We Keep Coding

Unhandled exception of type 'System.ApplicationException' occurred in System.Drawing.dll

I have a winforms app. In development mode, when debugging from Visual Studio .NET 2003 (Yes, I know it's old, but this is a legacy project), I get this error when I try to open a new form. In order to open a new form I get an instance of the form and then I call ShowDialog() method, for example:
frmTest test = new frmTest(here my parameters);
test.ShowDialog();
If I press F11 (step into) when debugging it is not crashing, but If in the line where I instantiate the form I press F10 to go into next line, that is, test.ShowDialog(), then it crashes showing this error.
The complete message error is:
"An unhandled exception of type 'System.ApplicationException' occurred
in System.drawing.dll. Additional Information: An attempt was made to
free a mutual exclusion that does not belong to the process"
I have translated last part: Additional information ... since it was appearing in spanish.
The form that I am instantiating with parameters, its constructor, consists on initialize some variables for example:
public frmTest(string param1, string param2)
{
InitializeComponent();
this.param1 = param1;
this.param2 = param2;
}
private void frmTest_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
// here I call a remote webservice asynchronously.
}
Also my form "frmTest" has four pictureboxes, a label, and a button. Three of the pictureboxes contain a png image (it is assigned on design time through Image property), the last picturebox contains a animated gif, also loaded in design time through Image property. Maybe the error occurs due to these images?

TL;DR: Your web request handler will execute on a different thread. Ensure you don't do anything that isn't thread-safe in that handler. You can use Invoke to dispatch your callback handler's code to the main thread.
Diagnosis
The problem here is almost certainly hiding in the missing details of your asynchronous call.
// here I call a remote webservice asynchronously.
Asynchronously is a little bit too vague to be sure what exactly is happening, but there's a very good chance that the asynchronous mechanism that you are using has executed its callback on a different thread from the main UI thread.
Overview
This is common in the .NET model. Asynchronous I/O in the .NET model makes use of threads in a thread pool to handle I/O via I/O Completion Ports (IOCP). It means that when a call like Socket.BeginReceive or WebRequest.BeginGetResponse (or any .NET asynchronous web request that uses similar technology internally) completes, the callback will execute on a thread in the thread pool, not the main thread. This may be surprising to you, since you didn't actively create another thread; you just participated in making asynchronous calls.
You must be very careful about what you do in the callback from your web request as many user-interface / Windows Forms operations are not permitted on any thread other than the main UI thread. Similarly, it may not be the UI itself that is causing you problems, you may have just accessed some resource or object that is not thread safe. Many seemingly innocuous things can cause a crash or exception if you're not careful with multithreading.
To resolve the issue:
If in doubt, in your callback, as early as you can, dispatch (a.k.a. Invoke) the code in your handler so that it runs on the main thread.
A common pattern for doing this would be something like what follows below.
Suppose you have made a call like this:
IAsyncResult result = (IAsyncResult myHttpWebRequest.BeginGetResponse(
new AsyncCallback(RespoCallback), myRequestState);
The handler might be set up like this:
private static void RespCallback(IAsyncResult asynchronousResult)
{
// THIS IS NOT GOING TO WORK BECAUSE WE ARE ON THE WRONG THREAD. e.g.:
this.label1.Text = "OK"; // BOOM! :(
}
Instead, dispatch any necessary processing back to the main thread.
private static void RespCallback(IAsyncResult asynchronousResult)
{
this.Invoke((MethodInvoker) delegate {
// This block of code will run on the main thread.
// It is safe to do UI things now. e.g.:
this.label1.Text = "OK"; // HOORAY! :)
});
}
I'm not advising this as a general best practice. I'm not saying to just immediately dispatch all your handlers back to the main thread. One size does not fit all. You should really look at the specific details of what you do in your handler and ensure you aren't doing thread-specific things. But I am saying that in the absence of any kind of explanation from you about what your asynchronous handlers are doing, the problem would likely be solved by invoking the handler code on the main thread.
Note: Of course, to fix your problem with this technique, it requires that your main thread is running. If you blocked your main thread with a (bad) technique like the one in this example then you'll have to redesign part of your app. Here's an example of something that would require a bigger rework:
// Start the asynchronous request.
IAsyncResult result=
(IAsyncResult) myHttpWebRequest.BeginGetResponse(new AsyncCallback(RespCallback),myRequestState);
// this line implements the timeout, if there is a timeout, the callback fires and the request becomes aborted
ThreadPool.RegisterWaitForSingleObject (result.AsyncWaitHandle, new WaitOrTimerCallback(TimeoutCallback), myHttpWebRequest, DefaultTimeout, true);
// The response came in the allowed time. The work processing will happen in the
// callback function.
allDone.WaitOne(); // *** DANGER: This blocks the main thread, the IO thread
// won't be able to dispatch any work to it via `invoke`
Notice the WaitOne call? That blocks execution of the executing thread. If this code executes on the main thread, then the main thread will be blocked until the WebRequest completes. You'll have to redesign so that either you don't block the main thread (my recommendation) or that you more closely examine your callback handler to see why what it's doing is conflicting with other threads.

