I've just started working with tasks and I've come to some things I don't quite understand about calling methods within the task. I have started a new task like this:
var ts = new CancellationTokenSource();
var token = ts.Token;
Task.Run(() => Control(), token);
void Control()
{
while(!token.IsCancellationRequested)
{
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
switch(ENUM)
{
case SOMETHING:
StartSomething();
break;
}
Task.Delay(50, token).wait();
}
}
Now I don't understand the behavior of StartSomething() once token has been cancelled. What if StartSomething() as well contains a while loop, can I as well use?
!token.IsCancellationRequested
and
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
As well, if the Cancellation exception is being thrown inside that StartSomething() loop, will it instantly cancel task?
Yes, you can easily pass the same token onto StartSomething and exceptions from it will bubble up to Control and cancel the task. If you don't then it will keep running even if the CancellationTokenwas cancelled until it returns control toControl` that observes the token:
void StartSomething(CancellationToken token)
{
while (true)
{
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested(); // Will cancel the task.
// ...
}
}
Keep in mind though that token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested() will raise exception and the task will be canceled while !token.IsCancellationRequested will simply complete the task without marking it as canceled.
Related
This question already has an answer here:
Faulted vs Canceled task status after CancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested
(1 answer)
Closed last month.
According to this and this, passing a cancellation token to a task constructor, or Task.Run, will cause the task to be associated with said token, causing the task to transition to Canceled instead of Faulted if a cancellation exception occurs.
I've been fiddling with these examples for a while, and I can't see any benefits other than preventing a cancelled task to start.
Changing the code on this MSDN example from
tc = Task.Run(() => DoSomeWork(i, token), token);
to
tc = Task.Run(() => DoSomeWork(i, token));
produced the exact same output:
This code also results in two cancelled state tasks with the same exceptions thrown:
var token = cts.Token;
var t1 = Task.Run(() =>
{
while (true)
{
Thread.Sleep(1000);
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
};
});
var t2 = Task.Run(() =>
{
while (true)
{
Thread.Sleep(1000);
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
};
}, token);
Console.ReadKey();
try
{
cts.Cancel();
Task.WaitAll(t1, t2);
}
catch(Exception e)
{
if (e is AggregateException)
{
foreach (var ex in (e as AggregateException).InnerExceptions)
{
Console.WriteLine(e.Message);
}
}
else
Console.WriteLine(e.Message);
}
Console.WriteLine($"without token: { t1.Status }");
Console.WriteLine($"with token: { t2.Status }");
Console.WriteLine("Done.");
Apparently, throwing OperationCanceledException from within the task is enough to make it transition to Canceled instead of Faulted. So my question is: is there a reason for passing the token to the task other than preventing a cancelled task to run?
Is there a reason for passing the token to the task other than preventing a cancelled task to run?
In this particular case, No. Past the point in time that the task has started running, the token has no effect to the outcome.
The Task.Run method has many overloads. This case is peculiar because of the infinite while loop.
var t1 = Task.Run(() =>
{
while (true)
{
Thread.Sleep(1000);
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
};
});
The compiler has to choose between these two overloads:
public static Task Run(Action action);
public static Task Run(Func<Task> function);
...and for a reason explained in this question it chooses the later. Here is the implementation of this overload:
public static Task Run(Func<Task?> function, CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
if (function == null) ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentNullException(ExceptionArgument.function);
// Short-circuit if we are given a pre-canceled token
if (cancellationToken.IsCancellationRequested)
return Task.FromCanceled(cancellationToken);
// Kick off initial Task, which will call the user-supplied function and yield a Task.
Task<Task?> task1 = Task<Task?>.Factory.StartNew(function, cancellationToken,
TaskCreationOptions.DenyChildAttach, TaskScheduler.Default);
// Create a promise-style Task to be used as a proxy for the operation
// Set lookForOce == true so that unwrap logic can be on the lookout for OCEs thrown
// as faults from task1, to support in-delegate cancellation.
UnwrapPromise<VoidTaskResult> promise = new UnwrapPromise<VoidTaskResult>(task1,
lookForOce: true);
return promise;
}
The important detail is the lookForOce: true. Let's look inside the UnwrapPromise class:
// "Should we check for OperationCanceledExceptions on the outer task and interpret them
// as proxy cancellation?"
