Here is the piece of code, which run through all the process and when It finds the right process, code sends the message. My question is what happened to the 'proc', how to dispose that process.
//get all other (possible) running instances
Process[] processes = Process.GetProcesses();
foreach (Process proc in processes)
{
if (proc.ProcessName.ToLower() == ProcessName.ToLower())
{
SendMessage(proc.MainWindowHandle, (uint)Message, IntPtr.Zero, IntPtr.Zero);
}
}
Thanks in advance,
Harsha
To make sure all resoucers are freed as early as possible, call Dispose on the process, when you no longer need it.
//get all other (possible) running instances
Process[] processes = Process.GetProcesses();
try
{
foreach (Process proc in processes)
{
// use proc
}
}
finally
{
foreach (Process proc in processes)
proc.Dispose();
processes = null;
}
In general terms you don't need to worry about disposing or deallocating objects, unless the object implements the IDisposable interface. If it does you should either call the Dispose() method on it manually when you're finished, or wrap with a using statement to have it called automatically:
using (var disposableObject = new DisposableType())
{
// do work with disposableObject
}
IF you are looping to find your won process then you could try something like:
Process.GetCurrentProcess();
In any case I would change it to:
foreach (Process proc in Process.GetProcesses())
{
if (proc.ProcessName.ToLower() == ProcessName.ToLower())
{
SendMessage(proc.MainWindowHandle, (uint)Message, IntPtr.Zero, IntPtr.Zero);
}
}
That way no variable will refernce the "GetProcesses" and the GC would eventually handle it.
The variable proc is local to the foreach loop so once the loop completes, it will automatically be garbage collected.
Related
I made a program that opens COM6. The program starts when the user logs on.
If another user logs on, while the first user is still logged in, the program crazes because the COM is already open.
I found this code, which I thought could solve the problem. The code was meant to close all other application with the same name, but apparently, it does not work, when the other app is running under another user. Have anybody got any solution for this ?
void CloseAllButMe()
{
Process[] processes;
Process self = Process.GetCurrentProcess();
processes = Process.GetProcessesByName(self.ProcessName);
foreach (Process p in processes)
{
if (self.Id != p.Id) p.CloseMainWindow();
}
}
You can use the methods Process.Kill to stop a process. Calling Kill will immediately stop the process and could cause a loss of work.
Here is a code sample for killing Calculator:
public static void KillPaint()
{
System.Diagnostics.Process[] procs = null;
try
{
procs = Process.GetProcessesByName("calc");
Process mspaintProc = procs[0];
if (!mspaintProc.HasExited)
{
mspaintProc.Kill();
}
}
finally
{
if (procs != null)
{
foreach (Process p in procs)
{
p.Dispose();
}
}
}
}
I want to troll my brother a Little bit ;) by writing a program, which I can put in his "StartUp"-Folder. This program should scan his default system tasks so that it doesn't destroy his computer so I wrote all currently open processes in a list. Now I want to check when he opens a program (Process) is it in the list("Taskmgr" is also in the list, so you can exit the troll anytime)? If the opened Process is not in the list, kill it. If you Need any further information, please ask...
My current code is this:
void CloseProcesses()
{
Process[] arrProcesses = Process.GetProcesses();
List<string> lststrProcessNames = new List<string>();
/*Writes current running processes(+ taskmanager process) in a list*/
foreach (Process CurrentProcess in arrProcesses)
{
lststrProcessNames.Add(CurrentProcess.ProcessName);
}
lststrProcessNames.Add("taskmgr");
try
{
Process[] arrNewProcesses = Process.GetProcesses();
foreach (Process NewCurrentProcess in arrNewProcesses)
{
if (lststrProcessNames.Contains(NewCurrentProcess.ProcessName))
{
CloseProcesses();
}
else
{
NewCurrentProcess.Kill();
}
}
}
catch
{
this.Close();
}
}
I have been researching this issue pretty extensively and cannot seem to find an answer.
I know that the Only part of a ReadProcessMemory or WriteProcessMemory request was completed exception is thrown when a 32-bit process tries to access a 64-bit process and the same for a 64-bit modifying a 32-bit process.
The solution to that issue is to change the Platform Target to 'Any CPU'. I have tried this and unfortunately this does not solve my issue.
