I am trying to use a CEvent to make my thread wait until the message queue is ready as per MSDN's advice so that my PostThreadMessage function will work correctly.
BOOL MFC_Thread::InitInstance(){
BOOL worked=CWinThread::InitInstance();
MSG msg;
BOOL result=PeekMessage(&msg, NULL, WM_USER, WM_USER, PM_NOREMOVE);
fingerveinControllerThreadReady->SetEvent();//Breakpoint 1
return TRUE;
}
void init(){
controllerThreadReady=new CEvent(FALSE, FALSE);
CWinThread* thread=AfxBeginThread(RUNTIME_CLASS(MFC_Thread));
controllerThread=thread->m_nThreadID;
WaitForSingleObject(controllerThreadReady, INFINITE);
DoSomething();//Breakpoint 2
}
Unfortunately, it seems that the WaitForSingleObject isn't doing its job. Sometimes Breakpoint 1 is hit first, sometimes Breakpoint 2. When Breakpoint 2 is hit first, I receive WAIT_FAILED with the cause ERROR_INVALID_HANDLE. Why is this happening?
That might be because you're passing the CEvent object instead of its handle.
Try this:
WaitForSingleObject(controllerThreadReady.m_hObject, INFINITE);
Related
I'm getting a crash sometimes in RegisterWaitForSingleObject (1 out of 10). It seems that although RegisterWaitForSingleObject returns, the internal thread pool is not yet ready.
HANDLE processHandle = OpenProcess (PROCESS_ALL_ACCESS, FALSE, processID);
// CRASH IN INTERNAL SOMETIMES
RegisterWaitForSingleObject (&hWaitForChild_,processHandle,OnChildProcessExit, 0,INFINITE,WT_EXECUTEONLYONCE);
// If I sleep here, then it seems ok.
//std::this_thread::sleep_for (std::chrono::milliseconds (10));
CloseHandle (processHandle);
I can replicate this with a simple sample here. 1 in 10 times, it will crash. How should I be synchronizing it properly without resorting to sleep hack.
https://filedn.com/l3TGy7Y83c247u0RDYa9fkp/temp/stackoverflow/testregister.cpp
based on your code spinet:
// THIS CRASHS HERE SOMETIMES
if (! RegisterWaitForSingleObject (
&hWaitForChild_
,processHandle
, OnChildProcessExit
, 0 //this
, INFINITE
, WT_EXECUTEONLYONCE))
{
LogDebug ("RegisterWaitForSingleObject failed");
}
// If this is enabled, then it won't crash
//std::this_thread::sleep_for (std::chrono::milliseconds (10));
if (! CloseHandle (processHandle)) // !!!
LogDebug ("RegisterWaitForSingleObject Closehandle failed");
so you close processHandle just after you call RegisterWaitForSingleObject for this handle. however if read about RegisterWaitForSingleObject:
If this handle is closed while the wait is still pending, the
function's behavior is undefined.
if look more deep - try understand - how is RegisterWaitForSingleObject worked internally ? it pass processHandle to some worker thread. and this thread begin wait for this handle. but this is (pass handle to another thread) is asynchronous operation - say for example internally can be started new thread with this handle as argument, or it can be passed to already existing working thread via some signal. but anyway - worked thread got this handle and begin wait some later. from another side - you just close processHandle after RegisterWaitForSingleObject return control. so here race - what will be first - or worked thread begin wait on handle (in this case all will be work) or you close this handle. in case you close this handle first - worked thread will be try wait on already invalid handle and raise exception - STATUS_THREADPOOL_HANDLE_EXCEPTION.
// If this is enabled, then it won't crash
//std::this_thread::sleep_for (std::chrono::milliseconds (10));
of course - by sleep you give time for worked thread to begin wait on handle. in this case he begin wait before you close handle.
solution - you must not close handle, until WAITORTIMERCALLBACK Callback will be not called. you need allocate some context, where place processHandle and pass this context to RegisterWaitForSingleObject. and when you callback will be called - you got pointer to your context back and here and close handle.
also note, that you not need open separate, second, handle for child process, but can use process handle returned by CreateProcess
Ok, I managed to solve it by keeping the handle around until I call Unregisterwait. It seems to be stable. Thanks to the answers.
