source for io_queue_run from libaio-0.3.109 on Centos/RHEL (LGPL license, Copyright 2002 Red Hat, Inc.)
int io_queue_run(io_context_t ctx)
{
static struct timespec timeout = { 0, 0 };
struct io_event event;
int ret;
/* FIXME: batch requests? */
while (1 == (ret = io_getevents(ctx, 0, 1, &event, &timeout))) {
io_callback_t cb = (io_callback_t)event.data;
struct iocb *iocb = event.obj;
cb(ctx, iocb, event.res, event.res2);
}
return ret;
}
You'd never want to actually call this without the io_queue_wait call. And, the io_queue_wait call is commented out in the header included with both Centos/RHEL 6 and 7. I don't think you should call this function.
Instead, I think you should incorporate this source into your own code, then modify it to do what you want. You could pretty trivially add a timeout argument to this io_queue_run and just replace your call to io_getevents with it, instead of bothering with io_queue_wait. There's even a patch here that makes io_queue_run MUCH better: https://lwn.net/Articles/39285/).
I am working with HANDLES, the first one, nextColorFrameEvent is an event handler and the second one is a stream handler. They are being initialized in the following piece of code:
nextColorFrameEvent = CreateEvent( NULL, TRUE, FALSE, NULL );
hr = nui->NuiImageStreamOpen(
NUI_IMAGE_TYPE_COLOR,
NUI_IMAGE_RESOLUTION_640x480,
0,
2,
nextColorFrameEvent,
&videoStreamHandle);
I want to properly deal with them on destruction, while not creating errors at the same time. Sometimes the initializer wont be called, so both HANDLEs are still NULL when the software comes to an end. Thats why I want to check first if the HANDLEs are properly initialized etc. and if they are, I want to close them. I got my hands on the following piece of code for this:
if (nextColorFrameEvent && nextColorFrameEvent != INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE)CloseHandle(nextColorFrameEvent);
#ifdef QT_DEBUG
DWORD error = GetLastError();
qDebug()<< error;
#endif
if (videoStreamHandle && videoStreamHandle != INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE)CloseHandle(videoStreamHandle);
#ifdef QT_DEBUG
error = GetLastError();
qDebug()<< error;
#endif
But this is apperently incorrect: if I do not run the initializer and then close the software this piece of code runs and gives me a 6:
Starting C:\...\Qt\build-simpleKinectController-Desktop_Qt_5_0_2_MSVC2012_64bit-Debug\debug\simpleKinectController...
6
6
C:\...\Qt\build-simpleKinectController-Desktop_Qt_5_0_2_MSVC2012_64bit-Debug\debug\simpleKinectController exited with code 0
which means:
ERROR_INVALID_HANDLE 6 (0x6) The handle is invalid.
Which means that closeHandle ran anyway despite the tests. What tests should I do to prevent closing when the handle is not a valid HANDLE?
Bonus question: if I run the initializer this error will no longer appear when only closing colorFrameEvent, but will still appear when closing videoStreamHandle:
Starting C:\...\Qt\build-simpleKinectController-Desktop_Qt_5_0_2_MSVC2012_64bit-Debug\debug\simpleKinectController...
0
6
C:\...\Qt\build-simpleKinectController-Desktop_Qt_5_0_2_MSVC2012_64bit-Debug\debug\simpleKinectController exited with code 0
Do I need a diffent function to close a stream handler?
nui->NuiImageStreamOpen(...) does not create a valid Windows handle for the stream but instead it creates an internal handle inside the driver side.
So you can not use windows API to release/close stream handle !!!
To do that just call nui->NuiShutdown(). I have not yet used the callback event but I think its a valid windows handle and should be closed normally.
if you need just to change settings you can always call nui->NuiImageStreamOpen(...) with new settings. No need to shutdown ...
I would also welcome function nui->NuiImageStreamClose(...); because current state of API complicates things for long term running aps with changing sensor configurations.
CreateEvent (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms682396(v=vs.85).aspx) returns NULL if an event was not created.
You are checking against INVALID_HANDLE_VALID which is not NULL.
You are probably trying to double-close a handle. That is likely to generate ERROR_INVALID_HANDLE 6. You can't detect this with your test, because the first CloseHandle(nextColorFrameEvent); did not change nextColorFrameEvent.