The next block of code is what keeps throwing the exception. The program that runs this code is used to open up applications on remote computers and keeps a list of all the processes that the program itself opened so that I don't have to loop through all the processes.
Process processToRemove = null;
lock (_runningProcesses)
{
foreach (Process p in _runningProcesses)
{
foreach (ProcessModule module in p.Modules)
{
string[] strs = text.Split('\\');
if (module.ModuleName.Equals(strs[strs.Length - 1]))
{
processToRemove = p;
break;
}
}
if (processToRemove != null)
{
break;
}
}
if (processToRemove != null)
{
processToRemove.Kill();
_runningProcesses.Remove(processToRemove);
}
}
These processes can and most likely will be 32-bit and 64-bit, mixed together.
Is there anything I am doing that I shouldn't be doing, or is there just a better way to do all of this?
As detailed in the comments of the MSDN page for Process.Modules and this thread there is a known issue in Process.Modules when enumerating 32 bit processes from a 64 bit process and visa-versa:
Internally .NET's Process.Modules is using function EnumProcessModules
from PSAPI.dll. This function has a known issue that it cannot work
across 32/64 bit process boundary. Therefore enumerating another
64-bit process from 32-bit process or vice versa doesn't work
correctly.
The solution seems to be to use the EnumProcessModulesEx function, (which must be called via P/Invoke), however this function is only available on later versions of Windows.
We fixed this issue by adding
a new function called EnumProcessModulesEx to PSAPI.dll
(http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682633.aspx), but we
currently cannot use it in this case:
it only works on Windows Vista or Windows Server 2008
currently .NET 2.0 Framework don't have a service pack or hotfix to make Process.Modules use this new API
There are only some issues regarding the handling of the processes and the locking that I would change:
object lockObject = new object();
List<Process> processesToRemove = new List<Process>();
foreach (Process p in _runningProcesses)
{
foreach (ProcessModule module in p.Modules)
{
string[] strs = text.Split('\\');
if (module.ModuleName.Equals(strs[strs.Length - 1]))
{
processesToRemove.Add(p);
break;
}
}
}
lock (lockObject)
{
foreach (Process p in processesToRemove)
{
p.Kill();
_runningProcesses.Remove(p);
}
}
I'm not answering for the bounty, just wanted to give some ideas. This code isn't tested because I don't exactly know what you are trying to do there.
Just consider not to lock the process-list and to keep the lock as short as possible.
I agree with #sprinter252 that _runningProcesses should not be used as your sync object here.
//Somewhere that is accessible to both the thread getting the process list and the thread the
//code below will be running, declare your sync, lock while adjusting _runningProcesses
public static readonly object Sync = new object();
IList<Process> runningProcesses;
lock(Sync)
{
runningProcesses = _runningProcesses.ToList();
}
Process processToRemove = null;
foreach (Process p in _runningProcesses)
{
foreach (ProcessModule module in p.Modules)
{
string[] strs = text.Split('\\');
if (module.ModuleName.Equals(strs[strs.Length - 1]))
{
processToRemove = p;
break;
}
}
if (processToRemove != null)
{
break;
}
}
if (processToRemove != null)
{
//If we've got a process that needs killing, re-lock on Sync so that we may
//safely modify the shared collection
lock(Sync)
{
processToRemove.Kill();
_runningProcesses.Remove(processToRemove);
}
}
If this code is wrapped in a loop to continue to check _runningProcesses for the process you wish to kill, consider changing processToRemove to processesToRemove and change it's type to a collection, iterate over that list in the bottom block after a check for a non-zero count and lock outside of that loop to decrease the overhead of obtaining and releasing locks per process to kill.
How can I kill some active processes by searching for their .exe filenames in C# .NET or C++?
Quick Answer:
foreach (var process in Process.GetProcessesByName("whatever"))
{
process.Kill();
}
(leave off .exe from process name)
My solution is to use Process.GetProcess() for listing all the processes.
By filtering them to contain the processes I want, I can then run Process.Kill() method to stop them:
var chromeDriverProcesses = Process.GetProcesses().