Application exceptions are not thrown by the framework itself: what-is-applicationexception-for-in-net; Problem should be in the code you have not the framework. Also be sure to check "InvokeRequired" property before taking the action and if it is, run the method using "Invoke" method. Can check c-sharp-cross-thread-call-problem for that.

May be the async call is trying to access UI thread.
Make sure you are not using control properties like TextBox.Text. If so, you just have to pass its value to the async call, or store it in a class variable before the call.
Also, inside an async call you can't assign values to that properties. Use Invoke() instead.

Try to add an exception breakpoint and VS will stop at the instruction causing the exception. The actual stacktrace may help.
Have You tried to close VS's local variable watch window? Maybe it is evaluating something for You on UI components where the accessing thread should be equal to owner thread of UI component!

Net tasks called using BeginInvoke on the main form not executing

I've used Visual Studio 2013 to build a C# application with a single form, and the application has two routines that update the screen. The routines that update the screen need to run on the main thread, so my own threads (which don't interact with the screen) call the BeginInvoke method on the main form when updates are required. However, something is happening somewhere in the application with the result that the two update routines stop executing. I've put logging into the app to track the calls to BeginInvoke and the execution of the update routines, and I can see that when this problem occurs, the BeginInvoke calls are made, but then nothing. When this happens, the whole application seems to freeze. I can't think of what might be causing this. How can I debug this? Is there any way of looking at what's queued to run on the main thread? When I run in debug and break into the application, all threads look normal, and the main thread doesn't appear to be doing anything, so why isn't it processing my pending update tasks?

The Control.BeginInvoke() adds the delegate to an internal thread-safe queue. And posts a message to the UI thread to tell it to go have a look in that queue. The message loop inside Application.Run() gets that message and goes about emptying the queue again, executing the delegates.
So if you don't see this happening then the most obvious reason is that the UI thread isn't inside the Application.Run() loop. A standard mistake you could make is waiting for the thread to complete for example. Very likely to cause deadlock. Never wait, if you need to run code after the thread completes then consider BackgroundWorker's RunWorkerCompleted event or TaskScheduler.FromCurrentSynchronizationContext().
The not-so-obvious failure mode of not seeing anything happening is that you are calling BeginInvoke() far too often. If you do this more than ~1000 times per second, give or take, then you'll flood that internal queue with too many delegates. The UI thread will actually be busy emptying that queue but can never catch up, always finding yet another delegate in the queue after executing one. It goes catatonic when this happens, not taking care of its normal duties anymore. Like responding to input and painting the windows. No fix for this, other than limiting the rate at which you call BeginInvoke(). Do keep the target in mind, you only have to do it as often as the user's eyes can perceive. Updating the UI at a rate more then 25 times per second is just wasted effort.

This might be due to the two update routines attempting to update the UI at the same time. I've seen strange UI behaviour, e.g. partially updated controls, when many UI updates occur in a short space of time when triggered by multiple interleaved events. The two routines are different routines, yes?
A possible way to solve this is to use asynchronous delegate invocation on the UI thread. In the code below I've assumed that your UI is a WinForms Form, and I've named the two routines UpdateA and UpdateB.
private bool isUpdating;
public delegate void UpdateDelegate();
private void UpdateA()
{
if (isUpdating)
{
this.BeginInvoke(new UpdateDelegate(UpdateA));
}
else
{
isUpdating = true;
try
{
// ... do UI updates for A
}
finally
{
isUpdating = false;
}
}
}
private void UpdateB()
{
if (isUpdating)
{
this.BeginInvoke(new UpdateDelegate(UpdateB));
}
else
{
isUpdating = true;
try
{
// ... do UI updates for B
}
finally
{
isUpdating = false;
}
}
}
By the way, I didn't use lock above to synchronise access to flag isUpdating, on the assumption that both UpdateA and UpdateB execute on the UI thread. They are invoked asynchronously by the worker threads via BeginInvoke.

