This question already has an answer here:
How to show progress bar while saving file to excel in python?
(1 answer)
Closed 2 years ago.
I use QProcess to call the Ping command, and use waitForFinished to wait for the end of the command execution.
Now I want to use a QProgressBar progress bar connect_gress to indicate that the range is (0, 100) in the initial state, and it becomes (0, 0) when QProcess starts to start, which is the busy state, and the command called by QProcess ends. Time to change back to (0, 100)
void web::gress_begin(){
ui->connect_gress->setRange(0, 0);
}
void web::gress_finish(){
ui->connect_gress->setRange(0, 100);
ui->connect_gress->setValue(100);
}
This is part of QProcess
QProcess excping;
connect(&excping, SIGNAL(started()), this, SLOT(gress_begin()));
connect(&excping, SIGNAL(finished(int, QProcess::ExitStatus)), this, SLOT(gress_finish()));
excping.start(cmdstr);
excping.waitForStarted();
excping.waitForFinished(-1);
But when the program is running, I press the button, the connect_gress on the main interface does not enter the busy state, and until the command ends, the value of connect_gress will become 100, that is, gress_finish is executed and successfully displayed, and gress_start is also It was executed, but it did not show up successfully.
QProcess::waitForFinished blocks the current thread. And I believe you are calling it in main tread aka GUI thread. So main thread never has a change to process events including paintEvent. Also GUI is frozen while ping process running. So user can't do anything at this time, I don't know if it is your intend or not.
Easiest way to solve it not waiting for finish at all. But in this case user can play around with ui while pinging. excping is a stack variable so it might die before emitting finished in this case. We can create it in heap and delete after the finished signal.
auto excping = new QProcess(this);
connect(excping, SIGNAL(started()), this, SLOT(gress_begin()));
connect(excping, SIGNAL(finished(int, QProcess::ExitStatus)), this, SLOT(gress_finish()));
connect(excping, SIGNAL(finished(int, QProcess::ExitStatus)), excping, SLOT(deleteLater()));
excping->start(cmdstr);
excping->waitForStarted();
// no waitForFinished
Another easy way to solve with blocking is forcing event loop to process events. I am not a favor of processEvents. Documentations also discourage to use that. So please don't make it habit to toss around like a some sort of magic sauce.
void web::gress_begin(){
ui->connect_gress->setRange(0, 0);
QCoreApplication::processEvents();
}
Also you can tweak around with the execution delay of functions. Checkout Qt::QueuedConnection and QMetaObject::invokeMethod.
using QtCreator to make a loftier interface to a sofware.
There is basically a set of buttons to tune and inputs, a start and stop job
buttons, my problem comes from an infinite loop that freezes the display so I came up with using fork() so that the loop have to compete with the main program instead of eating up the whole resources (no multithreading), but the program crashes spiting:
[xcb] Unknown sequence number while processing queue
[xcb] Most likely this is a multi-threaded client and XInitThreads has not
been called
[xcb] Aborting, sorry about that.
a.out: ../../src/xcb_io.c:274: poll_for_event: Assertion
`!xcb_xlib_threads_sequence_lost' failed.
the fonction calling the loop is called 'ON', 'OFF' is supposed to exit the forked process.
//in button 'ON' func
ps = fork();
if(getpid() == ps)
{
while(1)
{
strcpy(word, charset(minlength, maxlength, N));
ui->pass->setText(word);//operation on the display
....SNIP
}
}
//In button 'OFF' func
if(getpid() == ps)
exit(0);
I'm really asking what is the correct way of starting a while(1) and be able to break, exit, or return from it while not freezing the window using QT, thanks.
You crash probably here:
ui->pass->setText(word);//operation on the display
as in Qt, you can not change UI from non UI threads directly. Only from signals and slots mechanism.
The proper way to not freeze UI is obviously to compute lengthy operations in another thread.
You can achieve this in several ways:
One is by sub-classing QObject class to create 'worker object' which would perform all heavy operations. You create new QThread object that should live as long as you need your object. And use QObject::moveToThread method to move created object to new thread. To control your worker object you should send signals from object and call it's slots also via signal-slot mechanism. If you call them directly - they will be executed in caller thread (so do not perform stuff like worker->startHeavyJob(); in UI thread). Instead emit signal in UI (emit sigStartHeavyStuff();) and connect it to slot of your worker object (slotDoHeavyStuff();)
if you do not want to bother with this (if operation is pretty small)
- you can use QApplication::processEvents() to process events in UI event loop while going in your infinite while loop.
Another way is to use QtConcurrentRun framework to run function in separate thread which manages itself. Threads are taken from thread pool and are managed by Qt. This approach looks like something you want to do. Though you still will be able to access UI objects only through signals and slots.
