Search Results

Search found 1638 results on 66 pages for 'multithreading'.

Page 56/66 | < Previous Page | 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63  | Next Page >

  • Another thread safe queue implementation

    - by jensph
    I have a class, Queue, that I tried to make thread safe. It has these three member variables: std::queue<T> m_queue; pthread_mutex_t m_mutex; pthread_cond_t m_condition; and a push and pop implemented as: template<class T> void Queue<T>::push(T value) { pthread_mutex_lock( &m_mutex ); m_queue.push(value); if( !m_queue.empty() ) { pthread_cond_signal( &m_condition ); } pthread_mutex_unlock( &m_mutex ); } template<class T> bool Queue<T>::pop(T& value, bool block) { bool rtn = false; pthread_mutex_lock( &m_mutex ); if( block ) { while( m_queue.empty() ) { pthread_cond_wait( &m_condition, &m_mutex ); } } if( !m_queue.empty() ) { value = m_queue.front(); m_queue.pop(); rtn = true; } pthread_mutex_unlock( &m_mutex ); return rtn; } Unfortunately there are occasional issues that may be the fault of this code. That is, there are two threads and sometimes thread 1 never comes out of push() and at other times thread 2 never comes out of pop() (the block parameter is true) though the queue isn't empty. I understand there are other implementations available, but I'd like to try to fix this code, if needed. Anyone see any issues? The constructor has the appropriate initializations: Queue() { pthread_mutex_init( &mMutex, NULL ); pthread_cond_init( &mCondition, NULL ); } and the destructor, the corresponding 'destroy' calls.

    Read the article

  • Turn based synchronization between threads

    - by Amarus
    I'm trying to find a way to synchronize multiple threads having the following conditions: * There are two types of threads: 1. A single "cyclic" thread executing an infinite loop to do cyclic calculations 2. Multiple short-lived threads not started by the main thread * The cyclic thread has a sleep duration between each cycle/loop iteration * The other threads are allowed execute during the inter-cycle sleep of the cyclic thread: - Any other thread that attempts to execute during an active cycle should be blocked - The cyclic thread will wait until all other threads that are already executing to be finished Here's a basic example of what I was thinking of doing: // Somewhere in the code: ManualResetEvent manualResetEvent = new ManualResetEvent(true); // Allow Externally call CountdownEvent countdownEvent = new CountdownEvent(1); // Can't AddCount a CountdownEvent with CurrentCount = 0 void ExternallyCalled() { manualResetEvent.WaitOne(); // Wait until CyclicCalculations is having its beauty sleep countdownEvent.AddCount(); // Notify CyclicCalculations that it should wait for this method call to finish before starting the next cycle Thread.Sleep(1000); // TODO: Replace with actual method logic countdownEvent.Signal(); // Notify CyclicCalculations that this call is finished } void CyclicCalculations() { while (!stopCyclicCalculations) { manualResetEvent.Reset(); // Block all incoming calls to ExternallyCalled from this point forward countdownEvent.Signal(); // Dirty workaround for the issue with AddCount and CurrentCount = 0 countdownEvent.Wait(); // Wait until all of the already executing calls to ExternallyCalled are finished countdownEvent.Reset(); // Reset the CountdownEvent for next cycle. Thread.Sleep(2000); // TODO: Replace with actual method logic manualResetEvent.Set(); // Unblock all threads executing ExternallyCalled Thread.Sleep(1000); // Inter-cycles delay } } Obviously, this doesn't work. There's no guarantee that there won't be any threads executing ExternallyCalled that are in between manualResetEvent.WaitOne(); and countdownEvent.AddCount(); at the time the main thread gets released by the CountdownEvent. I can't figure out a simple way of doing what I'm after, and almost everything that I've found after a lengthy search is related to producer/consumer synchronization which I can't apply here.