The solution is to use C++ techniques, in particular RAII. There are plenty of examples around how to use shared_ptr with HANDLE. shared_ptr is the standard solution to run cleanup code at most once, after everyone is done, and only if anybody actually allocated a resource.
there is a good way of debugging that I'm particularly fond of, despite being all writen in macros, which are nasty, but in this case they work wonders.
Zed's Awesome Debug Macros
there are a couple of things I like to change though. They make extensive use of goto, which I tend to avoid, specially in c++ projects, because otherwise you wouldn't be able to declare variables mid-code. This is why I use exit(-1) instead, or, in some projects, I mod the code to try, throw, catch c++. Since you are working with Handles, a good thing would be setting a variable and telling the program to close itself.
here is what I mean. Take this piece of code from the macros (i assume you would read the exercise and familiarize with the macros):
#define check(A, M, ...) if(!(A)) { log_err(M, ##__VA_ARGS__); errno=0; goto error; }
i'd change
goto error;
to something like
error = true;
the syntax inside the program would be something like, and I took it from a multithread program I'm writing myself:
pRSemaphore = CreateSemaphore(NULL, 0, MAX_TAM_ARQ, (LPCWSTR) "p_read_semaphore");
check(pRSemaphore, "Impossible to create semaphore: %d\n", GetLastError());
As you can see, GetLastError is only called when pRSemaphore is set to null. There are somewhat fancy mechanisms behind the macro (at least they are fancy for me), but they are hidden inside the "check" mask, so you needn't worry about them.
next step is to treat the error with something like:
inline void ExitWithError(bool &err) {
//close all handles
//tell other related process to do the same if necessary
exit(-1);
}
or you could just call it inside the macro like
#define check(A, M, ...) if(!(A)) { log_err(M, ##__VA_ARGS__); errno=0; ExitWithError(); }
hope I could be of any help
I'm a rookie programmer, so please be polite.
Well i'm trying to write a simple Terminal Backgammon game, just for fun, but i have a problem.
The entire game runs in a while loop which keeps re running as long as nobody moved all their bricks to the end of the board.
A simple integer controls whatever it is black or white who plays.
I wrote a function to check for any possible moves, cause i want to program to skip the turn in case absolutely no moves can be made.
Well, i want this function to run and in case it returns false(No possible moves) then i want the rest of the code to skip and change the turn to the next player. For example if the dice combination gives no possible moves for black, then i want the program to skip black and go to white.
So i sort of want to break the rest of the while loop, but keep it running.
It's a little complicated for me to explain the issue, but i hope you guys understand.
Thanks alot
- Martin
It sounds like you want to use continue:
while (someCondition)
{
doSomething();
if (someOtherCondition)
continue;
doSomethingElse();
}
In this example, if someOtherCondition is true, the continue statement will cause the program to jump back to the top of the loop rather than continuing to execute the following statements. If someOtherCondition is false, doSomethingElse() will get run as normal.
I think this is roughly what you want to know.
Hope it helps.
while( keepRunning )
{
bool noPossibleMoves = checkForPossibleMoves();
setup for each loop iteration
Do things here that are always necessary.
if( noPossibleMoves )
{
continue; // This will go to the top of the while loop
}
wait for user input etc...
...
...
}
I have a function that creates and insert some numbers in a vector.
if(Enemy2.dEnemy==true)
{
pt.y=4;
pt.x=90;
pt2.y=4;
pt2.x=125;
for(int i=0; i<6; i++)
{
Enemy2.vS1Enemy.push_back(pt);
Enemy2.vS2Enemy.push_back(pt2);
y-=70;
pt.y=y;
pt2.y=y;
}
Enemy2.dEnemy=false;
Enemy3.cEnemy=0;
}
It should insert 6 numbers in two vectors, the only problem is that it doesn't - it actually inserts more.
I don't think the snippet will run unless Enemy2.dEnemy == true, and it won't stay true for ever.
The first time the snippet runs, then Enemy2.dEnemy is set to false and it shouldn't run again.
I don't set Enemy2.dEnemy to true anywhere except when the window is created.
If I insert a break point any where in the snippet, the program will work fine - it will insert ONLY 6 numbers in the two vectors.