// Unwrap() sets this to false, Run() sets it to true.
private readonly bool _lookForOce;
..and at another point below:
case TaskStatus.Faulted:
List<ExceptionDispatchInfo> edis = task.GetExceptionDispatchInfos();
ExceptionDispatchInfo oceEdi;
if (lookForOce && edis.Count > 0 &&
(oceEdi = edis[0]) != null &&
oceEdi.SourceException is OperationCanceledException oce)
{
result = TrySetCanceled(oce.CancellationToken, oceEdi);
}
else
{
result = TrySetException(edis);
}
break;
So although the internally created Task<Task?> task1 ends up in a Faulted state, its unwrapped version ends up as Canceled, because the type of the exception is
OperationCanceledException (abbreviated as oce in the code).
That's a quite convoluted journey in the history of TPL, with methods introduced at different times and frameworks, in order to serve different purposes. The end result is a little bit of inconsistency, or nuanced behavior if you prefer to say it so. A relevant article that you might find interesting is this: Task.Run vs Task.Factory.StartNew by Stephen Toub.
So I'm spinning up a HttpListener to wait for an OAuth2 response. In an ideal world, this is only going to be alive for a few seconds while the user logs in in the browser and we get posted the token.
I'd also like for this to have a CancellationToken so that the user can stop listening after a delay should they so wish.
My initial idea was to use something along the lines of:
_listener.Start();
Task<HttpListenerContext> t = _listener.GetContextAsync();
while (!cancelled.IsCancellationRequested)
{
if (t.IsCompleted)
{
break;
}
await Task.Run(() => Thread.Sleep(100));
}
HttpListenerContext ctx = t.Result;
//...
_listener.Stop();
But that doesn't sit right with me for so many reasons (weird async usage, polling, etc.).
So then I thought I might be able to use the synchronous version _listener.GetContext() in conjunction with Task.Run(func<T>, CancellationToken):
_listener.Start()
HttpListenerContext ctx = await Task.Run(() => _listener.GetContext(), cancelled);
//...
_listener.Stop();
This is a little better, the code's at least tidier, although it seems hacky using a synchronous version of the method asynchronously with a Task...
However this doesn't behave how I'd expect (aborting the running task when the token is cancelled).
This strikes me as something that really ought to be fairly simple to do so I assume I'm missing something.
So my question is thus... How do I listen asynchronously with a HttpListener in a cancellable fashion?
Because the GetContextAsync method does not support cancellation, it basically means that it is unlikely you can cancel the actual IO operation, yet unlikely to cancel the Task returned by the method, until you Abort or Stop the HttpListener. So the main focus here is always a hack that returns the control flow to your code.
While both the answers from #guru-stron and #peter-csala should do the trick, I just wanted to share another way without having to use Task.WhenAny.
You could wrap the task with a TaskCompletionSource like this:
public static class TaskExtensions
{
public static Task<T> AsCancellable<T>(this Task<T> task, CancellationToken token)
{
if (!token.CanBeCanceled)
{
return task;
}
var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<T>();
// This cancels the returned task:
// 1. If the token has been canceled, it cancels the TCS straightaway
// 2. Otherwise, it attempts to cancel the TCS whenever
// the token indicates cancelled
token.Register(() => tcs.TrySetCanceled(token),
useSynchronizationContext: false);
task.ContinueWith(t =>
{
// Complete the TCS per task status
// If the TCS has been cancelled, this continuation does nothing
if (task.IsCanceled)
{
tcs.TrySetCanceled();
}
else if (task.IsFaulted)
{
tcs.TrySetException(t.Exception);
}
else
{
tcs.TrySetResult(t.Result);
}
},
CancellationToken.None,
TaskContinuationOptions.ExecuteSynchronously,
TaskScheduler.Default);
return tcs.Task;
}
}
And flow the control like this:
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
cts.CancelAfter(3000);
try
{
var context = await listener.GetContextAsync().AsCancellable(cts.Token);
}
catch (TaskCanceledException)
{
// ...
}
I would suggest creating cancelable infinite task (Task.Delay(Timeout.Infinite, token) for example) and use Task.WhenAny. Something like that:
var cts = new CancellationTokenSource(); // token source controled by consumer "outside"
var token = cts.Token;
var httpListener = new HttpListener();
httpListener.Start();
var t = httpListener.GetContextAsync();
// to cancel the infinite delay task if listener finishes first
var localCts = CancellationTokenSource.CreateLinkedTokenSource(token);
var completed = await Task.WhenAny(t, Task.Delay(Timeout.Infinite, localCts.Token));
if (completed == t) // check that completed task is one from listener
{
localCts.Cancel(); // cancel the infinite task
HttpListenerContext ctx = t.Result;
//...