    Read the article

  • Sleeping a thread blocking stdin

    - by Sid
    Hey, I'm running a function which evaluates commands passed in using stdin and another function which runs a bunch of jobs. I need to make the latter function sleep at regular intervals but that seems to be blocking the stdin. Any advice on how to resolve this would be appreciated. The source code for the functions is def runJobs(comps, jobQueue, numRunning, limit, lock): while len(jobQueue) >= 0: print(len(jobQueue)); if len(jobQueue) > 0: comp, tasks = find_computer(comps, 0); #do something time.sleep(5); def manageStdin(): print "Global Stdin Begins Now" for line in fileinput.input(): try: print(eval(line)); except Exception, e: print e; --Thanks

    Read the article

  • C++: is it safe to read an integer variable that's being concurrently modified without locking?

    - by Hongli
    Suppose that I have an integer variable in a class, and this variable may be concurrently modified by other threads. Writes are protected by a mutex. Do I need to protect reads too? I've heard that there are some hardware architectures on which, if one thread modifies a variable, and another thread reads it, then the read result will be garbage; in this case I do need to protect reads. I've never seen such architectures though. This question assumes that a single transaction only consists of updating a single integer variable so I'm not worried about the states of any other variables that might also be involved in a transaction.

    Read the article

  • New form on a different thread

    - by Dan
    So I have a thread in my application, which purpose is to listen to messages from the server and act according to what it recieves. I ran into a problem when I wanted to fire off a message from the server, that when the client app recieves it, the client app would open up a new form. However this new form just freezes instantly. I think what's happening is that the new form is loaded up on the same thread as the thread listening to the server, which of course is busy listening on the stream, in turn blocking the thread. Normally, for my other functions in the clients listening thread, I'd use invokes to update the UI of the main form, so I guess what I'm asking for is if here's a way to invoke a new form on the main form.

    Read the article

  • Limiting object allocation over multiple threads

    - by John
    I have an application which retrieves and caches the results of a clients query. The client then requests different chunks of data and the application sends the relevant results and removes them from the cache. A new requirement for this application is that there needs to be a run-time configurable maximum number of results which may be cached. I've taken the naive approach and implemented this by using a counter under a lock which is incremented every time a result is cached and decremented whenever a result is removed from the cache. Unfortunately, this has drastically reduced the applications performance when processing a large number of concurrent requests. I have tried both a critical section lock and spin-lock; the performance improves a bit with a spin-lock, but is still unacceptably slow. Is there a better way to solve this problem which may improve performance? Right now I have a thread pool that services requests and each request is tied to a Request object which stores that cached results for that particular request. Here is a simplified pseudo code version of my current implementation: void ResultCallback( Result result, Request *request ) { lock totalResultsCached lock cachedLimit if( totalResultsCached + 1 > cachedLimit ) { unlock cachedLimit unlock totalResultsCached //cancel the request return; } ++totalResultsCached; unlock cachedLimit unlock totalResultsCached request.add(result) } void SendResults( int resultsToSend, Request *request ) { while ( resultsToSend > 0 ) { send(request.remove()) lock totalResultsCached --totalResultsCached unlock totalResultsCached --resultsToSend; } }

    Read the article

  • Java Socket - how to catch Exception of BufferedReader.readline()

    - by Hasan Tahsin
    I have a Thread (let's say T1) which reads data from socket: public void run() { while (running) { try { BufferedReader reader = new BufferedReader( new InputStreamReader(socket.getInputStream()) ); String input = reader.readLine(); } catch (IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); } } } Another Thread (lets say T2) try to finish the program in one of its method. Therefore T2 does the following: T1.running = false; socket.close(); Here is this scenario for which i couldn't find a solution: T1 is active and waiting for some input to read i.e. blocking. context switching T2 is active and sets running to false, closes the socket context switching because T1 was blocking and T2 closed the socket, T1 throws an Exception. What i want is to catch this SocketException. i can't put a try/catch(SocketException) in T1.run(). So how can i catch it in T1's running-method? If it's not possible to catch it in T1's running, then how can i catch it elsewhere? PS: "Another question about the Thread Debugging" Normally when i debug the code step by step, i lose the 'active running line' on a context switch. Let's say i'm in line 20 of T1, context switch happens, let's assume the program continues from the 30.line of T2, but the debugger does not go/show to the 30.line of T2, instead the 'active running line' vanishes. So i lose the control over the code. I use Eclipse for Java and Visual Studio for C#. So what is the best way to track the code while debugging on a context switch ?