Any ideas what's wrong here?
ok so i did some debugging.
i found that Enemy2.dEnemy=false; is being skipped for some reason.
i tried to do this to see if it was.
if(Enemy2.dEnemy)
{
pt.y=4;
pt.x=90;
pt2.y=4;
pt2.x=125;
for(int i=0; i<6; i++)
{
Enemy2.vS1Enemy.push_back(pt);
Enemy2.vS2Enemy.push_back(pt2);
y-=70;
pt.y=y;
pt2.y=y;
}
TCHAR s[244];
Enemy2.dEnemy=false;
if(Enemy2.dEnemy)
{
MessageBox(hWnd, _T("0"), _T(""), MB_OK);
}
else
{
MessageBox(hWnd, _T("1"), _T(""), MB_OK);
}
Enemy3.cEnemy=0;
}
well the message box popped saying 1 and my code worked fine. it seems that Enemy2.dEnemy=false; doesn't have time to run ;/
blahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblahblah!
ok i found where is the real problem which was causing to insert more than 6 numbers..
it was where i was asigning Enemy2.dEnemy=true;
if(Enemy2.e1)
{
Enemy2.now=time(NULL);
Enemy2.tEnemy=Enemy2.now+4;
Enemy2.e1=false;
}
if(Enemy2.tEnemy==time(NULL))
{
check=1;
Enemy2.aEnemy=0;
Enemy2.dEnemy=true;
}
the problem seems that the second if runs more than one time, which is weird!
First things first: get rid of that abominable if (Enemy2.dEnemy == true) - it should be:
if (Enemy2.dEnemy)
(I also prefer to name my booleans as a readable sentence segments like Enemy2.isABerserker or Enemy3.hasHadLeftLegCutOffThreeInchesBelowTheKnee but that's just personal preference).
Other than that, the only thing I can suggest is a threading problem. There's nothing wrong with that code per se, but there is a window in which two threads could enter the if statement and both start pushing values into your vector.
In other words, if thread 1 is doing the pushing when thread 2 encounters the if statement, thread 2 will also start pushing values, since thread 1 has yet to set dEnemy to true. And don't think you can just move the assignment to the top of the if block - that will reduce but not remove the window.
My advice is to print out the contents of the vectors in the situation where they have more than six entries and that may give a clue as to what's happened (post the output here if you wish).
Re your update that the second if below is running twice:
if(Enemy2.e1)
{
Enemy2.now=time(NULL);
Enemy2.tEnemy=Enemy2.now+4;
Enemy2.e1=false;
}
if(Enemy2.tEnemy==time(NULL))
{
check=1;
Enemy2.aEnemy=0;
Enemy2.dEnemy=true;
}
If this code is executed twice in the same second (and that's not beyond the bounds of possibility), the second if statement will run twice.
That's because time(NULL) give you the number of seconds since the epoch so, until that second is over, you may well be executing the contents of that if thousands of times (or more).
If this problem disappears when you put in a breakpoint or a diagnostic output message, that's a strong clue that the problem is undefined behavior, which is usually caused by something like dereferencing an uninitialized pointer or careless use of const_cast.
The cause of the problem probably has nothing to do with the code you're looking at. It's caused somewhere else and just happens to show up here. It's like someone being hit by a falling brick: the obvious symptom is a man lying unconscious on the sidewalk, but the real problem has nothing to do with the man or the sidewalk, it's several stories up.
If you want to find the cause of the error, remove your diagnostics until the problem reappears, then start removing everything else. Prune away all of the other code. Whenever the error stops, back up until it starts again; if you don't see the cause of the error, start pruning somewhere else. Eventually the bug will have nowhere to hide.
I have an application which runs on a controlling hardware connected with different sensors. On loading the application, it checks the individual sensors one by one to see whether there is proper communication with the sensor according to predefined protocol or not.
