Solved

Thread nerver returns from WaitForSingleObject() !!!

Posted on 2000-03-22
2
228 Views
Last Modified: 2013-12-03
I've a Mutex and 3 threads like below

HANDLE HMutex;  
bool   End = false;
//////
/////
void Thread_Running_1()
{
  do
  {
     WaitForSingleObejct( HMutex, INFINITE );
     // ..... do something important
  }
  while( ! End );
}  
//////
/////
void Thread_Running_2()
{
  do
  {
     WaitForSingleObejct( HMutex, INFINITE );
     // ..... do something important
  }
  while( ! End );
}  
//////
//////   The main() function is only a case school
//////
void main()
{
   // I create and lock the mutex

   HMutex = CreateMutex( ..... );
   WaitForSingleObejct( HMutex, INFINITE );

   // I create 2 threads and i start these threads

   CreateThread( ...., Thread_Running_1, ..... );
   CreateThread( ...., Thread_Running_2, ..... );

   // At this time, Thread 1 and 2 are in a wait state.
   // Now, We release and close the Mutex

   End = true;
   ReleaseMutex( HMutex );
   CloseHandle( HMutex );
   
   // At this time, the HMutex is REALLY DESTROYED
}  


The trouble is when i release and close the Mutex handle,
only one thread will continue running. The other thread is
DEFINITELY lost. You can see the thread in "perfmon.exe".
You must call TerminateThread() api to shutdown the thread,
because the thread never returns from WaitForSingleObject().

When i close the Mutex handle, i do not know how many threads
are awaiting the mutex to be released. We could think that
the CloseHandle() will cease the WaitForSingleObject() execution
by returning WAIT_FAILED to threads but it DOES NOT.

This is same thing for Critical Section, Event, Semaphore.

MY QUESTION :
How to prevent the thread from being lost ?
 
0
Comment
Question by:mars
  • 2
2 Comments
 
LVL 22

Accepted Solution

by:
nietod earned 100 total points
Comment Utility
First of all, you really shoudl be using critical sections for this, not mutexes.

next you need to declare end as volatile, otherwise it may be optimized out of existance, preventing the threads from ending.  (VERY likely.)

Finally  you should not close the mutex handle unil the other threads finish.  To do this you can wait on the thread handles with WaitForSingleObject().  The wait function will return when the thread ends.  So use this to wait until two the additional threads are done, then close the mutex handle

let me know if you have any quesitons.
0
 
LVL 22

Expert Comment

by:nietod
Comment Utility
One more thing the threads that lock the mutex never release it.  You should have them release the mutex before then terminate.
0

Featured Post

Free Trending Threat Insights Every Day

Enhance your security with threat intelligence from the web. Get trending threat insights on hackers, exploits, and suspicious IP addresses delivered to your inbox with our free Cyber Daily.

Join & Write a Comment

As more and more people are shifting to the latest .Net frameworks, the windows presentation framework is gaining importance by the day. Many people are now turning to WPF controls to provide a rich user experience. I have been using WPF controls fo…
Whether you've completed a degree in computer sciences or you're a self-taught programmer, writing your first lines of code in the real world is always a challenge. Here are some of the most common pitfalls for new programmers.
This is Part 3 in a 3-part series on Experts Exchange to discuss error handling in VBA code written for Excel. Part 1 of this series discussed basic error handling code using VBA. http://www.experts-exchange.com/videos/1478/Excel-Error-Handlin…
This video discusses moving either the default database or any database to a new volume.

762 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question

Need Help in Real-Time?

Connect with top rated Experts

11 Experts available now in Live!

Get 1:1 Help Now