    Read the article

  • Easy Threading in WPF

    - by Sandeep Bansal
    Hi everyone, I've been reading a lot about threading in C#, WPF and Silverlight but can't get it to work. My main problem is I have the _load (_Initialized) action and it has a lot of object creation and along with that I have timers working doing different things, this causes the startup time of the program to be very slow and obviously causes the UI to hang and it isn't a good thing for deploying to a lot of users. My timers change values of labels and textfields but having them do that on another thread is an obvious no go. So can someone give me some examples on how to achieve what I need to do? Thanks

    Read the article

  • .NET Threading : How to wait for other thread to finish some task

    - by Alex Ilyin
    Assume I have method void SomeMethod(Action callback) This method does some work in background thread and then invokes callback. The question is - how to block current thread until callback is called ? There is an example bool finished = false; SomeMethod(delegate{ finished = true; }); while(!finished) Thread.Sleep(); But I'm sure there should be better way

    Read the article

  • Python threading question (Working with a method that blocks forever)

    - by Nix
    I am trying to wrap a thread around some receiving logic in python. Basically we have an app, that will have a thread in the background polling for messages, the problem I ran into is that piece that actually pulls the messages waits forever for a message. Making it impossible to terminate... I ended up wrapping the pull in another thread, but I wanted to make sure there wasn't a better way to do it. Original code: class Manager: def __init__(self): receiver = MessageReceiver() receiver.start() #do other stuff... class MessageReceiver(Thread): receiver = Receiver() def __init__(self): Thread.__init__(self) def run(self): #stop is a flag that i use to stop the thread... while(not stopped ): #can never stop because pull below blocks message = receiver.pull() print "Message" + message What I refectored to: class Manager: def __init__(self): receiver = MessageReceiver() receiver.start() class MessageReceiver(Thread): receiver = Receiver() def __init__(self): Thread.__init__(self) def run(self): pullThread = PullThread(self.receiver) pullThread.start() #stop is a flag that i use to stop the thread... while(not stopped and pullThread.last_message ==None): pass message = pullThread.last_message print "Message" + message class PullThread(Thread): last_message = None def __init__(self, receiver): Thread.__init(self, target=get_message, args=(receiver)) def get_message(self, receiver): self.last_message = None self.last_message = receiver.pull() return self.last_message I know the obvious locking issues exist, but is this the appropriate way to control a receive thread that waits forever for a message? One thing I did notice was this thing eats 100% cpu while waiting for a message... **If you need to see the stopping logic please let me know and I will post.

    Read the article

  • Create table class as a singleton

    - by Mark
    I got a class that I use as a table. This class got an array of 16 row classes. These row classes all have 6 double variables. The values of these rows are set once and never change. Would it be a good practice to make this table a singleton? The advantage is that it cost less memory, but the table will be called from multiple threads so I have to synchronize my code which way cause a bit slower application. However lookups in this table are probably a very small portion of the total code that is executed. EDIT: This is my code, are there better ways to do this or is this a good practice? Removed synchronized keyword according to recommendations in this question. final class HalfTimeTable { private HalfTimeRow[] table = new HalfTimeRow[16]; private static final HalfTimeTable instance = new HalfTimeTable(); private HalfTimeTable() { if (instance != null) { throw new IllegalStateException("Already instantiated"); } table[0] = new HalfTimeRow(4.0, 1.2599, 0.5050, 1.5, 1.7435, 0.1911); table[1] = new HalfTimeRow(8.0, 1.0000, 0.6514, 3.0, 1.3838, 0.4295); //etc } @Override @Deprecated public Object clone() throws CloneNotSupportedException { throw new CloneNotSupportedException(); } public static HalfTimeTable getInstance() { return instance; } public HalfTimeRow getRow(int rownumber) { return table[rownumber]; } }

    Read the article

  • C# Anyway to detect if an object is locked.

    - by scope-creep
    Hi, Is their anyway to determine if a object is locked in c#. I have the unenviable position, through design where i'm reading from a queue inside a class, and I need to dump the contents into a collection in the class. But that collection is also read/write from an interface outside the class. So obviously their may be a case when the collection is being written to, as the same time i want to write to it. I could program round it, say using delegate but it would be ugly. Bob.