I met the same problem like you that an exception occurred while debugging in Visual Studio. I tried many time and finally found the reason. If you close the handle of the process newly created, the program would crash. I tried to close the handles in the callback function, it works perfectly, like this:
typedef struct {
LPTSTR pszCmdLine;
HANDLE hEvent;
} THREAD_PARAM;
typedef struct {
TCHAR szCmdLine[1024];
HANDLE hWaitObject;
DWORD dwProcessId;
HANDLE hProcess;
DWORD dwThreadId;
HANDLE hThread;
} OBJECT_PARAM;
static void CALLBACK WaitObjectCallback(LPVOID lpParam, BOOLEAN TimerOrWaitFired)
{
OBJECT_PARAM *pobp = static_cast<OBJECT_PARAM *>(lpParam);
TCHAR szInfo[1024] = { 0 };
DWORD dwExitCode = 0;
GetExitCodeProcess(pobp->hProcess, &dwExitCode);
wnsprintf(szInfo, ARRAYSIZE(szInfo), _T("process %u [%s] exit: %u\n"), pobp->dwProcessId, pobp->szCmdLine, dwExitCode);
OutputDebugString(szInfo);
//
// unregister the wait object handle and close the process handle finally
//
UnregisterWait(pobp->hWaitObject);
CloseHandle(pobp->hProcess);
CloseHandle(pobp->hThread);
GlobalFree(lpParam);
}
static DWORD CALLBACK ThreadFunction(LPVOID lpParam)
{
THREAD_PARAM *pthp = static_cast<THREAD_PARAM *>(lpParam);
STARTUPINFO si = { sizeof(si) };
PROCESS_INFORMATION pi = { 0 };
BOOL bResult;
bResult = CreateProcess(nullptr, pthp->pszCmdLine, nullptr, nullptr, FALSE, 0, nullptr, nullptr, &si, &pi);
if (bResult)
{
OBJECT_PARAM *pobp = static_cast<OBJECT_PARAM *>(GlobalAlloc(GPTR, sizeof(OBJECT_PARAM)));
// make copy of the command line and other informations of the newly created process
lstrcpyn(pobp->szCmdLine, pthp->pszCmdLine, ARRAYSIZE(pobp->szCmdLine));
pobp->dwProcessId = pi.dwProcessId;
pobp->hProcess = pi.hProcess;
pobp->dwThreadId = pi.dwThreadId;
pobp->hThread = pi.hThread;
bResult = RegisterWaitForSingleObject(&pobp->hWaitObject, pi.hProcess, WaitObjectCallback, pobp, INFINITE, WT_EXECUTEONLYONCE);
// once it failed...
if (!bResult)
{
CloseHandle(pi.hProcess);
CloseHandle(pi.hThread);
}
}
// Notify the thread creator that the process is created successfully
SetEvent(pthp->hEvent);
return 0;
}
I have created a thread with this line
threadHandle = CreateThread(NULL, FALSE, Threadhandle1, NULL, 0, NULL);
I want to kill thread forcefully without waiting for a thread to finish
Thread Code:-
DWORD WINAPI Threadhandle1(void* data){
Sleep(5000);
MessageBox(NULL, TEXT("First"), L"Simple Message", NULL);
Sleep(5000);
MessageBox(NULL, TEXT("Second"), L"Simple Message", NULL);
return 0;
}
Code to Stop Thread:-
TerminateThread(threadHandle, 0);
CloseHandle(threadHandle);
You can terminate thread by using TerminateThread() using the thread handle you got from CreateThread.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms686717(VS.85).aspx
PS:It is mentioned in website:
"TerminateThread is a dangerous function that should only be used in the most extreme cases. You should call TerminateThread only if you know exactly what the target thread is doing, and you control all of the code that the target thread could possibly be running at the time of the termination."
I've got to debug some code which is not from me.
This code implement a timer API using winapi Timer interface.
I'm not very used to this Winapi functionality, so i could use your help :)
From what I understand this code is done like this :
=> Init()
timerQueue = CreateTimerQueue();
=> CreateTimer()
CreateTimerQueueTimer(timerHandle, timerQueue, timerCallback, ..., WT_EXECUTEDEFAULT);
=> timerCallback()
DeleteTimerQueueTimer(timerQueue , timerHandle, NULL));
calback() //Launch user-defined callback
=> CleanUp() // to be called at the end
DeleteTimerQueueEx(timerQueue , INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE);
When we test that, user-defined callback are executed successfully after the desired amount of time. But after that timerCallback threads keep pending and never return, preventing the all process to returns. Using VS debugger I can see those threads (named TppWorkerThread#4) on the thread...
