- Boost-users - lists.boost.org

RE: [Boost-users] Re: Re: Thread creation state
by Kutch, Patrick G 11 Feb '04

11 Feb '04

Looking at the code, by 1st guess would be that you have a race condition. tObj->runthread() is getting executed before tObj->createthead() has finished its business and the worker thread has actually entered the mutex. Meaning that tObj->runthread() calls the notify_one() BEFORE the actual worker thread does a wait. Thus when your threadproc does a lock and then a wait, it will wait forever because nothing will do the notify_one() again. Race conditions are funny things, may work perfectly on one box forever, then change one line of code, or take it to another system and bad things happen. May also behave differently under different OS's - mutexes are a prime examle of this, under Windows they seem to be recursive by default, but not under LINUX. A down and dirty way to see if my theory is correct, put in a delay between the tObj->createthread() and tObj->runthread() lines. Hope this helps - if it does praise me with thanx, if it doesn't it was a crackpot theory or I haven't had sufficient coffee yet to make an intelligent analysis - you pick. :-) good luck, - Patrick -----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Michael Glassford Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 7:40 AM To: Boost Users mailing list Subject: [Boost-users] Re: Re: Thread creation state What I meant was, can you post a complete sample that you have actually compiled and run and that has actually demonstrated the problem? That obviously isn't the case with the code you posted because it contains syntax errors and the main() function in your second post doesn't match the definition of the testCommand class in your first post. Having said that, I fixed the errors the best I could and don't see the problem. It would help if you could: 1) Tell me what compiler and compiler version you're using. 2) Tell me what Boost version you're using. 3) Post a complete code sample that demonstrates the problem. 4) Specify what compile and link options you're using (perhaps you could attach a make file or project file?) Sorry; I'm trying to help, but if you want me to be able to figure out the problem you'll have to help me out. Mike ----- Original Message ----- From: <janardhan.guptha(a)efi.com> Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lib.boost.user Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 11:32 PM Subject: RE: Re: Thread creation state > > The rest of the applicatin is just creating the object and preparing it > for execution. I am using Win32 version of boost.Thread implementation. > > The creation code snipet is > > void main() { > testCommand *tObj = new testCommand(11); > tObj->createthread(); > tObj->runthread(); > } > > > -----Original Message----- > From: boost-users-bounces(a)lists.boost.org > [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org]On Behalf Of Michael > Glassford > Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 12:17 AM > To: boost-users(a)lists.boost.org > Subject: [Boost-users] Re: Thread creation state > > > It would be a lot easier to help if you could post a complete, > compilable example that demonstrates the problem. Also, it would be > useful to know whether you are using the Win32, pthread, or Mac > implementation of Boost.Thread. > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > <janardhan.guptha(a)efi.com> wrote in message > news:433CFA26BCA852438922F929E3D07955AE53A7@blraddc02.efi.internal... > > I am creating a boost thread, how to know in which state it is > created. > > I have a code snippet that is waiting always in the thread creatin > functon > > istelf. Where as i tried with some boost samples, they are working > amazingly > > perfect. This is how my code snippet looks like > > > > typedef boost::mutex::scoped_lock lock; > > class testCommand { > > static void threadfunc() { > > testCommand *testObj = mMapCommand[mObjID]; > > testObj->processthread(); > > }; > > > > static map< int mObjID, testCommand*> mMapCommand; > > private: > > void createthread() { > > mThread = new boost::thread(&testCommand::threadfunc); > > } > > void processthread() { > > lock lk(mMutex); > > mCondition.wait(lk); > > //// Some Action > > }; > > > > void runthread() { > > lock lk(mMutex); > > mCondition.notify_one(); > > }; > > > > public: > > static int mObjID; > > boost::thread *mThread; > > boost::condition mCondition; > > boost::mutex mMutex; > > }; > > > > > > The newly created thread is waiting at the following location > forever, by > > the time > > i get a chance to execute the new thread is greatly delayed. > > > > NTDLL! 77f8856e() > > boost::detail::thread::lock_ops<boost::mutex>::unlock(boost::mutex & > {...}) > > line 49 > > boost::detail::thread::scoped_lock<boost::mutex>::unlock() line 85 + > 11 > > bytes > > > boost::detail::thread::scoped_lock<boost::mutex>::~scoped_lock<boost:: > mutex> > > () line 74 > > `anonymous namespace'::thread_param::started() line 47 + 15 bytes > > thread_proxy(void * 0x0012fd74) line 71 > > _threadstartex(void * 0x00961040) line 212 + 13 bytes > > KERNEL32! 7c57b382() > > > > It sounds like i am missing something here. The queries here are > > 1. why it is waiting at the above specified line forever ? > > 2. Where can i get few worth thread samples done using boost::thread > > > > Regards > > Janardhan > > > > _______________________________________________ > Boost-users mailing list > Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org > http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