Invoke(Delegate)

Can anybody please explain this statement written on this link
Invoke(Delegate):
Executes the specified delegate on the thread that owns the control's underlying window handle.
Can anybody explain what this means (especially the bold one) I am not able to get it clearly

The answer to this question lies in how C# Controls work
Controls in Windows Forms are bound to a specific thread and are not
thread safe. Therefore, if you are calling a control's method from a
different thread, you must use one of the control's invoke methods to
marshal the call to the proper thread. This property can be used to
determine if you must call an invoke method, which can be useful if
you do not know what thread owns a control.
From Control.InvokeRequired
Effectively, what Invoke does is ensure that the code you are calling occurs on the thread that the control "lives on" effectively preventing cross threaded exceptions.
From a historical perspective, in .Net 1.1, this was actually allowed. What it meant is that you could try and execute code on the "GUI" thread from any background thread and this would mostly work. Sometimes it would just cause your app to exit because you were effectively interrupting the GUI thread while it was doing something else. This is the Cross Threaded Exception - imagine trying to update a TextBox while the GUI is painting something else.
Which action takes priority?
Is it even possible for both to happen at once?
What happens to all of the other commands the GUI needs to run?
Effectively, you are interrupting a queue, which can have lots of unforeseen consequences. Invoke is effectively the "polite" way of getting what you want to do into that queue, and this rule was enforced from .Net 2.0 onward via a thrown InvalidOperationException.
To understand what is actually going on behind the scenes, and what is meant by "GUI Thread", it's useful to understand what a Message Pump or Message Loop is.
This is actually already answered in the question "What is a Message Pump" and is recommended reading for understanding the actual mechanism that you are tying into when interacting with controls.
Other reading you may find useful includes:
What's up with Begin Invoke
One of the cardinal rules of Windows GUI programming is that only the
thread that created a control can access and/or modify its contents
(except for a few documented exceptions). Try doing it from any other
thread and you'll get unpredictable behavior ranging from deadlock, to
exceptions to a half updated UI. The right way then to update a
control from another thread is to post an appropriate message to the
application message queue. When the message pump gets around to
executing that message, the control will get updated, on the same
thread that created it (remember, the message pump runs on the main
thread).
and, for a more code heavy overview with a representative sample:
Invalid Cross-thread Operations
// the canonical form (C# consumer)
public delegate void ControlStringConsumer(Control control, string text); // defines a delegate type
public void SetText(Control control, string text) {
if (control.InvokeRequired) {
control.Invoke(new ControlStringConsumer(SetText), new object[]{control, text}); // invoking itself
} else {
control.Text=text; // the "functional part", executing only on the main thread
}
}
Once you have an appreciation for InvokeRequired, you may wish to consider using an extension method for wrapping these calls up. This is ably covered in the Stack Overflow question Cleaning Up Code Littered with Invoke Required.
There is also a further write up of what happened historically that may be of interest.

A control or window object in Windows Forms is just a wrapper around a Win32 window identified by a handle (sometimes called HWND). Most things you do with the control will eventually result in a Win32 API call that uses this handle. The handle is owned by the thread that created it (typically the main thread), and shouldn't be manipulated by another thread. If for some reason you need to do something with the control from another thread, you can use Invoke to ask the main thread to do it on your behalf.
For instance, if you want to change the text of a label from a worker thread, you can do something like this:
theLabel.Invoke(new Action(() => theLabel.Text = "hello world from worker thread!"));

If you want to modify a control it must be done in the thread in which the control was created. This Invoke method allows you to execute methods in the associated thread (the thread that owns the control's underlying window handle).
In below sample thread1 throws an exception because SetText1 is trying to modify textBox1.Text from another thread. But in thread2, Action in SetText2 is executed in the thread in which the TextBox was created
private void btn_Click(object sender, EvenetArgs e)
{
var thread1 = new Thread(SetText1);
var thread2 = new Thread(SetText2);
thread1.Start();
thread2.Start();
}
private void SetText1()
{
textBox1.Text = "Test";
}
private void SetText2()
{
textBox1.Invoke(new Action(() => textBox1.Text = "Test"));
}

