I have a Qt/C++ application, with the usual GUI thread, and a network thread. The network thread is using an external library, which has its own select() based event loop... so the network thread isn't using Qt's event system.
At the moment, the network thread just emit()s signals when various events occur, such as a successful connection. I think this works okay, as the signals/slots mechanism posts the signals correctly for the GUI thread.
Now, I need for the network thread to be able to call the GUI thread to ask questions. For example, the network thread may require the GUI thread to request put up a dialog, to request a password.
Does anyone know a suitable mechanism for doing this?
My current best idea is to have the network thread wait using a QWaitCondition, after emitting an object (emit passwordRequestedEvent(passwordRequest);. The passwordRequest object would have a handle on the particular QWaitCondition, and so can signal it when a decision has been made..
Is this sort of thing sensible? or is there another option?
Using signals to send messages between threads is fine, if you don't like using the Condition Variable, then you can send signals in both directions in a more-or-less asynchronous manner: this might be a better option if you want to continue processing network stuff while you wait for a reply from the GUI.
Related
I'm on some c++ mobile product, but I need my apps main thread is still running without any blocking when doing some heavy work on the background thread and run back on main thread. But I realized there is no runOnMainThread/runOnUIThread in c++ thread api. I trying to figure it out the issue and found that need to depend library, or create your own thread event queue. Although it is good, but i am thinking to have a behavior which can runOnUIThread.
How it does not work: the mentioned library creates a timer, installs a SIGALRM signal handler and dispatches queued tasks when signals are fired. This allows tasks being processed on the main thread even when it is busy. However POSIX permits only a small set of async-signal-safe functions to be invoked inside of signal handler. Running arbitrary с++ code inside of signal handler violates that restriction and leaves application in hopelessly doomed state.
After some research and development, I've created a library called NonBlockpp
it is a small c++ library to allow c++ mobile application able to process the heavy and time consuming task on background and back to Main thread again, It’s been tested and fired the main thread event.
It also allow to save the tasks and fire them later, all the task has no blocking each other and thread safety.
How it works:
If you found any query or suggestion, please don't hesitate to raise an issue and we can discuss it together.
The project has rectify from signal to pollEvent due to signal handler might not be safe to use.
Please take a look the new changed.
NonBlockpp
Usage
More precisely, the question should be:
What's the difference between connecting the signal QTimer::timeout to my working function and creating a worker thread with QThread?
I am writing a program which receives streaming data in main thread (the signal is generated by QIODevice::readread())and processes them concurrently. For now I start a QTimer constantly firing signal QTimer::timeout, and the signal is connected to a working function in main thread which does the data processing stuff. This is how I achieve the concurrency.
I wonder if this approach different from creating another thread with QThread, since the idea I've found in this topic is very simliar to what I've done. The only difference is that the accepted answer creates another thread and moves timer and worker class on it. Besides the difference, I can't see any necessity of using a thread in my case.
In my case (receiving data in main thread and processing them concurrently), am I doing OK using QTimer or should I create a QThread? I am quite new to multi-threading, and if I misunderstand something, please help correct me. Thank you.
[Edit]:
I don't know what's the difference/advantage of creating a new thread to process the data. For now, everything is doing in one thread: I keep storing data in a queue and dequeue them one by one in a function triggered by QTimer::timeout.
What's the difference between connecting the signal QTimer::timeout to my working
function and creating a worker thread with QThread?
When you connect some signal/slot pair from the objects which has the same thread affinity, then the connection is direct. What it means is in your case, the main thread creates the timer, and also contains the slot, so the signal will be emitted in the main thread and also will be processed in the main thread (as the slot is also in the main thread).
When you connect some signal/slot pair from the objects which has the different thread affinity, then the connection is queued. That means signal emission and slot execution will run in different threads.
You are not really achieving concurrency, the timer signal and processing slot are executing in main thread sequentially.
So here are your options:
If you want to process data in main thread, current code is ok.
If you want to emit timeout in main thread and process data in different thread then create new class with the processing method and use moveToThread with object of that class.
The link you provided really has a different situation. In your case (correct me if I am wrong), you process data only when data is available, not just after a specified time. Your situation is much like traditional producer/consumer problem. My proposal is to not use QTimer at all. Instead create a new class with a slotwhich will process data. Then emit a signal from main thread when data is available, and connect if to the processing slot. You will achieve real concurrency. In this case you will need to implement locking for shared data access, it is easy in Qt, you can just use QMutexLocker
First, a little background:
One of the fundamental ideas behind threads is that a thread can only do one thing at a time. It may be updating the GUI, or processing data, or communicating with a remote server, but it can't be doing all those things at once.
That's where multi-threading comes in. You probably want your computer to be doing many things at once (watching videos, browsing the web, listening to music, and writing code all at the same time). The computer allows you to do that by scheduling each of these tasks on a separate threads and switching between them in periodic intervals.
In the old days, before multi-core processors, this was achieved solely by multitasking (the processor would interrupt the currently executing thread, switch to another thread context and execute the other thread for a while before switching again). With modern processors, you can have several threads executing at the EXACT same time, one on each core. This is typically referred to as multiprocessing.