Perhaps we miss something to make callback returns properly or we created some sort of deadlocks... However I cannot figure it out ...
Please let me know if I forgot some relevant information.
Thank you for your help.
EDIT:
Further information :
- Blocking thread are at this state at the end of the process :
* Category :Worker Thread
* Name : _TppWorkerThread#4
* Location : _ZwWaitForWorkViaWorkerFactory#8
* Priotity : Normal
EDIT2:
Having some more time to work on that strange behavior, I am now able to reproduce it in a standalone code.
#include <windows.h>
#include <stdio.h>
HANDLE gDoneEvent;
HANDLE hTimer[5];
HANDLE hTimerQueue = NULL;
HANDLE g_threadHandle;
void PeriodicCallback(void)
{
printf("Periodic routine called.\n");
}
void SingleCallback(void)
{
printf("Single routine called.\n");
if (!DeleteTimerQueueTimer(hTimerQueue, hTimer[2], NULL))
printf("DeleteTimerQueueTimer() fail. Return value is %d.\n", GetLastError());
}
void CALLBACK CommonCallback(PVOID lpParam, BOOLEAN TimerOrWaitFired)
{
printf("Common routine called. Parameter is %d.\n", *(int *)lpParam);
((void (*)(void))lpParam)();
}
void MainTest(void)
{
// Use an event object to track the TimerRoutine execution
gDoneEvent = CreateEvent(NULL, TRUE, FALSE, NULL);
if (NULL == gDoneEvent)
{
printf("CreateEvent failed (%d)\n", GetLastError());
return -1;
}
if(0 == SetThreadPriority(GetCurrentThread(), THREAD_PRIORITY_BELOW_NORMAL))
{
printf("SetThreadPriority failed (%d)\n", GetLastError());
return -2;
}
// Create the timer queue.
hTimerQueue = CreateTimerQueue();
if (NULL == hTimerQueue)
{
printf("CreateTimerQueue failed (%d)\n", GetLastError());
return -3;
}
/*
if (!CreateTimerQueueTimer( &hTimer[2], hTimerQueue,
(WAITORTIMERCALLBACK)CommonCallback, &SingleCallback, 1000, 0, WT_EXECUTEDEFAULT))
{
printf("CreateTimerQueueTimer failed (%d)\n", GetLastError());
return -4;
}
*/
if (!CreateTimerQueueTimer( &hTimer[4], hTimerQueue,
(WAITORTIMERCALLBACK)CommonCallback, &PeriodicCallback, 10, 500, WT_EXECUTEDEFAULT))
{
printf("CreateTimerQueueTimer failed (%d)\n", GetLastError());
return -5;
}
// TODO: Do other useful work here
printf("Call timer routine in 10 seconds...\n");
Sleep(4000);
CloseHandle(gDoneEvent);
if (!DeleteTimerQueueTimer(hTimerQueue, hTimer[4], INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE))
printf("DeleteTimerQueueTimer failed (%d)\n", GetLastError());
// Delete all timers in the timer queue.
if (!DeleteTimerQueueEx(hTimerQueue, INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE))
printf("DeleteTimerQueue failed (%d)\n", GetLastError());
Sleep(1000);
ExitThread(0);
}
int main(int argc, char **argv[])
{
if(g_threadHandle == CreateThread(NULL, 0, (LPTHREAD_START_ROUTINE)MainTest, NULL, 0, NULL))
printf("Creation fail");
ExitThread(0);
}
I'm compiling this code on VisualStudio 2010 Professional.
It appears that event after calling DeleteTimerQueueTimer() some threads remain pending on the threads pool, preventing my process to shutdown. I still cannot figured it out ...
When you call DeleteTimerQueueEx with an INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE as its second parameter it will block until all callbacks which are running have completed. The Error may be in one of your callback functions which never returns.
You are calling DeleteTimerQueueTimer(timerQueue , timerHandle, NULL); with NULL as the third parameter, this will not wait for the callback to complete if one is running at the time you delete the timer. I suggest using DeleteTimerQueueTimer(timerQueue , timerHandle, INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE) which will block until the call back completes (if one is running). Calling cleanUp() without using the blocking version of DeleteTimerQueueTimer is likely a bug as you may be cleaning up at the same time as the callback is executing.
It could also be a problem of calling DeleteTimerQueueEx or DeleteTimerQueueTimer from within a callback, which is forbidden. Break on execution of DeleteTimerQueueEx and look at what thread you are in, if its a TppWorkerThread than you have found your bug.