Invoke((MethodInvoker)delegate{ textBox1.Text = "Test"; });

In practical terms it means that the delegate is guaranteed to be invoked on the main thread. This is important because in the case of windows controls if you don't update their properties on the main thread then you either don't see the change, or the control raises an exception.
The pattern is:
void OnEvent(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
if (this.InvokeRequired)
{
this.Invoke(() => this.OnEvent(sender, e);
return;
}
// do stuff (now you know you are on the main thread)
}

this.Invoke(delegate) make sure that you are calling the delegate the argument to this.Invoke() on main thread/created thread.
I can say a Thumb rule don't access your form controls except from main thread.
May be the following lines make sense for using Invoke()
private void SetText(string text)
{
// InvokeRequired required compares the thread ID of the
// calling thread to the thread ID of the creating thread.
// If these threads are different, it returns true.
if (this.textBox1.InvokeRequired)
{
SetTextCallback d = new SetTextCallback(SetText);
this.Invoke(d, new object[] { text });
}
else
{
this.textBox1.Text = text;
}
}
There are situations though you create a Threadpool thread(i.e worker thread) it will run on main thread. It won't create a new thread coz main thread is available for processing further instructions. So First investigate whether the current running thread is main thread using this.InvokeRequired if returns true the current code is running on worker thread so call
this.Invoke(d, new object[] { text });
else directly update the UI control(Here you are guaranteed that you are running the code on main thread.)

It means that the delegate will run on the UI thread, even if you call that method from a background worker or thread-pool thread. UI elements have thread affinity - they only like talking directly to one thread: the UI thread. The UI thread is defined as the thread that created the control instance, and is therefore associated with the window handle. But all of that is an implementation detail.
The key point is: you would call this method from a worker thread so that you can access the UI (to change the value in a label, etc) - since you are not allowed to do that from any other thread than the UI thread.

Delegate are essentially inline Action's or Func<T>. You can declare a delegate outside the scope of a method which you are running or using a lambda expression(=>); because you run the delegate within a method, you run it on the thread which is being run for the current window/application which is the bit in bold.
Lambda example
int AddFiveToNumber(int number)
{
var d = (int i => i + 5);
d.Invoke(number);
}

It means that the delegate you pass is executed on the thread that created the Control object (which is the UI thread).
You need to call this method when your application is multi-threaded and you want do some UI operation from a thread other than the UI thread, because if you just try to call a method on a Control from a different thread you'll get a System.InvalidOperationException.

C#: inner workings: events, Control.BeginInvoke and program exiting = Interruption?

I'm creating a program with several projects and some projects report back to the main project messages for logging purposes.
Since i am using Asynch sockets, some of these messages come back in different threads, so once they get to the main thread i check InvokeRequired and if true i use this.BeginInvoke to handle the logging.
I need to handle it in the UI thread specially in the case of the server, where i show the last logged messages on a ListBox so i can follow the progress of operations during my tests.
I know sometimes it may happen that a few messages get switched around, but for now i can live with that. For some reason if i use Invoke instead of BeginInvoke, the server will crash if i stop it while clients are connected, and won't even give any exception. But using BeginInvoke i overcame this.
My question regards understanding how events and BeginInvoke work in case of program termination. If an event is on queue or a BeginInvoke has been called just before the program is closed, will it terminate imediatly, cancelling everything? or will it perform all pending actions, in my case log the pending message, and then exit?