}
httpListener.Stop();
Here is yet another solution:
var cancellationSignal = new TaskCompletionSource<object>();
var contextTask = _listener.GetContextAsync();
using (cancelled.Register(state => ((TaskCompletionSource<object>)state).TrySetResult(null), cancellationSignal))
{
if (contextTask != await Task.WhenAny(contextTask, cancellationSignal.Task).ConfigureAwait(false))
break; //task is cancelled
}
Because we can't await the CancellationToken that's why have to apply the following trick
The CancellationToken does expose a Register method, where we can define a callback which will be called whenever the cancellation occurs
Here we can provide a delegate which sets an awaitable to completed
So, we can await that task
In order to create a Task which is set to completed whenever the cancellation occurs I've used TaskCompletionSource. You could also use SemaphoreSlim or any other signalling object which has async wait, like AsyncManualResetEvent.
So, we pass the cancellationSignal to the Register as a state parameter
Inside the delegate we have to cast it back to TCS to be able to call the TrySetResult on it
Inside the using block we await a Task.WhenAny
It will return that Task which finishes first
If that Task is the cancellation then we can break / return / throw ...
If that Task is the contextTask then we can continue the normal flow
I have a Windows Service that monitors my application by running a couple of tests every second. A bug report has been submitted that said that the service stoppes running after a while, and I'm trying to figure out why.
I suspect that the code below is the culprit, but I have trouble understanding exactly how it works. The ContinueWith statement has recently been commented out, but I dont know if it is needed
private Task CreateTask(Action action)
{
var ct = _cts.Token;
return Task.Run(async () =>
{
ct.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
var sw = new Stopwatch();
while (true)
{
sw.Restart();
action();
if (ct.IsCancellationRequested)
{
_logger.Debug("Cancellation requested");
break;
}
var wait = _settings.loopStepFrequency - sw.ElapsedMilliseconds;
if (wait <= 0) // No need to delay
continue;
// If ContinueWith is needed wrap this in an ugly try/catch
// handling the exception
await Task.Delay(
(int)(_settings.loopStepFrequency - sw.ElapsedMilliseconds),
ct); //.ContinueWith(tsk => { }, ct);
}
_logger.Debug("Task was cancelled");
}, _cts.Token);
}
Are there any obvious problems with this code?
Are there any obvious problems with this code?
The one that jumps out to me is the calculation for the number of milliseconds to delay. Specifically, there's no floor. If action() takes an unusually long time, then the task could fail in a possibly unexpected way.
There are several ways for the task to complete in either a cancelled or failed state, or it can delay forever:
The task can be cancelled before the delegate begins, due to the cancellation token passed to Task.Run.
The task can be cancelled by the ThrowIfCancellationRequested call.
The task can complete successfully after being cancelled, due to the IsCancellationRequested logic.
The task can be cancelled by the cancellation token passed to Task.Delay.
The task may fail with an ArgumentOutOfRangeException if _settings.loopStepFrequency - sw.ElapsedMilliseconds is less than -1. This is probably a bug.
The task may delay indefinitely (until cancelled) if _settings.loopStepFrequency - sw.ElapsedMilliseconds happens to be exactly -1. This is probably a bug.
To fix this code, I recommend two things:
The code is probably intending to do await Task.Delay((int) wait, ct); instead of await Task.Delay((int)(_settings.loopStepFrequency - sw.ElapsedMilliseconds), ct);. This will remove the last two conditions above.
Choose one method of cancellation. The standard pattern to express cancellation is via OperationCanceledExcpetion; this is the pattern used by ThrowIfCancellationRequested and by Task.Delay. The IsCancellationRequested check is using a different pattern; it will successfully complete the task on cancellation, instead of cancelling it.