    Read the article

  • lock statement not working when there is a loop inside it?

    - by Ngu Soon Hui
    See this code: public class multiply { public Thread myThread; public int Counter { get; private set; } public string name { get; private set; } public void RunConsolePrint() { lock(this) { RunLockCode("lock"); } } private void RunLockCode(string lockCode) { Console.WriteLine("Now thread "+lockCode+" " + name + " has started"); for (int i = 1; i <= Counter; i++) { Console.WriteLine(lockCode+" "+name + ": count has reached " + i + ": total count is " + Counter); } Console.WriteLine("Thread " + lockCode + " " + name + " has finished"); } public multiply(string pname, int pCounter) { name = pname; Counter = pCounter; myThread = new Thread(new ThreadStart(RunConsolePrint)); } } And this is the test run code: static void Main(string[] args) { int counter = 50; multiply m2 = new multiply("Second", counter); multiply m1 = new multiply("First", counter); m1.myThread.Start(); m2.myThread.Start(); Console.ReadLine(); } I would expect that m2 must execute from start to finish before m1 starts executing, or vice versa, because of the lock statement. But the result I found was the call to lock first and lock second was intermingled together, i.e., something like this Now thread lock First has started Now thread lock Second has started lock First: Count has reached 1: total count is 50 lock First: Count has reached 2: total count is 50 lock Second: Count has reached 1: total count is 50 What did I do wrong?

    Read the article

  • Are there concurrency problems when using -performSelector:withObject:afterDelay: ?

    - by mystify
    For example, I often use this: [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:someDelay]; Now, lets say I call this 10 times to perform at the exact same delay, like: [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; - (void)doSomethingAfterDelay:(id)someObject { /* access an array, read stuff, write stuff, do different things that would suffer in multithreaded environments .... all operations are nonatomic! */ } I have observed pretty strange behavior when doing things like this. For my understanding, this method schedules a timer to fire on the current thread, so in this case the main thread. But since it doesn't create new threads, it actually should not be possible to run into concurrency problems, right?

    Read the article

  • Are there concurrency problems when using -performSelector:withObject:afterDelay: ?

    - by mystify
    For example, I often use this: [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:someDelay]; Now, lets say I call this 10 times to perform at the exact same delay, like: [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; [self performSelector:@selector(doSomethingAfterDelay:) withObject:someObject afterDelay:2.0]; - (void)doSomethingAfterDelay:(id)someObject { /* access an array, read stuff, write stuff, do different things that would suffer in multithreaded environments .... all operations are nonatomic! */ } I have observed pretty strange behavior when doing things like this. For my understanding, this method schedules a timer to fire on the current thread, so in this case the main thread. But since it doesn't create new threads, it actually should not be possible to run into concurrency problems, right?

    Read the article

  • Can I avoid a threaded UDP socket in Pyton dropping data?

