开发者

What's the best way to signal threads that sleep or block to stop?

开发者 https://www.devze.com 2023-01-17 19:56 出处:网络
I\'ve got a service that I need to shut down and update. I\'m having difficulties with this in two different cases:

I've got a service that I need to shut down and update. I'm having difficulties with this in two different cases:

  1. I have some threads that sleep for large amounts of time. Obviously I can't wait for them to wake up to finish shutting down the service. I had a thought to use an AutoResetEvent that gets set by some controller thread when the sleep interval is up (by just checking every two seconds or something), and triggering it immediately at OnCl开发者_如何学Goose time. Is there a better way to facilitate that?

  2. I have one thread that makes a call to a blocking method call (one which I cannot modify). How do you signal such a thread to stop?


  1. I'm not sure if I understood your first question correctly, but have you looked at using WaitForSingleObject as an alternative to Sleep? You can specify a timeout as well as an object to wait on, so if you want it to wake up earlier, just signal the object.

  2. What exactly do you mean by "call to a blocking thread"? Or did you just mean a blocking call? In general, there isn't a way to interrupt a thread without forcefully terminating it. However, if the call is a system call, there might be ways to return control by making the call fail, eg. cancelling I/O or closing an associated handle.


For 1. you can get your threads into an interruptable Sleep by using SleepEx rather than Sleep. Once they get this shutdown kick (initiated from your termination logic using QueueUserApc), you can detect it happened using the return code from SleepEx and terminate those threads accordingly. This is similar to the suggestion to use WaitForSingleObject, but you don't need another per-thread handle that's just used to terminate the associated thread.

The return value is zero if the specified time interval expired.

The return value is WAIT_IO_COMPLETION if the function returned due to one or more I/O completion callback functions. This can happen only if bAlertable is TRUE, and if the thread that called the SleepEx function is the same thread that called the extended I/O function.

For 2., that's a tough one unless you have access to some resource used in that thread that can cause the blocking call to abort in such a way that the calling thread can handle it cleanly. You may just have to implement code to kill that thread with extreme prejudice using TerminateThread (probably this should be the last thing you do before exiting the process) and see what happens under test.


An easy and reliable solution is to kill the service process. A process is the memory-safe abstraction of the OS, after all, so you can safely terminate one without regard for process-internal state - of course, if your process is communicating or fiddling with external state, all bets are off...

Additionally, you could implement the solution which OS's themselves commonly do: one warning signal asking the process to clean up as best possible (which sets a flag and gracefully exits what can be gracefully stopped), and then forceful termination if the process doesn't exit by itself (which ends pesky things like blocking I/O).

All services should be built such that forceful termination isn't harmful, since these processes are system managed and may be terminated by things such as a reboot - i.e., your service ideally should permit this without corrupting storage anyhow.

Oh, and one final warning; windows services may share a process (I presume for efficiency, though it strikes me as an avoidable optimization), so if you go this route, you want to make sure your service is not sharing a process with other services. You can ensure this by passing the option SERVICE_WIN32_OWN_PROCESS to ChangeServiceConfig.

0

精彩评论

暂无评论...
验证码 换一张
取 消