Now, I have implemented the code for checking the individual sensor communication as a singleton thread and following is the run function, it used select system call and pipe for interprocess communication to signal the end of thread.
void SensorClass::run()
{
mFdWind=mPort->GetFileDescriptor();
fd_set readfs;
int max_fd = (mFdWind > gPipeFdWind[0] ? mFdWind : gPipeFdWind[0]) + 1;
int res;
mFrameCorrect=false;
qDebug("BEFORE WHILE");
while(true)
{
qDebug("\n IN WHILE LOOP");
usleep(50);
FD_ZERO(&readfs);
FD_SET(mFdWind,&readfs);
FD_SET(gPipeFdWind[0],&readfs);
res=select(max_fd,&readfs,NULL,NULL,NULL);
if(res < 0)
perror("Select Failed");
else if(res == 0)
puts("TIMEOUT");
else
{
if(FD_ISSET(mFdWind,&readfs))
{
puts("*************** RECEIVED DATA ****************");
mFrameCorrect=false;
FlushBuf();
//int n=mPort->ReadPort(mBuf,100);
int n=mPort->ReadPort(mBuf,100);
if(n>0)
{
Count++;
QString str((const char*)mBuf);
//qDebug("\n %s",qPrintable(str));
//See if the Header of the frame is valid
if(IsHeaderValid(str))
{
if( (!IsCommaCountOk(str)) || (!IsChecksumOk(str,mBuf)) || (!CalculateCommaIndexes(str)) )
{
qDebug("\n not ok");
mFrameCorrect=false;
} //if frame is incorrect
else
{
qDebug("\n OK");
mFrameCorrect=true;
}//if frame is correct(checksum etc are ok)
}//else if header is ok
}//if n > 0
}//if data received FD_ISSET
if(FD_ISSET(gPipeFdWind[0],&readfs))
break;
}//end nested else res not <= 0
}//infinite loop
}
The above thread is run started from the main GUI thread. This runs fine. The problem is I have given an option to the user to retest the subsystem at will. For this I delete the singleton instance using
delete SensorClass::instance();
and then restart the singleton using
SensorClass::instace()->start();
The problem is this time the control comes out of while loop in run() function immedeately upon entering the while loop, my guess is the pipe read has again read from the write pipe which was written to the last time. I have tried to use the fflush() to clear out the I/O but no luck.
My question is
Am I thinking on the right track?
If yes then how do we clear out the pipes?
If not can anyone suggest why is the selective retest not working?
Thanks in advance..
fflush clears the output buffer. If you want to clear the input buffer, you're going to need to read the data or seek to the end.
I'm not convinced the "Singleton" pattern is appropriate. There are other ways of ensuring at most one instance for each piece of hardware. What if you later want multiple threads, each working with a different sensor?
Let's assume that you're creating this thread by inheriting from QThread (which you don't specify). From the documentation of QThread::~QThread ():
Note that deleting a QThread object will not stop the execution of the thread it represents. Deleting a running QThread (i.e. isFinished() returns false) will probably result in a program crash.
So the statement delete SensorClass::instance(); is probably a really, really bad idea. In particular, it's going to be tough making any sense of this program's behavior given this flaw. Before continuing, you might want to find a way to remove the instance and ensure that the thread goes away, too.
Another problem comes to mind. When you run delete SensorClass::instance(), you get rid of some object (on the heap, one hopes). Who tells the singleton holder that its object is gone? E.g. so that the next call to SensorClass::instance() knows it needs to allocate another instance? Is this handled properly in SensorClass::~SensorClass?
Suppose that's not a problem. That likely means that the pointer to the instance is held in a global variable (or, e.g. a class level static member). It probably doesn't matter for this situation, but is access to that member properly synchronized? I.e. is there a mutex that's locked for each access to it?
You really don't want to run your initialization in thread. That is issue number one that dramatically complicates your problem and which is the kind of thing for some reason no one points out.
Just make the initialization its own function, then have a guard variable and lock, and have everything that uses it separately initialize it when they start up.
So you're signaling by writing something to the pipe, and the pipe is only created once - i.e. reused in the later threads?
Read the signaling away from the pipe. Assuming you signal by writing a single byte, then instead of just breaking out, you'd do something like (NB, no error checking etc below):
if(FD_ISSET(gPipeFdWind[0],&readfs)) {
char c;
read(gPipeFdWind[0], &c, 1);
break;
}
There are also Qt classes for handling socket I/O, e.g. QTcpSocket, which would make the code not only cleaner, also more cross-platform. Or at least QSocketNotifier to abstract the select away.