    - by 666craig
    First off, I'm new to Python and learning on the job, so be gentle! I'm trying to write a threaded Python app for Windows that reads data from a UDP socket (thread-1), writes it to file (thread-2), and displays the live data (thread-3) to a widget (gtk.Image using a gtk.gdk.pixbuf). I'm using queues for communicating data between threads. My problem is that if I start only threads 1 and 3 (so skip the file writing for now), it seems that I lose some data after the first few samples. After this drop it looks fine. Even by letting thread 1 complete before running thread 3, this apparent drop is still there. Apologies for the length of code snippet (I've removed the thread that writes to file), but I felt removing code would just prompt questions. Hope someone can shed some light :-) import socket import threading import Queue import numpy import gtk gtk.gdk.threads_init() import gtk.glade import pygtk class readFromUDPSocket(threading.Thread): def __init__(self, socketUDP, readDataQueue, packetSize, numScans): threading.Thread.__init__(self) self.socketUDP = socketUDP self.readDataQueue = readDataQueue self.packetSize = packetSize self.numScans = numScans def run(self): for scan in range(1, self.numScans + 1): buffer = self.socketUDP.recv(self.packetSize) self.readDataQueue.put(buffer) self.socketUDP.close() print 'myServer finished!' class displayWithGTK(threading.Thread): def __init__(self, displayDataQueue, image, viewArea): threading.Thread.__init__(self) self.displayDataQueue = displayDataQueue self.image = image self.viewWidth = viewArea[0] self.viewHeight = viewArea[1] self.displayData = numpy.zeros((self.viewHeight, self.viewWidth, 3), dtype=numpy.uint16) def run(self): scan = 0 try: while True: if not scan % self.viewWidth: scan = 0 buffer = self.displayDataQueue.get(timeout=0.1) self.displayData[:, scan, 0] = numpy.fromstring(buffer, dtype=numpy.uint16) self.displayData[:, scan, 1] = numpy.fromstring(buffer, dtype=numpy.uint16) self.displayData[:, scan, 2] = numpy.fromstring(buffer, dtype=numpy.uint16) gtk.gdk.threads_enter() self.myPixbuf = gtk.gdk.pixbuf_new_from_data(self.displayData.tostring(), gtk.gdk.COLORSPACE_RGB, False, 8, self.viewWidth, self.viewHeight, self.viewWidth * 3) self.image.set_from_pixbuf(self.myPixbuf) self.image.show() gtk.gdk.threads_leave() scan += 1 except Queue.Empty: print 'myDisplay finished!' pass def quitGUI(obj): print 'Currently active threads: %s' % threading.enumerate() gtk.main_quit() if __name__ == '__main__': # Create socket (IPv4 protocol, datagram (UDP)) and bind to address socketUDP = socket.socket(socket.AF_INET, socket.SOCK_DGRAM) host = '192.168.1.5' port = 1024 socketUDP.bind((host, port)) # Data parameters samplesPerScan = 256 packetsPerSecond = 1200 packetSize = 512 duration = 1 # For now, set a fixed duration to log data numScans = int(packetsPerSecond * duration) # Create array to store data data = numpy.zeros((samplesPerScan, numScans), dtype=numpy.uint16) # Create queue for displaying from readDataQueue = Queue.Queue(numScans) # Build GUI from Glade XML file builder = gtk.Builder() builder.add_from_file('GroundVue.glade') window = builder.get_object('mainwindow') window.connect('destroy', quitGUI) view = builder.get_object('viewport') image = gtk.Image() view.add(image) viewArea = (1200, samplesPerScan) # Instantiate & start threads myServer = readFromUDPSocket(socketUDP, readDataQueue, packetSize, numScans) myDisplay = displayWithGTK(readDataQueue, image, viewArea) myServer.start() myDisplay.start() gtk.gdk.threads_enter() gtk.main() gtk.gdk.threads_leave() print 'gtk.main finished!'

    Read the article

  • Windows service thread not updating database until complete

    - by dfarney
    I have a windows service with a FileSystemWatcher. When a new file is dropped in my folder a new thread is created, started, and I begin processing the file. Throughout this process I am making updates to the database (Linq to SQL) to keep track of the file's processing progress. Problem is none of my database updates are reflected throughout the process, just an update after everything has been completed. Any ideas? Note: when doing dev/testing my code was in an aspx page and worked great, but when I put it in a windows service I no longer get the progress updates. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • UITableViewController executes delate functions before network request finishes

    - by user1543132
    I'm having trouble trying to populate a UITableView with the results of a network request. It seems that my code is alright as it works perfectly when my network is speedy, however, when it's not, the function - (UITableViewCell *)tableView:(UITableView *)tableView cellForRowAtIndexPath:(NSIndexPath *)indexPath- still executes, which results in a bad access error. I presume that this is because the array that the aforesaid function attempts to utilize has not been populated. This brings me to my question: Is there anyway that I can have the UITableView delegate methods delayed to avoid this? - (UITableViewCell *)tableView:(UITableView *)tableView cellForRowAtIndexPath:(NSIndexPath *)indexPath { static NSString *CellIdentifier = @"AlbumsCell"; //UITableViewCell *basicCell = [tableView dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier:CellIdentifier forIndexPath:indexPath]; AlbumsCell *cell = (AlbumsCell *)[tableView dequeueReusableCellWithIdentifier:CellIdentifier]; if (!cell) { **// Here is where the Thread 1: EXC_BAD_ACCESS (code=2 address=0x8)** cell = [[[AlbumsCell alloc] initWithStyle:UITableViewCellStyleDefault reuseIdentifier:CellIdentifier] autorelease]; } Album *album = [_albums objectAtIndex:[indexPath row]]; [cell setAlbum:album]; return cell; }

    Read the article

  • Why onCreate() calling multiple times when i use Thread()?