Now, back to your question:
A thread can only do one thing at a time and, if you use a timer, you are using the main (AKA GUI) thread to process your data. This thread is typically responsible for responding to OS events and updating the GUI (hence GUI thread). If you don't have a lot of data to process, it's typically OK to do so on the GUI thread. However, if the data processing time has a chance of growing, it is recommended to execute such processing on a separate thread to make sure that the UI remains responsive (and so that you don't get the annoying "Your program is not responding" message from the OS). Basically, if data processing can take longer than ~200ms, it is recommended to execute the processing on a separate thread so that the user doesn't feel like the GUI is "stuck".
I have a C++ console app that uses open() [O_RDWR | O_NONBLOCK], write(), select(), read() and close() to work with device file. Also ioctl() can be called to cancel current operation. At any given time only one user can work with device.
I need to come up with C++ class having libsigc++ signals that get fired when data is available from device.
The problem: when calling select() application becomes unresponsive as it waits for the data. How to make it responsive - by calling select() in worker thread? If so - how will worker thread communicate with main thread? Maybe I should look into boost::asio?
How to make it responsive - by calling select() in worker thread
you can use dup(), this will duplicated your file descriptors... thus you can move entire read operations into another thread. thus your write thread and processing thread will be responsive, even when the read [select()] thread is in sleeping.
signal emitting overhead of libsigc++ is minimal, thus i think you can embedded code inside the read thread itself. slots can exist in different thread, this is where you will receive your signals...
I think Thrift source code [entirely boost based] might be of your interest, though thrift does not use libsigc++.
It sounds as though you've misunderstood select; the purpose of select (or poll, epoll, etc) is not "wait for data" but "wait for one or more events to occur on a series of file descriptors or a timer, or a signal to be raised".
What "responsiveness" is going missing while you're in your select call? You said it's a console app so you're not talking about a GUI loop, so presumably it is IO related? If so, then you need to refactor your select so that waiting for the data you're talking about is one element; that is, if you're using select, build FD_SETs of ALL file/socket descriptors (and stdin and stdout are file descriptors) that you want to wait on input for.
Or build a loop that periodically calls "select" with a short timeout to /test/ for any pending input and only try and read it when select tells you there is something to read.
It sounds like you have a producer-consumer style problem. There are various way to implement a solution to this problem, but most folks these days tend to use condition variable based approaches (see this C++11 based example).
There are also a number of design patterns that when implemented can help alleviate your concurrency problem, such as:
Half-Sync / Half-Async
A producer-consumer style pattern that introduces a queue between an asynchronous layer that fills the queue with events, and a synchronous layer that processes those events.
Leader / Followers
Multiple threads take turns handling events
A related discussion is available here.
I know that it's bad to run any kind of GUI widget from within a separate thread. For just messages, this can be overcome with signals to the main thread. But what if the thread needs a user input, how can the answer be signaled back to the thread and how can that thread wait for that answer?
My particular case is an application that uses sftp from libssh. During connection and authentication, the user may need to answer one or more questions. But for performance reasons, all the SSH/SFTP stuff must be running in a separate thread.
It is not possible to use GUI classes in non-GUI threads at all. What you can do is use signals and slots to exchange information from one thread to another. Send a signal from your worker thread and wait on a semaphore, like QWaitCondition. Send a message back with the answer.
In your case you could also use Qt::BlockingQueuedConnection as connection type to stop your worker thread until the user has entered data. QInputDialog also waits until the user has finished entering data.
Hey I am not sure if this has already been asked that way. (I didn´t find anwsers to this specific questions, at least). But:
I have a program, which - at startup - creates an Login-window in a new UI-Thread.
In this window the user can enter data which has to be verified by an server.
Because the window shall still be responsive to the users actions, it (ofc it´s only a UI-thread) shall not handle the transmission and evaluation in it´s own thread.
I want the UI-thread to delegate this work back to the main thread.
In addition: The main thread (My "client" thread) shall manage all actions that go on, like logging in, handle received messages from the server etc... (not window messages)
But I am not sure of how to do this:
1.) Shall I let the UI-Thread Queue an APC to the main thread (but then the main thread does not know about the stuff going on.
2.) May I better use event objects to be waited on and queues to transmit the data from one thread to another?...
Or are there way better options?
For example: I start the client:
1. The client loads data from a file and does some intialization
The client creates a window in a new thread which handles login data input from the user.
The Window Thread shall notifiy and handle the , that has been entered by the user, over to the client.
The Client shall now pack the data and delegate the sending work to another object (e.g. CSingleConnection) which handles sending the data over a network (of course this does not require a new thread, because it can be handle with Overlapped I/O...
One special receiver thread receives the data from the server and handles it back to the client, which - in turn - evaluates the data.
If the data was correct and some special stuff was received from the server, the main thread shall signal the UI thread to close the window and terminate...
The client then creates a new window, which will handle the chatting-UI
The chatting UI thread and the Client thread shall communicate to handle messages to be sent and received...
(Hope this helps to get what I am trying)...
It all depends on what you are prepared to use. If you are developing with Qt, their signals and slots are just the thing to do such a communication. They also supply a network library, so you could easily omit the receiver thread because their network classes do asynchronous communication and will send a signal when you have data, which means your thread does not need to be blocked in the mean time.
If you don't want to use Qt, boost also supplies thread safe signals and slots, but as far as I understand it their slots will be run in the context of the calling thread...
Anyways, I have used Qt sig and slots with great satisfaction for exactly this purpose. I wholeheartedly agree GUI's shouldn't freeze, ever.
I don´t know wether this is good style or not (anwsering Your own question):
But I think I go with Event Objects and two queues (one for the connection between Client and Connection, and one to communicate Client and UI)...