1 0

RE: [Boost-users] Re: Conversions between shared_ptr<Base>andshared_ptr<Derived>
by Ben Hutchings 11 Feb '04

11 Feb '04

Konstantin Baumann <boost(a)ks-baumann.de> wrote: > For performance reasons I would like to see something like the > following conversion operators in shared_ptr<T>: > > template<class T> > class shared_ptr { > public: > ... > template<class S> > operator shared_ptr<S>&() throw() { > BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT(T* is convertible to S*); > return reinterpret_cast<shared_ptr<S>&>(*this); > } > > template<class S> > operator const shared_ptr<S>&() throw() const { > BOOST_STATIC_ASSERT(T* is convertible to S*); > return reinterpret_cast<const shared_ptr<S>&>(*this); > } > > }; // class shared_ptr<T> > > This would mimic the standard conversion from T* to S* without any > performance penalty for shared_ptr<T>. <snip> Don't sacrifice correctness for performance. First, the reinterpret_cast results in undefined behaviour. If you think you know that the actual behaviour is OK, you are wrong. If S is a base class of T then the conversion of T* to S* generally requires changing the bits of the pointer, unless S is the first non-virtual base. Second, if we can create a reference of type shared_ptr<S> to an object of type shared_ptr<T>, then we can also modify that object to contain a pointer of type S* which may not be convertible to T*.

1 0

RE: [Boost-users] Re: Thread creation state
by janardhan.guptha＠efi.com 11 Feb '04

11 Feb '04

The rest of the applicatin is just creating the object and preparing it for execution. I am using Win32 version of boost.Thread implementation. The creation code snipet is void main() { testCommand *tObj = new testCommand(11); tObj->createthread(); tObj->runthread(); } -----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces(a)lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org]On Behalf Of Michael Glassford Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 12:17 AM To: boost-users(a)lists.boost.org Subject: [Boost-users] Re: Thread creation state It would be a lot easier to help if you could post a complete, compilable example that demonstrates the problem. Also, it would be useful to know whether you are using the Win32, pthread, or Mac implementation of Boost.Thread. Thanks, Mike <janardhan.guptha(a)efi.com> wrote in message news:433CFA26BCA852438922F929E3D07955AE53A7@blraddc02.efi.internal... > I am creating a boost thread, how to know in which state it is created. > I have a code snippet that is waiting always in the thread creatin functon > istelf. Where as i tried with some boost samples, they are working amazingly > perfect. This is how my code snippet looks like > > typedef boost::mutex::scoped_lock lock; > class testCommand { > static void threadfunc() { > testCommand *testObj = mMapCommand[mObjID]; > testObj->processthread(); > }; > > static map< int mObjID, testCommand*> mMapCommand; > private: > void createthread() { > mThread = new boost::thread(&testCommand::threadfunc); > } > void processthread() { > lock lk(mMutex); > mCondition.wait(lk); > //// Some Action > }; > > void runthread() { > lock lk(mMutex); > mCondition.notify_one(); > }; > > public: > static int mObjID; > boost::thread *mThread; > boost::condition mCondition; > boost::mutex mMutex; > }; > > > The newly created thread is waiting at the following location forever, by > the time > i get a chance to execute the new thread is greatly delayed. > > NTDLL! 77f8856e() > boost::detail::thread::lock_ops<boost::mutex>::unlock(boost::mutex & {...}) > line 49 > boost::detail::thread::scoped_lock<boost::mutex>::unlock() line 85 + 11 > bytes > boost::detail::thread::scoped_lock<boost::mutex>::~scoped_lock<boost:: mutex> > () line 74 > `anonymous namespace'::thread_param::started() line 47 + 15 bytes > thread_proxy(void * 0x0012fd74) line 71 > _threadstartex(void * 0x00961040) line 212 + 13 bytes > KERNEL32! 7c57b382() > > It sounds like i am missing something here. The queries here are > 1. why it is waiting at the above specified line forever ? > 2. Where can i get few worth thread samples done using boost::thread > > Regards > Janardhan _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users(a)lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users

