responsively checking two queues without pegging CPU_问答_开发者

I have a thread pool system which uses message passing to organize events, and I am also using the Windows API which also does a bit of message passing. So essentially I need to use the functions which check for the presence of messages without blocking. If I block (if I use GetMessage I think it will block) while checking either queue, I may miss any incoming messages on the other queue.

The first solution I know of is to Sleep a couple of miliseconds somewhere during my loop of peeking on both queues.

Another way I can think of is to have an additional thread, so that now I have one for e开发者_如何学Cach loop I am listening to. I make it not responsible for doing anything other than running the windows message loop, then use it to process and forward any events to my own message queue for the event to be handled. But this won't work if Windows specifically sends the messages i'm interested in to the original thread.

Are there other good solutions?

Your requirement is a bit unclear, but I can agree that Windows message queues are awkward in that only one thread can wait on them. Windows binds windows to threads, and only the thread that creates a window can interact with it.

If you have user-defined messages that contain work to processed by to your thread pool, I suggest that you do exactly what you suggest in your question - use one thread to process all the Windows messages, (GetMessage() loop), requeue any work that turns up to your thread pool input queue and handle 'normal' Windows messages with the usual Translate/Dispatch mechanism.

If you need more help, could you describe more clearly the flow of Windows messages and/or work objects through your system? It is not obvious where the work for the thread pool comes from and how it is transported, (if forced to use a WMQ, I usually postMessage a reference in wParam/lParam, but your system?).

Rgds, Martin

Normally, a thread pool would not be involved in the Windows message loop, and blocking indefinitely when there is no work is not only allowable for a worker thread, but even desirable.

The most elegant way of implementing a thread pool that can receive messages via some kind of queue, which automatically keeps all CPU cores busy, and which as a bonus is very efficient, is using a completion port.

CreateIoCompletionPort with a null handle will create a completion port and return the handle. Passing zero as NumberOfConcurrentThreads tells the operating system to keep as many threads running as there are cores available.

Create any number of worker threads (a few more than you have cores) and CreateIoCompletionPort with the handle returned by the first call. That will bind the workers to this completion port. Now call GetQueuedCompletionStatus with INFINITE timeout on every worker, that will block them indefinitively.

Make a struct which has an OVERLAPPED as the first member, plus any data that you want to hand as a task (some pointers to data, or anything).

For every task, set up one of your message structs, and PostQueuedCompletionStatus to the completion port handle. At application exit, post null. You can use the dwNumberOfBytesTransferred field (and the completion key) to pass some additional info.

Now Windows will wake one thread for every message you posted, in last-in-first-out order, up to the number of cores available. If one of the workers blocks on IO, Windows will wake another one for another task (keeping the CPU busy as long as there is work to do).

After finishing a task, go back to GetQueuedCompletionStatus.

A way to gracefully terminate all workers is to pass "zero bytes transferred" and have the worker re-post the event, and exit if it encounters that.

I am not an expert on windows queues, but I am nearly certain there has to be an asynchronous event driven mechanism for message passing.