There are so many problems with this code, that makes more sense to rewrite it than attempt to fix it. Here is a possible way to rewrite this method, with some (possibly superfluous) argument validation added:
private Task CreateTask(Action action)
{
if (action == null) throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(action));
var ct = _cts.Token;
var delayMsec = _settings.loopStepFrequency;
if (delayMsec <= 0) throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException("loopStepFrequency");
return Task.Run(async () =>
{
while (true)
{
var delayTask = Task.Delay(delayMsec, ct);
action();
await delayTask;
}
}, ct);
}
The responsibility for logging a possible exception/cancellation belongs now to the caller of the method, that (hopefully) awaits the created task.
var task = CreateTask(TheAction);
try
{
await task; // If the caller is async
//task.GetAwaiter().GetResult(); // If the caller is sync
_logger.Info("The task completed successfully");
}
catch (OperationCanceledException)
{
_logger.Info("The task was canceled");
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
_logger.Error("The task failed", ex);
}
I have the following code piece with the output below.
I was expecting the second task to be cancelled as it also registers a callback on the cancellation token.
But the cancellation only happens on the first task, where the original cancellation was done.
Aren't cancellations supposed to be propagated to all token instances?
The Microsoft article on Cancellation Tokens does not explain this well.
Any pointers on why this is happening?
Code:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
AsyncProgramming();
Console.ReadLine();
}
private static async void AsyncProgramming()
{
try
{
using (var cts = new CancellationTokenSource())
{
var task2 = CreateTask2(cts);
var task1 = CreateTask1(cts);
Thread.Sleep(5000);
await Task.WhenAll(task2, task1);
}
}
catch (Exception e)
{
Console.WriteLine(e.Message);
}
Console.WriteLine("Both tasks over");
}
private static async Task CreateTask1(CancellationTokenSource cts)
{
try
{
cts.Token.Register(() => { cts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested(); });
await Task.Delay(5000);
Console.WriteLine("This is task one");
cts.Cancel();
Console.WriteLine("This should not be printed because the task was cancelled");
}
catch (Exception e)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task 1 exception: " + e.Message);
Console.WriteLine("Task 1 was cancelled");
}
}
private static async Task CreateTask2(CancellationTokenSource cts)
{
try
{
cts.Token.Register(() =>
{
Console.WriteLine("Write something");
Thread.CurrentThread.Abort();
cts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
});
await Task.Delay(8000);
Console.WriteLine("This is task two");
}
catch (Exception e)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task 2 was cancelled by Task 1");
Console.WriteLine(e);
}
}
}
Output:
This is task one
Write something
Task 1 exception: Thread was being aborted.
Task 1 was cancelled
This is task two
Thread was being aborted.
Both tasks over
The first thing is that when you call CancellationToken.Register all it normally does is to store the delegate to call later.
The thread/logic flow calling CancellationTokenSource.Cancel runs all previously registered delegates, regardless of where those were registered from. This means any exception thrown in those normally does not relate in any way to the methods that called Register.
Side note 1: I said normally above, because there is a case where the call to Register will run the delegate right away. I think this is why the msdn documentation is extra confusing. Specifically: if the token was already cancelled, then Register will run the delegate right away, instead of storing it to be ran later. Underneath that happens in CancellationTokenSource.InternalRegister.
The second thing to complete the picture is that all CancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested does is to throw an exception wherever it is being ran from. That would normally be wherever CancellationTokenSource.Cancel was called from. Note that normally all registered delegates are ran, even if some of those throw an exception.
Side note 2: throwing ThreadAbortException changes the intended logic in the Cancel method, because that special exception can't be caught. When faced with that, cancel stops running any further delegates. The same happens to the calling code, even when catching exceptions.
The last thing to note, is that the presence of the CancellationToken does not affect the logic flow of the methods. All lines in the method run, unless there is code explicitely exiting the method, for example, by throwing an exception. This is what happens if you pass the cancellation token to the Task.Delay calls and it gets cancelled from somewhere else before the time passes. It is also what happens if you were to put calls to CancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested after specific lines in your method.
It is not just the second task that fails to cancel. Both registrations to the token work and both ThrowIfCancellationRequested fire, but they are not handled because they run in a different thread.
This happens in the background (twice):
An exception of type 'System.OperationCanceledException' occurred in mscorlib.dll but was not handled in user code
What you should do is call cts.Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested(); in your function instead of registering to the event.
See the examples at https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/standard/threading/cancellation-in-managed-threads
Right now you are combining two ways of cancellation: registering to the token cancel event (Token.Register), and throwing if the token is cancelled (Token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested).