2 1

RE: [Boost-users] long compilation time of variant over long typelist with gcc
by Ben Hutchings 11 Feb '04

11 Feb '04

Graeme Lufkin <gwl(a)u.washington.edu> wrote: <snip> > When I compile code that declares a variable of this variant > type, the compilation takes unreasonably long (like, 1.5 hours on a > 2Ghz machine). For fewer types it goes much quicker, the transition > to unreasonably long happens around 14 types in the mpl::vector. <snip> > Something else I've noticed: the Intel compiler doesn't have the > compilation problem! I've attached sample case code that uses 16 > types, which takes less than 5 seconds to compile with Intel 8.0 and > almost 200 with GCC 3.2.2 (both on linux). > When I try the full 20 types I need, GCC chugs for several > hours, which is unacceptable for my project. Is there anything I can > do, or is this a GCC shortcoming that I need to wait for? I suggest you try newer versions of GCC (3.3 and 3.4 beta); if those still have the problem then report this as a bug at <http://gcc.gnu.org/bugs.html> with the keyword "compile-time-hog". Also check whether the poor performance is due to swapping, which indicates excessive use of memory and not necessarily excessive use of CPU time.

1 0

Spirit: pt_parse doesn't compile when using phrase_scanner_t for rules
by Steve Folly 11 Feb '04

11 Feb '04

Hi, I've read FAQ question number one about the free parse() function not compiling when and I've managed to get that to work by using rule<phrase_scanner_t> as suggested. However, I need to use the pt_parse method to create a parse tree. I'm obviously missing something really obvious because now pt_parse wont compile, even though I'm using a phrase_scanner_t because of the space_p skip parser. Any pointers most welcome. Thanks. Steve.

2 2

long compilation time of variant over long typelist with gcc
by Graeme Lufkin 10 Feb '04

10 Feb '04

I've recently become excited by the variant class and the apply_visitor technique. I've got a list of about 20 types that I want to handle in my variant (they're all related, so I won't need to supply 20 operator() to my visitors!). So I create a mpl::vector of the types, and then use make_variant_over to create my particular variant type. All this works fine (modulo a few days struggling to learn mpl stuff). When I compile code that declares a variable of this variant type, the compilation takes unreasonably long (like, 1.5 hours on a 2Ghz machine). For fewer types it goes much quicker, the transition to unreasonably long happens around 14 types in the mpl::vector. Side question: I finally found the macros BOOST_MPL_USE_PREPROCESSED_HEADERS and BOOST_MPL_LIMIT_VECTOR_SIZE that I had to suitably define to use such large mpl::vector-s. Are these documented anywhere, or am I missing the "suggested" way to do this? Something else I've noticed: the Intel compiler doesn't have the compilation problem! I've attached sample case code that uses 16 types, which takes less than 5 seconds to compile with Intel 8.0 and almost 200 with GCC 3.2.2 (both on linux). When I try the full 20 types I need, GCC chugs for several hours, which is unacceptable for my project. Is there anything I can do, or is this a GCC shortcoming that I need to wait for? -- - Graeme gwl(a)u.washington.edu "This sentence contains exactly threee erors."

