We Keep Coding

How to suspend a thread by another thread in C#?

Sorry for my bad English. Hope someone suggests me a better version of my question.
I've searched but seemed like I couldn't find the answer for my problem.
Currently, I'm writing a C# WPF app. This app will perform a heavy task in a long time. So I've decided to create another class with that heavy method and pass that method to another thread. I have to create a class to do that because the heavy method takes parameters.
I want the ability to suspend and resume that thread. I've known that I should use a ManualResetEvent object or Thread.Sleep method.
After many hours of trying and testing, getting confused why I always end up suspend the UI thread but the heavy thread is still running. What I've tried were:
Create a ManualResetEvent object called mre inside the HeavyClass. When user click the Pause button, the UI class will call the method heavyClass.mre.WaitOne().
class HeavyClass
{
// properties
ManualResetEvent mre = new ManualResetEvent(false);
public void HeavyRun()
{
//Do something takes really long time
//And doesn't have any loops
}
}
class MainWindow : Window
{
// properties
private HeavyClass heavyClass = new HeavyClass();
private void buttonStart_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
Thread t = new Thread(heavyClass.HeavyRun);
t.Start();
}
private void buttonPause_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
heavyClass.mre.WaitOne();
}
}
Create a method called SleepThread inside the HeavyClass. When user click the Pause button, the UI class will call the method heavyClass.SleepThread().
class HeavyClass
{
//properties
ManualResetEvent mre = new ManualResetEvent(false);
public void SleepThread()
{
Thread.Sleep(Timeout.Infinite);
//mre.WaitOne();
//They are the same behavior
}
public void HeavyRun()
{
//Do something takes really long time
//And doesn't have any loops
}
}
class MainWindow : Window
{
// properties
private HeavyClass heavyClass = new HeavyClass();
private void buttonStart_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
Thread t = new Thread(heavyClass.HeavyRun);
t.Start();
}
private void buttonPause_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
heavyClass.SleepThread();
}
}
Create an EventHandler<MainWindow> PauseThread inside the UI class, then write its handle inside the HeavyClass. When user click the Pause button, the UI class will trigger the event PauseThread(this, this).
class MainWindow : Window
{
// properties
private HeavyClass heavyClass = new HeavyClass();
public event EventHandler<MainWindow> PauseThread;
private void buttonStart_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
Thread t = new Thread(heavyClass.HeavyRun);
t.Start();
}
private void buttonPause_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
PauseThread(this, this);
}
}
class HeavyClass
{
// properties
ManualResetEvent mre = new ManualResetEvent(false);
public void HeavyRun()
{
MainWindow.PauseThread += (s, E) =>
{
Thread.Sleep(Timeout.Infinite);
//mre.WaitOne();
//They are the same behavior
};
//Do something takes really long time
//And doesn't have any loops
}
}
As I said above, I always paused the UI thread and the heavy task is still running.
And finally in the end, I've known the essence of my problem. That is: which thread calls Thread.Sleep() or WaitOne() will be blocked. Yeah, "which thread", not "which class".
Everything makes sense for me now. But that doesn't help me to achieve my goal. And that leads me to think that I am doing the seemingly impossible thing. It's clearly that I want to pause a thread by another thread. But that another thread is the one who calls any kinds of "suspend thread", so it is the one who is suspended. I don't have any idea about how to make the heavy method to be suspended by itself. It is running, how the hell it could know when the user click the Pause button?
I am at a total loss. Someone please help me to make my app works as expected.
By the way, this impossible thing makes me think that I am doing things wrong way, is it?
UPDATE: If you like to see my heavy task, actually it is very simple
class HeavyClass
{
public string filePath = "D:\\Desktop\\bigfile.iso";//This file is about 10GB
public string HeavyRun()
{
string MD5Hash;
MD5 md5 = MD5.Create();
Stream stream = File.OpenRead(filePath);
MD5Hash = Encoding.Default.GetString(md5.ComputeHash(stream));
return MD5Hash;
}
}