Where(pr => pr.ProcessName == "chromedriver"); // without '.exe'
foreach (var process in chromeDriverProcesses)
{
process.Kill();
}
Update:
In case if you want to do the same in an asynchronous way (using the C# 8 Async Enumerables), check this out:
const string processName = "chromedriver"; // without '.exe'
await Process.GetProcesses()
.Where(pr => pr.ProcessName == processName)
.ToAsyncEnumerable()
.ForEachAsync(p => p.Kill());
Note: using async methods doesn't always mean code will run faster.
The main benefit is that the foreground thread will be released while operating.
You can use Process.GetProcesses() to get the currently running processes, then Process.Kill() to kill a process.
If you have the process ID (PID) you can kill this process as follow:
Process processToKill = Process.GetProcessById(pid);
processToKill.Kill();
You can Kill a specific instance of MS Word.
foreach (var process in Process.GetProcessesByName("WINWORD"))
{
// Temp is a document which you need to kill.
if (process.MainWindowTitle.Contains("Temp"))
process.Kill();
}
Depending on how many processes there are to kill (e.g. when its hundreds like in my case), foreaching over all of them might take quite a while. (interesting sidenote: while Kill() was usually quite quick in .NET FW 4.8 , somehow in NET 6.0 Windows its a lot slower - seeing multiple Win32Exceptions in the debug/trace until the target process is finally done)
Anyway back to topic:
In case of an app shutdown, where u need to make sure every process is is gone, consider using the TAP library - particulary the Parallel shortcuts, hundreds of processes killed within a glimpse.
Usage example:
var procs = Process.GetProcessByName("mydirtyprocesses");
if (procs.Length == 0) return;
procs.AsParallel().ForAll(process =>
{
try
{
process.Kill();
// No process linked to the process comp (mostly because the process died in
// the short timespan between invoking GetProcess() and the effective
// initialization of the props/fields of the component. -OR- Process has
// already exited (when the exit happened after the process component has
// beenpopulated (difference is, in case 1 you cannot even get the Process
// ID from // the component, in case 2 you see data like Id and get the true
// for HasExited // - so always be prepared for that.
// catch (InvalidOperationException)
{
// Process is gone, no further action required
return;
}
// Ensuring process is gone (otherwise try again or fail or whatever)
if (!process.HasExited)
{
// Handle it
}
}
In this particular scenario just wrap it properly in try/catch , as with such a number of processes the probability for an exception is quite increased
static void Main()
{
string processName = Process.GetCurrentProcess().ProcessName;
int processId = Process.GetCurrentProcess().Id;
Process[] oProcesses = Process.GetProcessesByName(processName);
if (oProcesses.Length > 1)
{
if ((MessageBox.Show("Application is opened!", "",MessageBoxButtons.YesNo) == DialogResult.Yes)) ;
{
foreach (var process in Process.GetProcessesByName(processName))
{
if (process.Id != processId)
{
process.Kill();
}
}
}
}
else
{
Application.EnableVisualStyles();
Application.SetCompatibleTextRenderingDefault(false);
Application.Run(new frmLogin());
}
}
public void EndTask(string taskname)
{
string processName = taskname.Replace(".exe", "");
foreach (Process process in Process.GetProcessesByName(processName))
{
process.Kill();
}
}
//EndTask("notepad");
Summary: no matter if the name contains .exe, the process will end. You don't need to "leave off .exe from process name", It works 100%.
I have some System.Diagnotics.Processes to run. I'd like to call the close method on them automatically. Apparently the "using" keyword does this for me.
Is this the way to use the using keyword?
foreach(string command in S) // command is something like "c:\a.exe"
{
try
{
using(p = Process.Start(command))
{
// I literally put nothing in here.
}
}
catch (Exception e)
{
// notify of process failure
}
}
I'd like to start multiple processes to run concurrently.
using(p = Process.Start(command))
This will compile, as the Process class implements IDisposable, however you actually want to call the Close method.
Logic would have it that the Dispose method would call Close for you, and by digging into the CLR using reflector, we can see that it does in fact do this for us. So far so good.
Again using reflector, I looked at what the Close method does - it releases the underlying native win32 process handle, and clears some member variables. This (releasing external resources) is exactly what the IDisposable pattern is supposed to do.
However I'm not sure if this is what you want to achieve here.
Releasing the underlying handles simply says to windows 'I am no longer interested in tracking this other process'. At no point does it actually cause the other process to quit, or cause your process to wait.