1 0

Re: building boost with sunpro compilers
by King, William D 10 Feb '04

10 Feb '04

Thanks for your comments. The list sort problem is in the binary_search_test. binary_search_test.cpp in the utility library fails for sunpro 5.5 and 5.4, so sun needs to use the same workaround that begins in line 120 for DINKUMWARE and VC6. I will check my notes to find where the member template friends were an issue. It was something I found in 1.30.0, so, I am not sure if it will also be an issue in 1.31.0. So far, compiling 1.31.0 with sunpro is giving me much more trouble than either 1.30.0 or 1.30.2; sunpro doesn't like some of the iterator_facade code, which causes the filesystem library and several other tests to fail to compile. Davis King william.d.king(a)bankofamerica.com -----Original Message----- >From: boost-users-request(a)lists.boost.org >Message: 7 >Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 11:52:13 -0500 >From: Christopher Currie <christopher(a)currie.com> >Subject: [Boost-users] Re: building boost with sunpro compilers >To: boost-users(a)lists.boost.org >Message-ID: <c0b27u$luu$1(a)sea.gmane.org> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed >> The main fixes I have found so far is that for 5.5 and 5.4, >> BOOST_NO_LIST_SORT and BOOST_NO_MEMBER_TEMPLATE_FRIENDS need to be defined. >Can you point up which tests lead you to this conclusion? >Sun is supposed to be releasing an Early Access version of their next >compiler in the near future; I'll be focusing regressions and bugfixes >on that version once it's available. >Christopher ------------------------------

1 0

Thread creation state
by janardhan.guptha＠efi.com 10 Feb '04

10 Feb '04

I am creating a boost thread, how to know in which state it is created. I have a code snippet that is waiting always in the thread creatin functon istelf. Where as i tried with some boost samples, they are working amazingly perfect. This is how my code snippet looks like typedef boost::mutex::scoped_lock lock; class testCommand { static void threadfunc() { testCommand *testObj = mMapCommand[mObjID]; testObj->processthread(); }; static map< int mObjID, testCommand*> mMapCommand; private: void createthread() { mThread = new boost::thread(&testCommand::threadfunc); } void processthread() { lock lk(mMutex); mCondition.wait(lk); //// Some Action }; void runthread() { lock lk(mMutex); mCondition.notify_one(); }; public: static int mObjID; boost::thread *mThread; boost::condition mCondition; boost::mutex mMutex; }; The newly created thread is waiting at the following location forever, by the time i get a chance to execute the new thread is greatly delayed. NTDLL! 77f8856e() boost::detail::thread::lock_ops<boost::mutex>::unlock(boost::mutex & {...}) line 49 boost::detail::thread::scoped_lock<boost::mutex>::unlock() line 85 + 11 bytes boost::detail::thread::scoped_lock<boost::mutex>::~scoped_lock<boost::mutex> () line 74 `anonymous namespace'::thread_param::started() line 47 + 15 bytes thread_proxy(void * 0x0012fd74) line 71 _threadstartex(void * 0x00961040) line 212 + 13 bytes KERNEL32! 7c57b382() It sounds like i am missing something here. The queries here are 1. why it is waiting at the above specified line forever ? 2. Where can i get few worth thread samples done using boost::thread Regards Janardhan

2 1

How to export arrays from C(++) to python using boost
by Shukla, Nitin (Export) 10 Feb '04

10 Feb '04

I want to export an array of int and floats from C(++) to python using Boost but don't know how? Can anyone help me out? Is there any tutorials specifically on C(++)/Python interfacing using the Boost tool? I also want to export the BOOL type of C(++) to Python. How can I do that? --Nitin

2 1

building boost with sunpro compilers
by King, William D 10 Feb '04

10 Feb '04

Hello, I've been wondering if anyone else is trying to build boost on Solaris with recent sunpro compilers. In 1.31.0, the config files warn if you use any version later than 5.3, while the regression tests are running on 5.4, and Sun's latest release is 5.5. The main fixes I have found so far is that for 5.5 and 5.4, BOOST_NO_LIST_SORT and BOOST_NO_MEMBER_TEMPLATE_FRIENDS need to be defined. I would be interested in comparing notes and fixes with anyone else using Sunpro 5.5 (0x550). Thanks, Davis King william.d.king(a)bankofamerica.com

2 1