To make a thread suspendable, the work in the thread must be separable. In your case md5.ComputeHash(stream) will do all the work, and there is not way to make sure that thread will suspend at a right(saft) point inside md5.ComputeHash(stream). So you have to rewrite HeavyClass like below. Please notice that those codes are not the best approach of handling a thread, and I just try to keep it as same as the original.
class HeavyClass
{
MD5 _md5 = MD5.Create();
MethodInfo _hashCoreMI = _md5.GetType().GetMethod("HashCore", BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance);
MethodInfo _HashFinalMI = _md5.GetType().GetMethod("HashFinal", BindingFlags.NonPublic | BindingFlags.Instance);
WaitHandle _signal;
public void HeavyClass(WaitHandle signal)
{
_signal = signal;
}
public string HeavyRun(string filename)
{
byte[] buffer = new byte[4096];
int bytesRead = 0;
_signal.Set();
using(FileStream fs = File.OpenRead(filename))
{
while(true)
{
bytesRead = fs.Read(buffer, 0, 4096);
if (bytesRead > 0)
{
_hashCoreMI.Invoke(_md5, new object[] { buffer, 0, bytesRead });
}
else
{
break;
}
// if WaitHandle is signalled, thread will be block,
// otherwise thread will keep running.
_signal.WaitOne();
}
}
byte[] hash = _hashFinalMI.Invoke(_md5, null);
_md5.Initialize();
return Encoding.ASCII.GetString(hash);;
}
}
class MainWindow : Window
{
private HeavyClass _heavyClass;
private ManualResetEvent _mre;
public MainWindow()
{
InitializeComponent();
_mre = new ManualResetEvent(true);
_heavyClass = new HeavyClass(_mer);
}
private void buttonStart_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
Thread t = new Thread(heavyClass.HeavyRun("D:\\Desktop\\bigfile.iso"));
t.Start();
}
private void buttonPause_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
_mre.Reset();
}
private void buttonResume_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
_mre.Set();
}
}

Communication between threads via delegates?

I am looking for a solution for interthread communication.
Thread A is the main thread of a windows app. I starts a Thread B that is working independant of thread a, they do not share code. But thread A has to get some feedback about status of thread b. I try to solve this with a delegate.
I am very sorry, I forgot to add that I have to work on .net 3.5, c#, WEC7
It is important that the code
public void OnMyEvent(string foo)
{
MessageBox.Show(foo);
}
is executed in context of thread a, how can I achieve this
public partial class Form1 : Form
{
//...
public void StartThread(Object obj)
{
new ClassForSecondThread(obj as Parameters);
}
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
//ParameterizedThreadStart threadstart = new ParameterizedThreadStart(startThread);
ParameterizedThreadStart threadstart = new ParameterizedThreadStart(StartThread);
Thread thread = new Thread(threadstart);
Parameters parameters = new Parameters(){MyEventHandler = OnMyEvent};
thread.Start(parameters);
}
public void OnMyEvent(string foo)
{
MessageBox.Show(foo);
}
}
//This code is executed in Thread B
public class ClassForSecondThread
{
public ClassForSecondThread(Parameters parameters)
{
if (parameters == null)
return;
MyEventhandler += parameters.MyEventHandler;
DoWork();
}
private void DoWork()
{
//DoSomething
if (MyEventhandler != null)
MyEventhandler.DynamicInvoke("Hello World");// I think this should be executed async, in Thread A
Thread.Sleep(10000);
if (MyEventhandler != null)
MyEventhandler.DynamicInvoke("Hello World again"); // I think this should be executed async, in Thread A
}
public event MyEventHandler MyEventhandler;
}
public class Parameters
{
public MyEventHandler MyEventHandler;
}
public delegate void MyEventHandler(string foo);

As you want to call the MessageBox on the main UI thread, you can achieve what you want using Control.Invoke.
Invoke((MethodInvoker)(() => MessageBox.Show(foo)));
The Invoke method can be called directly on the Form and you won't be in the context of Thread B within the delegate - the code will run on the same thread as the Form.
EDIT:
OP question: if I understood Control.Invoke correctly, it always acts in the context of a control?
Although the Invoke method uses a Control (in this case the form) to get a handle to the UI thread it is running on, the code within the delegate is not specific to the UI. If you want to add more statements and expand it to include more stuff, just do this:
string t = "hello"; //declared in the form
//Thread B context - Invoke called
Invoke((MethodInvoker)(() =>
{
//Back to the UI thread of the Form here == thread A
MessageBox.Show(foo);
t = "dd";
}));
Also, if you are updating things in a multi threaded environment where the data is accessible to more than one thread, then you will need to investigate sychronization - applying locks to data etc.

For what it is worth you can simplify your code considerably by using the new async and await keywords in C# 5.0.
public class Form1 : Form
{
private async void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs args)
{
OnMyEvent("Hello World");
await Task.Run(
() =>
{
// This stuff runs on a worker thread.
Thread.Sleep(10000);
});
OnMyEvent("Hello World again");
}
private void OnMyEvent(string foo)
{
Message.Show(foo);
}
}
In the code above OnMyEvent is executed on the UI thread in both cases. The first call be executed before the task starts and the second call will be executed after the task completes.