    - by RajaReddy PolamReddy
    In my app i faced a problem with threads. i am using native code in my app. i try to load library and then calling native functions from the android code. 1. By using Threads() : PjsuaThread pjsuaThread = new PjsuaThread(); pjsuaThread.start(); thread code class PjsuaThread extends Thread { public void run() { if (pjsua_app.initApp() != 0) { // native function calling return; } else { } pjsua_app.startPjsua(ApjsuaActivity.CFG_FNAME); // native function calling finished = true; } When i use code like this, onCreate() function calling multiple times and able to load library and calling some functions properly, after some seconds onCreate calling again because of that it's crashing. 2. Using AsyncTask(): And also i used AsyncTask< for this requirement, it's crashing the application( crashing in lib code ). not able to open any functions class SipTask extends AsyncTask<Void, String, Void> { protected Void doInBackground(Void... args) { if (pjsua_app.initApp() != 0) { return null; } else { } pjsua_app.startPjsua(ApjsuaActivity.CFG_FNAME); finished = true; return null; } @Override protected void onPostExecute(Void result) { super.onPostExecute(result); Log.i(TAG, "On POst "); } } What is annoying is that in most cases it is not the missing library, it's tried to able to load the lib crashing in between. any one know the reason ?

    Read the article

  • Application window sent behind other windows on closing different thread (C#)

    - by david.murrant
    I'm writing a Windows Forms Application in C#.NET On startup, the application displays a splash screen which is running in a separate thread. Whilst the splash screen is showing, the main application is initialising. Once the main application has finished initialising, the main form of the application is displayed, and the splash screen still shows over the top. Everything so far is as expected. Then, the Splash screen is closed, which causes that thread to exit. For some reason, at the point, the main application windows gets sent behind all other open Windows, notably the Windows Explorer window where you clicked the .exe file to run the application in the first place! What could be causing the windows to suddenly jump "behind" like this?

    Read the article

  • Threading in C#

    - by j-t-s
    Hi All Just looking for something ultra simple. I need to spawn a method off to a new thread. I don't care when or how it ends. Can somebody please help me with this? Thank you

    Read the article

  • makecontext segfault?

    - by cdietschrun
    I am working on a homework assignment that will be due in the next semester. It requires us to implement our own context switching/thread library using the ucontext API. The professor provides code that does it, but before a thread returns, he manually does some work and calls an ISR that finds another thread to use and swapcontexts to it or if none are left, exits. The point of the assignment is to use the uc_link field of the context so that when it hits a return it takes care of the work. I've created a function (type void/void args) that just does the work the functions did before (clean up and then calls ISR). The professor said he wanted this. So all that's left is to do a makecontext somewhere along the way on the context in the uc_link field so that it runs my thread, right? Well, when I do makecontext on seemingly any combination of ucontext_t's and function, I get a segfault and gdb provides no help.. I can skip the makecontext and my program exist 'normally' when it hits a return in the threads I created because (presumably) the uc_link field is not properly setup (which is what I'm trying to do). I also can't find anything on why makecontext would segfault. Can anyone help? stack2.ss_sp = (void *)(malloc(STACKSIZE)); if(stack2.ss_sp == NULL){ printf("thread failed to get stack space\n"); exit(8); } stack2.ss_size = STACKSIZE; stack2.ss_flags = 0; if(getcontext(&main_context) == -1){ perror("getcontext in t_init, rtn_env"); exit(5); } //main_context.uc_stack = t_state[i].mystk; main_context.uc_stack = stack2; main_context.uc_link = 0; makecontext(&main_context, (void (*)(void))thread_rtn, 0); I've also tried just thread_rtn, &thread_rtn and other things. thread_rtn is declared as void thread_rtn(void). later, in each thread. run_env is of type ucontext_t: ... t_state[i].run_env.uc_link = &main_context;

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63  | Next Page >