Skip to main content

OrderedThreadPool - Bug Fix !!!

Hugh pointed out a bug in the OrderedThreadPool.

I think there is a small window for error in the OrderedThreadPool class. Bascially, if an item of work is queued, then a worker thread runs, takes the item off the queue and is about to call wcb(state) - but at that instant is (say) context switched. Then another item gets queued and another worker thread runs and dequeues the item and then again is about to call wcb(state). There is scope here for the two operations to run concurrently or even out of order...

Here is the fixed version of the same.

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Diagnostics;

namespace System.Threading
{
 public class OrderedThreadPool
 {
  private Queue workItemQ = new Queue();
  private bool loopWorkRunning = false;

  public void QueueUserWorkItem(WaitCallback wcbDelegate, object state)
  {
   lock (workItemQ)
   {
    workItemQ.Enqueue(new ThreadPoolTaskInfo(wcbDelegate, state));

    if (workItemQ.Count == 1 && !loopWorkRunning)
    {
     loopWorkRunning = true;
     ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(LoopWork);
    }
   }
  }

  private void LoopWork(object notUsed)
  {
   WaitCallback wcb = null;
   object state = null;

   lock (workItemQ)
   {
    if (workItemQ.Count == 0)
    {
     loopWorkRunning = false;
     return;
    }

    ThreadPoolTaskInfo tptInfo = workItemQ.Dequeue();
    state = tptInfo.State;
    wcb = tptInfo.CallbackDelegate;
    Debug.Assert(wcb != null);
   }

   try
   {
    wcb(state);
   }
   finally
   {
    ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(LoopWork, notUsed);
   }
  }

  public struct ThreadPoolTaskInfo
  {
   public readonly WaitCallback CallbackDelegate;
   public readonly object State;

   public ThreadPoolTaskInfo(WaitCallback wc, object state)
   {
    Debug.Assert(wc != null);
    CallbackDelegate = wc;
    State = state;
   }
  }
 }
}

Comments

Unknown said…
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said…
Thanks a lot for sharing. Nice post. Game Developer.

Popular posts from this blog

Implementing COM OutOfProc Servers in C# .NET !!!

Had to implement our COM OOP Server project in .NET, and I found this solution from the internet after a great deal of search, but unfortunately the whole idea was ruled out, and we wrapped it as a .NET assembly. This is worth knowing. Step 1: Implement IClassFactory in a class in .NET. Use the following definition for IClassFactory. namespace COM { static class Guids { public const string IClassFactory = "00000001-0000-0000-C000-000000000046"; public const string IUnknown = "00000000-0000-0000-C000-000000000046"; } /// /// IClassFactory declaration /// [ComImport(), InterfaceType(ComInterfaceType.InterfaceIsIUnknown), Guid(COM.Guids.IClassFactory)] internal interface IClassFactory { [PreserveSig] int CreateInstance(IntPtr pUnkOuter, ref Guid riid, out IntPtr ppvObject); [PreserveSig] int LockServer(bool fLock); } } Step 2: [DllImport("ole32.dll")] private static extern int CoR

Extension Methods - A Polished C++ Feature !!!

Extension Method is an excellent feature in C# 3.0. It is a mechanism by which new methods can be exposed from an existing type (interface or class) without directly adding the method to the type. Why do we need extension methods anyway ? Ok, that is the big story of lamba and LINQ. But from a conceptual standpoint, the extension methods establish a mechanism to extend the public interface of a type. The compiler is smart enough to make the method a part of the public interface of the type. Yeah, that is what it does, and the intellisense is very cool in making us believe that. It is cleaner and easier (for the library developers and for us programmers even) to add extra functionality (methods) not provided in the type. That is the intent. And we know that was exercised extravagantly in LINQ. The IEnumerable was extended with a whole lot set of methods to aid the LINQ design. Remember the Where, Select etc methods on IEnumerable. An example code snippet is worth a thousand

sizeof vs Marshal.SizeOf !!!

There are two facilities in C# to determine the size of a type - sizeof operator and Marshal.SizeOf method. Let me discuss what they offer and how they differ. Pardon me if I happen to ramble a bit. Before we settle the difference between sizeof and Marshal.SizeOf , let us discuss why would we want to compute the size of a variable or type. Other than academic, one typical reason to know the size of a type (in a production code) would be allocate memory for an array of items; typically done while using malloc . Unlike in C++ (or unmanaged world), computing the size of a type definitely has no such use in C# (managed world). Within the managed application, size does not matter; since there are types provided by the CLR for creating\managing fixed size and variable size (typed) arrays. And as per MSDN, the size cannot be computed accurately. Does that mean we don't need to compute the size of a type at all when working in the CLR world? Obviously no, else I would