You'll have to delay closing the form if you want to ensure all BeginInvoked delegates are executed. You can do so by making it a two-step process, appending another BeginInvoke delegate to the queue that actually closes the form. Like this:
private bool closing;
protected override void OnFormClosing(FormClosingEventArgs e) {
if (!closing) {
closing = true;
// Do your stuff
//...
this.BeginInvoke(new Action(() => this.Close()));
e.Cancel = true;
}
base.OnFormClosing(e);
}

When you call BeginInvoke to update UI, the code will be executed by a thread from the threadpool. And if the code raises an exception, it will only terminate the thread, not the whole application. That's why you have seen that your program didn't crash.
When BeginInvoke had just been called, and the program was terminated immediately. The remaining operations (logging ) won't be executed, because the thread from the threadpool

Invoke a method on the main thread without a WinForm control to call Invoke or BeginInvoke on

I want to run an operation on a background thread. When it has completed I want to check for any errors that occurred and re-throw them on my original thread.
I am using a backgroundworker. Throwing an exception in the RunWorkerCompleted event handler results in an unhandled exception - this makes sense if the eventhandler is running on the background thread. If I had a winform control I could call Invoke or BeginInvoke but I do not have a winform control in this object, although it is a winform project.
How can I re-throw an exception that occurred in the backgroundworker?
private void bgw_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (e.Error != null)
{
// I want to throw an exception here, without causing an unhandled exception and without being able to call Invoke or BeginInvoke on a WinForm control.
}
else if (e.Cancelled)
{
// Do something useful
}
else
{
if (e.Result != null)
{
// Do something with the result
}
}
}
I would have assumed that the RunWorkerCompleted event handler would be running on the original calling thread. Perhaps the backgroundworker is not what I need in this case.

It's not possible to inject code into another running thread. Not even the operating system can do this.
Control.BeginInvoke works by putting the delegate reference in a queue and then using PostMessage to post a user-message into the UI thread's message queue. The Application.Run message loop looks for this message and when it finds it pops the delegate off the queue and executes it.
The point is that there is no other way to do what you need without your main thread being coded to look for a some kind of signal (or message) from the other thread.
Added
You stated that this is a WinForm application but you do not have a Control to use BeginInvoke with.
Edit: I suggested a lazy-load without thinking it through. The Control might end up getting created on the wrong thread.
Pre-create a Control prior to Application.Run that lives for the lifetime of the app. You can use this to BeginInvoke from.
Edit #3
So then I try this to make certain it works and of course it doesn't. You can't simply create a generic Control, it must have an HWND handle. Simple fix: create it like this:
invokerControl = new Control();
invokerControl.CreateControl();
That will allow you to BeginInvoke from it, even if there are no open Form objects to invoke from.

You can check from other side. I mean - place timer (that will run in same main thread as form) on your form, and once per second - check some Exception field on your form (with lock()), and also some object field to detect that operation is completed. And then from bgw_RunWorkerCompleted wrap code with try...catch, and on catch (again with lock()) set Exception field of form to caught exception. But why not use Invoke or BeginInvoke?

If you didn't create the BGW instance on the UI thread then its RunWorkerCompleted event is going to run on an arbitrary threadpool thread. Any exception you throw on that thread is uncatchable and will terminate your app with a last gasp through AppDomain.UnhandledException.
In this case, there just isn't much use for BGW anymore. It is only nice to ensure that its events run on the UI thread. You might as well use MethodInvoker.BeginInvoke(). You'll need to think this through a bit and decide exactly what you're going to do when a bit of code off on some worker thread fails to do its job. Dealing with such a mishap is generally not possible and letting the program crash and burn is the right thing to do.
If you do want some kind of way to notify the user and try to keep the program stumbling along then you really ought to create the BGW instance on the UI thread. And use, say, MessageBox.Show() in the RunWorkerCompleted event handler. Be sure to recover your program state when you do this, you almost certainly need a catch clause in DoWork() to clean up the shrapnel.

Don't throw an exception.
Raise an event in the background worker which your main application thread subscribes to and then handle the error there - by throwing an exception if necessary.

Just handle the RunWorkerCompleted event. This event is synchronized for you
BackgroundWorker bgw;
private void button1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
bgw = new BackgroundWorker();
bgw.DoWork +=new DoWorkEventHandler(bgw_DoWork);
bgw.RunWorkerCompleted += new RunWorkerCompletedEventHandler(bgw_RunWorkerCompleted);
bgw.RunWorkerAsync(bgw);
}
void bgw_RunWorkerCompleted(object sender, RunWorkerCompletedEventArgs e)
{
if (e.Error != null)
textBox1.Text = e.Error.Message;
}
void bgw_DoWork(object sender, DoWorkEventArgs e)
{
throw new NotImplementedException();
}

If by chance you're using 4.0 you can switch to using a Task instead which will do what you want. See this example