If you want to force them quit, you'll need to use the p.Kill() method on the processes - however be advised it is never a good idea to kill processes as they can't clean up after themselves, and may leave behind corrupt files, and so on.
If you want to wait for them to quit on their own, you could use p.WaitForExit() - however this will only work if you're waiting for one process at a time. If you want to wait for them all concurrently, it gets tricky.
Normally you'd use WaitHandle.WaitAll for this, but as there's no way to get a WaitHandle object out of a System.Diagnostics.Process, you can't do this (seriously, wtf were microsoft thinking?).
You could spin up a thread for each process, and call `WaitForExit in those threads, but this is also the wrong way to do it.
You instead have to use p/invoke to access the native win32 WaitForMultipleObjects function.
Here's a sample (which I've tested, and actually works)
[System.Runtime.InteropServices.DllImport( "kernel32.dll" )]
static extern uint WaitForMultipleObjects( uint nCount, IntPtr[] lpHandles, bool bWaitAll, uint dwMilliseconds );
static void Main( string[] args )
{
var procs = new Process[] {
Process.Start( #"C:\Program Files\ruby\bin\ruby.exe", "-e 'sleep 2'" ),
Process.Start( #"C:\Program Files\ruby\bin\ruby.exe", "-e 'sleep 3'" ),
Process.Start( #"C:\Program Files\ruby\bin\ruby.exe", "-e 'sleep 4'" ) };
// all started asynchronously in the background
var handles = procs.Select( p => p.Handle ).ToArray();
WaitForMultipleObjects( (uint)handles.Length, handles, true, uint.MaxValue ); // uint.maxvalue waits forever
}
For reference:
The using keyword for IDisposable objects:
using(Writer writer = new Writer())
{
writer.Write("Hello");
}
is just compiler syntax. What it compiles down to is:
Writer writer = null;
try
{
writer = new Writer();
writer.Write("Hello");
}
finally
{
if( writer != null)
{
((IDisposable)writer).Dispose();
}
}
using is a bit better since the compiler prevents you from reassigning the writer reference inside the using block.
The framework guidelines Section 9.3.1 p. 256 state:
CONSIDER providing method Close(), in addition to the Dispose(), if close is standard terminology in the area.
In your code example, the outer try-catch is unnecessary (see above).
Using probably isn't doing what you want to here since Dispose() gets called as soon as p goes out of scope. This doesn't shut down the process (tested).
Processes are independent, so unless you call p.WaitForExit() they spin off and do their own thing completely independent of your program.
Counter-intuitively, for a Process, Close() only releases resources but leaves the program running. CloseMainWindow() can work for some processes, and Kill() will work to kill any process. Both CloseMainWindow() and Kill() can throw exceptions, so be careful if you're using them in a finally block.
To finish, here's some code that waits for processes to finish but doesn't kill off the processes when an exception occurs. I'm not saying it's better than Orion Edwards, just different.
List<System.Diagnostics.Process> processList = new List<System.Diagnostics.Process>();
try
{
foreach (string command in Commands)
{
processList.Add(System.Diagnostics.Process.Start(command));
}
// loop until all spawned processes Exit normally.
while (processList.Any())
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(1000); // wait and see.
List<System.Diagnostics.Process> finished = (from o in processList
where o.HasExited
select o).ToList();
processList = processList.Except(finished).ToList();
foreach (var p in finished)
{
// could inspect exit code and exit time.
// note many properties are unavailable after process exits
p.Close();
}
}
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
// log the exception
throw;
}
finally
{
foreach (var p in processList)
{
if (p != null)
{
//if (!p.HasExited)
// processes will still be running
// but CloseMainWindow() or Kill() can throw exceptions
p.Dispose();
}
}
}
I didn't bother Kill()'ing off the processes because the code starts get even uglier. Read the msdn documentation for more information.
try
{
foreach(string command in S) // command is something like "c:\a.exe"
{
using(p = Process.Start(command))
{
// I literally put nothing in here.
}
}
}
catch (Exception e)
{
// notify of process failure
}
The reason it works is because when the exception happens, the variable p falls out of scope and thus it's Dispose method is called that closes the process is how that would go. Additionally, I would think you'd want to spin a thread off for each command rather than wait for an executable to finish before going on to the next one.