Dispatcher.CheckAccess() Fails

I have a WPF UI called GUI.xaml and i need to change labels and images from other class. More over i need to perform a long task, so i'm using a background worker. So i've read a solution in this site:
In GUI.xaml.cs:
public static ChangeGUI someClass;
private void worker_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
someClass = new ChangeGUI(this); //
TaskClass.ConnectionThread(SuperHero.getUserID());
}
in ChangeGUI.cs:
public class ChangeGUI
{
GUI _GUIRef;
public ChangeGUI(GUI gui)
{
_GUIRef = gui;
}
public void ChangeLabel()
{
//here we can play with labels
}
public void ChangeMap(ImageSource tmp)
{
if (_GUIRef.image1.Dispatcher.CheckAccess())
_GUIRef.image1.Source = tmp;//ERROR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
else
_GUIRef.image1.Dispatcher.Invoke(new Changer(ChangeMap), tmp);
}
}
Here i receive an error: The calling thread cannot access this object because a different thread owns it.
Help is welcome,
Thank You!

If you created the ImageSource on the background thread, make sure you freeze it so that it's accessible from any thread:
var imageSource = ...;
imageSource.Freeze();

Question on threading in C#

I have a Windows Forms application at the moment, and I want to create a new thread and run a method on another class that accepts an input.
For example
public partial class Form1: Form {
SerialPort serialInput;
// I want to create a new thread that will pass the parameter serialInput into the method
// SMSListener on another class and run the method contionously on the background.
}
class SMS
{
public void SMSListener(SerialPort serial1)
{
serial1.DataReceived += port_DataRecieved;
}
private void port_DataRecieved(object sender, SerialDataReceivedEventArgs e)
{
// Other codes
}
}
How do I perform this in C#? I have seen numerous examples on the web, and most of them run the method on the same class with no parameters, but none that suits my requirements.

Perhaps a Background Worker could help you?
It is a bit hard to understand what you are aiming at.
public class Runner
{
private readonly BackgroundWorker _worker = new BackgroundWorker();
public Runner()
{
_worker.DoWork += WorkerDoWork;
}
public void RunMe(int payload)
{
_worker.RunWorkerAsync(payload);
}
static void WorkerDoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
var worker = sender as BackgroundWorker;
while (true)
{
if (worker.CancellationPending)
{
e.Cancel = true;
break;
}
// Work
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep((int)e.Argument);
}
}
}

I am not an expert on Multithreading but to the best of my knowledge you can only start threads on methods that accept an object parameter and return void. So in order to achieve that for your problem (don't shoot me down if there is a better approach!) I would do something like
public partial class Form1: Form {
SerialPort serialInput;
// I want to create a new thread that will pass the parameter serialInput into the method
// SMSListener on another class and run the method contionously on the background.
SMS sms = new SMS();
Thread t = new Thread(sms.SMSListenerUntyped);
t.Start(serialInput);
}
class SMS
{
public void SMSListenerUntyped(object serial1) {
if (serial1 is SerialPort) //Check if the parameter is correctly typed.
this.SMSListener(serial1 as SerialPort);
else
throw new ArgumentException();
}
public void SMSListener(SerialPort serial1)
{
serial1.DataReceived += port_DataRecieved;
}
private void port_DataRecieved(object sender, SerialDataReceivedEventArgs e)
{
// Other code.
}

How about just use the ThreadPool directly with a anonymous method allowing you to access your surrounding locals?
public void OnButtonClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
SerialPort serialInput = this.SerialInput;
System.Threading.ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(delegate
{
SmsListener listener = new SmsListener(serialInput);
});
}

How do I make event callbacks into my win forms thread safe?

When you subscribe to an event on an object from within a form, you are essentially handing over control of your callback method to the event source. You have no idea whether that event source will choose to trigger the event on a different thread.
The problem is that when the callback is invoked, you cannot assume that you can make update controls on your form because sometimes those controls will throw an exception if the event callback was called on a thread different than the thread the form was run on.

To simplify Simon's code a bit, you could use the built in generic Action delegate. It saves peppering your code with a bunch of delegate types you don't really need. Also, in .NET 3.5 they added a params parameter to the Invoke method so you don't have to define a temporary array.
void SomethingHappened(object sender, EventArgs ea)
{
if (InvokeRequired)
{
Invoke(new Action<object, EventArgs>(SomethingHappened), sender, ea);
return;
}
textBox1.Text = "Something happened";
}