Either you subscribe to the cancel event and perform your own cancel/cleanup logic, or you check in your function code if you should cancel your operation.
An example would look like this:
private static async Task CreateTask2(CancellationToken token)
{
try
{
// Pass on the token when calling other functions.
await Task.Delay(8000, token);
// And manually check during long operations.
for (int i = 0; i < 10000; i++)
{
// Do we need to cancel?
token.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
// Simulating work.
Thread.SpinWait(5000);
}
Console.WriteLine("This is task two");
}
catch (Exception e)
{
Console.WriteLine("Task 2 was cancelled by Task 1");
Console.WriteLine(e);
}
}
Registration of a delegate by Register is just a way to notify when a token goes to the cancelled state, no more. In order to do the cancellation you need to react on this notification in the code and it's mostly needed when execution you want to cancel goes to a stage where cancellation token isn't verified (for example because a method being executed just doesn't accept CancellationToken as paramater) but you still need some control of cancellation state. But in all cases when you deal with executuon of code which has access to CancellationToken you just don't need to subscribe on the cancellation notification.
In your case the first delegate raises exception and this exception is propagated to the Cancel call only that's why the task is cancelled, but this is improper design as you shouldn't deal with CancellationTokenSource in your tasks and shouldn't initiate a cancellation in there, so I'd say that the first cancellation works only by coincidence. For the second task the delegate is invoked but nothing triggers the cancellation inside the task so why should it be cancelled ?
I have a framework which creates a CancellationTokenSource, configures CancelAfter, then calls an async method and passes the Token. The async method then spawns many tasks, passing the cancellation token to each of them, and then awaits the collection of tasks. These tasks each contain logic to gracefully cancel by polling IsCancellationRequested.
My issue is that if I pass the CancellationToken into Task.Run() an AggregateException is thrown containing a TaskCanceledException. This prevents the tasks from gracefully canceling.
To get around this I can not pass the CancelationToken into Task.Run, however I'm not sure what I will be losing. For instance, I like the idea that if my task hangs and cannot perform the graceful cancel this exception will force it down. I was thinking I could string along two CancelationTokens to handle this, one 'graceful' and the other 'force'. However, I don't like that solution.
Here is some psudo-code representing what I described above..
public async Task Main()
{
CancellationTokenSource cts = new CancellationTokenSource();
cts.CancelAfter(30000);
await this.Run(cts.Token);
}
public async Task Run(CancellationToken cancelationToken)
{
HashSet<Task> tasks = new HashSet<Task>();
foreach (var work in this.GetWorkNotPictured)
{
// Here is where I could pass the Token,
// however If I do I cannot cancel gracefully
// My dilemma here is by not passing I lose the ability to force
// down the thread (via exception) if
// it's hung for whatever reason
tasks.Add(Task.Run(() => this.DoWork(work, cancelationToken))
}
await Task.WhenAll(tasks);
// Clean up regardless of if we canceled
this.CleanUpAfterWork();
// It is now safe to throw as we have gracefully canceled
cancelationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
}
public static void DoWork(work, cancelationToken)
{
while (work.IsWorking)
{
if (cancelationToken.IsCancellationRequested)
return // cancel gracefully
work.DoNextWork();
}
}
I recommend that you follow the standard cancellation pattern of throwing an exception rather than just returning:
public static void DoWork(work, cancellationToken)
{
while (work.IsWorking)
{
cancellationToken.ThrowIfCancellationRequested();
work.DoNextWork();
}
}
If you have cleanup work to do, that's what finally is for (or using, if you can refactor that way):
public async Task Run(CancellationToken cancellationToken)
{
HashSet<Task> tasks = new HashSet<Task>();
foreach (var work in this.GetWorkNotPictured)
{
tasks.Add(Task.Run(() => this.DoWork(work, cancellationToken))
}
try
{
await Task.WhenAll(tasks);
}
finally
{
this.CleanUpAfterWork();
}
}
Provide the CancellationToken to Task.Run in addition to passing it to the method doing the work. When you do this Task.Run can see that the exception thrown was caused by the CancellationToken it was given, and will mark the Task as cancelled.
tasks.Add(Task.Run(() => this.DoWork(work, cancelationToken),
cancelationToken));
Once you've done this you can ensure that DoWork throws when the token is cancelled, rather than checking IsCancellationRequested to try to end by being marked as "completed successfully".