EDIT:
In your comment you say you do call DeleteTimerQueueTimer from within the callback but don't use INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE, reading the documentation again from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms682569%28v=vs.85%29.aspx this does seem to be legal but I distinctly remember us making design decisions to avoid this, I'm sorry this is so vague, I hope someone can give authoritative advice on this.
We send an event/message to the queue of a non timer thread which then removes the timer, you could even have a dedicated thread for this but that is probably overkill. At the end of the day you need to be sure that the timer is removed before doing cleanup so you have to either block on removal or have some other thread do it upon signaling of an event.
After some work on that issue I think I got to an answer.
I appears that this timerQueue API is coded on top of threadPool winAPI, and when we ask to create a timerQueue Windows create a thread pool from where all callback will be launched.
Until here no problem, but, when we ask for timerQueue deletion, it appears that this thread pool is not deleted...
This result in some thread keeping pending waiting to be used and preventing the process to returns.
After some time (timeout??) those threads returns and the process exit.
I don't really get why this pool is not closed... but, now, I use a workaround :
exit(0);
At the end of my program, it's a bit brutal but it does the job (ie: killing my process, whatever threads are still pending or not)
I cannot understand why next code doesn't work. It compile correct, but doesn't output anything. Can you help me?
HANDLE hEvent;
unsigned int WINAPI MyThread(void *p)
{
WaitForSingleObject(hEvent, INFINITE);
_tprintf(TEXT("%s\n"),p);
return 0;
}
int _tmain(int argc, TCHAR *argv[])
{
hEvent = CreateEvent(NULL, TRUE, FALSE, NULL);
unsigned int ThreadID;
HANDLE hThread1 = (HANDLE)_beginthreadex(NULL, 0, MyThread, L"hello world", 0, &ThreadID);
SetEvent(hEvent);
return 0;
}
My guess is that the application is exiting before the print statement even fires. You set the event and then instantly exit. Try waiting for the thread to complete before exiting. You should be able to use the handle that is returned from _beginthreadex.
HANDLE hThread1 = (HANDLE)_beginthreadex(NULL, 0, MyThread, L"hello world", 0, &ThreadID);
SetEvent(hEvent);
WaitForSingleObject( hThread1, INFINITE );
Note: I just used INFINITE as the timeout for an example, in general you probably don't want INFINITE which could lead to deadlocks, etc. Each case needs to be examined to determine the correct behavior. Here, since you are just writing to the console, if this hasn't returned in a few seconds there is probably something wrong. You could modify the code to check the return value of WaitForSingleObject to see if it exited due to timeout and then make a decision based on that (like log an error, or something that would help to diagnose what went wrong)
You programs stops before the thread even started.
Put this in front of your return 0; and you should get some results
DWORD retVal;
GetExitCodeThread(hThread1, &retVal);
while(retVal == STILL_ACTIVE) {
Sleep(1000);
GetExitCodeThread(hThread1, &retVal);
}
retVal will also help you to see how your thread ended (given that you have different exit codes e.g. _endthreadex(6);)
Suppose I have created multiple threads.
Now I am waiting for multiple object as well using :
WaitOnMultipleObject(...);
Now if I want to know the status of all the thread's return code. How to do that ?
Do I need to loop for all the thread's handle in the loop.
GetExitCodeThread(
__in HANDLE hThread,
__out LPDWORD lpExitCode
);
And now check lpExitCode for success / failure code ?
Cheers,
Siddhartha
If you want to wait for a thread to exit, just wait on the thread's handle. Once the wait completes you can get the exit code for that thread.
DWORD result = WaitForSingleObject( hThread, INFINITE);
if (result == WAIT_OBJECT_0) {
// the thread handle is signaled - the thread has terminated
DWORD exitcode;
BOOL rc = GetExitCodeThread( hThread, &exitcode);
if (!rc) {
// handle error from GetExitCodeThread()...
}
}
else {
// the thread handle is not signaled - the thread is still alive
}
This example can be extended to waiting for completion of several thread by passing an array of thread handles to WaitForMultipleObjects(). Figure out which thread completed using the appropriate offset from WAIT_OBJECT_0 on the return from WaitForMultipleObjects(), and remove that thread handle from the handle array passed to WaitForMultipleObjects() when calling it to wait for the next thread completion.
Do I need to loop for all the thread's
handle in the loop.
GetExitCodeThread(
__in HANDLE hThread,
__out LPDWORD lpExitCode
);
Yes.