Here are the salient points:
You can't make UI control calls from a different thread than the one they were created on (the form's thread).
Delegate invocations (ie, event hooks) are triggered on the same thread as the object that is firing the event.
So, if you have a separate "engine" thread doing some work and have some UI watching for state changes which can be reflected in the UI (such as a progress bar or whatever), you have a problem. The engine fire's an object changed event which has been hooked by the Form. But the callback delegate that the Form registered with the engine gets called on the engine's thread… not on the Form's thread. And so you can't update any controls from that callback. Doh!
BeginInvoke comes to the rescue. Just use this simple coding model in all your callback methods and you can be sure that things are going to be okay:
private delegate void EventArgsDelegate(object sender, EventArgs ea);
void SomethingHappened(object sender, EventArgs ea)
{
//
// Make sure this callback is on the correct thread
//
if (this.InvokeRequired)
{
this.Invoke(new EventArgsDelegate(SomethingHappened), new object[] { sender, ea });
return;
}
//
// Do something with the event such as update a control
//
textBox1.Text = "Something happened";
}
It's quite simple really.
Use InvokeRequired to find out if this callback happened on the correct thread.
If not, then reinvoke the callback on the correct thread with the same parameters. You can reinvoke a method by using the Invoke (blocking) or BeginInvoke (non-blocking) methods.
The next time the function is called, InvokeRequired returns false because we are now on the correct thread and everybody is happy.
This is a very compact way of addressing this problem and making your Forms safe from multi-threaded event callbacks.

I use anonymous methods a lot in this scenario:
void SomethingHappened(object sender, EventArgs ea)
{
MethodInvoker del = delegate{ textBox1.Text = "Something happened"; };
InvokeRequired ? Invoke( del ) : del();
}

I'm a bit late to this topic, but you might want to take a look at the Event-Based Asynchronous Pattern. When implemented properly, it guarantees that events are always raised from the UI thread.
Here's a brief example that only allows one concurrent invocation; supporting multiple invocations/events requires a little bit more plumbing.
using System;
using System.ComponentModel;
using System.Threading;
using System.Windows.Forms;
namespace WindowsFormsApplication1
{
public class MainForm : Form
{
private TypeWithAsync _type;
[STAThread()]
public static void Main()
{
Application.EnableVisualStyles();
Application.Run(new MainForm());
}
public MainForm()
{
_type = new TypeWithAsync();
_type.DoSomethingCompleted += DoSomethingCompleted;
var panel = new FlowLayoutPanel() { Dock = DockStyle.Fill };
var btn = new Button() { Text = "Synchronous" };
btn.Click += SyncClick;
panel.Controls.Add(btn);
btn = new Button { Text = "Asynchronous" };
btn.Click += AsyncClick;
panel.Controls.Add(btn);
Controls.Add(panel);
}
private void SyncClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
int value = _type.DoSomething();
MessageBox.Show(string.Format("DoSomething() returned {0}.", value));
}
private void AsyncClick(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
_type.DoSomethingAsync();
}
private void DoSomethingCompleted(object sender, DoSomethingCompletedEventArgs e)
{
MessageBox.Show(string.Format("DoSomethingAsync() returned {0}.", e.Value));
}
}
class TypeWithAsync
{
private AsyncOperation _operation;
// synchronous version of method
public int DoSomething()
{
Thread.Sleep(5000);
return 27;
}
// async version of method
public void DoSomethingAsync()
{
if (_operation != null)
{
throw new InvalidOperationException("An async operation is already running.");
}
_operation = AsyncOperationManager.CreateOperation(null);
ThreadPool.QueueUserWorkItem(DoSomethingAsyncCore);
}
// wrapper used by async method to call sync version of method, matches WaitCallback so it
// can be queued by the thread pool
private void DoSomethingAsyncCore(object state)
{
int returnValue = DoSomething();
var e = new DoSomethingCompletedEventArgs(returnValue);
_operation.PostOperationCompleted(RaiseDoSomethingCompleted, e);
}
// wrapper used so async method can raise the event; matches SendOrPostCallback
private void RaiseDoSomethingCompleted(object args)
{
OnDoSomethingCompleted((DoSomethingCompletedEventArgs)args);
}
private void OnDoSomethingCompleted(DoSomethingCompletedEventArgs e)
{
var handler = DoSomethingCompleted;
if (handler != null) { handler(this, e); }
}
public EventHandler<DoSomethingCompletedEventArgs> DoSomethingCompleted;
}
public class DoSomethingCompletedEventArgs : EventArgs
{
private int _value;
public DoSomethingCompletedEventArgs(int value)
: base()
{
_value = value;
}
public int Value
{
get { return _value; }
}
}
}

As the lazy programmer, I have a very lazy method of doing this.
What I do is simply this.
private void DoInvoke(MethodInvoker del) {
if (InvokeRequired) {
Invoke(del);
} else {
del();
}
}
//example of how to call it
private void tUpdateLabel(ToolStripStatusLabel lbl, String val) {
DoInvoke(delegate { lbl.Text = val; });
}
You could inline the DoInvoke inside your function or hide it within separate function to do the dirty work for you.
Just keep in mind you can pass functions directly into the DoInvoke method.
private void directPass() {
DoInvoke(this.directInvoke);
}
private void directInvoke() {
textLabel.Text = "Directly passed.";
}

In many simple cases, you can use the MethodInvoker delegate and avoid the need to create your own delegate type.