I have a device which has an library. Some of its functions are most awesomely ill-behaved, in the "occasionally hang forever" sense.
I have a program which uses this device. If/when it hangs, I need to be able to recover gracefully and reset it. The offending calls should return within milliseconds and are being called in a loop many many times per second.
My first question is: when a thread running the recalcitrant function hangs, what do I do? Even if I litter the thread with interruption points, this happens:
boost::this_thread::interruption_point(); // irrelevant, in the past
deviceLibrary.thatFunction(); // <-- hangs here forever
boost::this_thread::interruption_point(); // never gets here!
The only word I've read on what to do there is to modify the function itself, but that's out of the question for a variety of reasons -- not least of which is "this is already miles outside of my skill set".
I have tried asynchronous launching with C++11 futures:
// this was in a looping thread -- it does not work: wait_for sometimes never returns
std::future<void> future = std::async(std::launch::async,
[this] () { deviceLibrary.thatFunction(*data_ptr); });
if (future.wait_for(std::chrono::seconds(timeout)) == std::future_status::timeout) {
printf("no one will ever read this\n");
deviceLibrary.reset(); // this would work if it ever got here
}
No dice, in that or a number of variations.
I am now trying boost::asio with a thread_group of a number of worker threads running io_service::run(). It works magnificently until the second time it times out. Then I've run out of threads, because each hanging thread eats up one of my thread_group and it never comes back ever.
My latest idea is to call work_threads.create_thread to make a new thread to replace the now-hanging one. So my second question is: if this is a viable way of dealing with this, how should I cope with the slowly amassing group of hung threads? How do I remove them? Is it fine to leave them there?
Incidentally, I should mention that there is in fact a version of deviceLibrary.thatFunction() that has a timeout. It doesn't.
I found this answer but it's C# and Windows specific, and this one which seems relevant. But I'm not so sure about spawning hundreds of extra processes a second (edit: oh right; I could banish all the calls to one or two separate processes. If they communicate well enough and I can share the device between them. Hm...)
Pertinent background information: I'm using MSVC 2013 on Windows 7, but the code has to cross-compile for ARM on Debian with GCC 4.6 also. My level of C++ knowledge is... well... if it seems like I'm missing something obvious, I probably am.
Thanks!