I see one big issue in the presented code that is causing your freeze: You never let Qt process anything while you are in the loop. You need to allow Qt to run it's event loop. The easiest way is to use QApplication::processEvents() inside the loop.
I'm also not a fan of a while(1) loop for a couple of reasons. The first of which is that it can eat machine cycles waiting for things to happen. I doubt you really need to run the code as fast as possible, you could probably get away with some sleeping in your loop.
The other issue is that it is hard to break out. A cleaner approach would be something like this
void MyClass::on_pushButton_ON_clicked()
{
MyClass::done = false; // this is a class attribute
while (!MyClass::done) {
QApplication::processEvents();
//...
}
}
void MyClass::on_pushButton_OFF_clicked()
{
MyClass::done = true;
}
I have (in the past) written cross-platform (Windows/Unix) applications which, when started from the command line, handled a user-typed Ctrl-C combination in the same way (i.e. to terminate the application cleanly).
Is it possible on Windows to send a Ctrl-C/SIGINT/equivalent to a process from another (unrelated) process to request that it terminate cleanly (giving it an opportunity to tidy up resources etc.)?
I have done some research around this topic, which turned out to be more popular than I anticipated. KindDragon's reply was one of the pivotal points.
I wrote a longer blog post on the topic and created a working demo program, which demonstrates using this type of system to close a command line application in a couple of nice fashions. That post also lists external links that I used in my research.
In short, those demo programs do the following:
Start a program with a visible window using .Net, hide with pinvoke, run for 6 seconds, show with pinvoke, stop with .Net.
Start a program without a window using .Net, run for 6 seconds, stop by attaching console and issuing ConsoleCtrlEvent
Edit: The amended solution from #KindDragon for those who are interested in the code here and now. If you plan to start other programs after stopping the first one, you should re-enable CTRL+C handling, otherwise the next process will inherit the parent's disabled state and will not respond to CTRL+C.
[DllImport("kernel32.dll", SetLastError = true)]
static extern bool AttachConsole(uint dwProcessId);
[DllImport("kernel32.dll", SetLastError = true, ExactSpelling = true)]
static extern bool FreeConsole();
[DllImport("kernel32.dll")]
static extern bool SetConsoleCtrlHandler(ConsoleCtrlDelegate HandlerRoutine, bool Add);
delegate bool ConsoleCtrlDelegate(CtrlTypes CtrlType);
// Enumerated type for the control messages sent to the handler routine
enum CtrlTypes : uint
{
CTRL_C_EVENT = 0,
CTRL_BREAK_EVENT,
CTRL_CLOSE_EVENT,
CTRL_LOGOFF_EVENT = 5,
CTRL_SHUTDOWN_EVENT
}
[DllImport("kernel32.dll")]
[return: MarshalAs(UnmanagedType.Bool)]
private static extern bool GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(CtrlTypes dwCtrlEvent, uint dwProcessGroupId);
public void StopProgram(Process proc)
{
//This does not require the console window to be visible.
if (AttachConsole((uint)proc.Id))
{
// Disable Ctrl-C handling for our program
SetConsoleCtrlHandler(null, true);
GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(CtrlTypes.CTRL_C_EVENT, 0);
//Moved this command up on suggestion from Timothy Jannace (see comments below)
FreeConsole();
// Must wait here. If we don't and re-enable Ctrl-C
// handling below too fast, we might terminate ourselves.
proc.WaitForExit(2000);
//Re-enable Ctrl-C handling or any subsequently started
//programs will inherit the disabled state.
SetConsoleCtrlHandler(null, false);
}
}
Also, plan for a contingency solution if AttachConsole() or the sent signal should fail, for instance sleeping then this:
if (!proc.HasExited)
{
try
{
proc.Kill();
}
catch (InvalidOperationException e){}
}
The closest that I've come to a solution is the SendSignal 3rd party app. The author lists source code and an executable. I've verified that it works under 64-bit windows (running as a 32-bit program, killing another 32-bit program), but I've not figured out how to embed the code into a windows program (either 32-bit or 64-bit).
How it works:
After much digging around in the debugger I discovered that the entry point that actually does the behavior associated with a signal like ctrl-break is kernel32!CtrlRoutine. The function had the same prototype as ThreadProc, so it can be used with CreateRemoteThread directly, without having to inject code. However, that's not an exported symbol! It's at different addresses (and even has different names) on different versions of Windows. What to do?
Here is the solution I finally came up with. I install a console ctrl handler for my app, then generate a ctrl-break signal for my app. When my handler gets called, I look back at the top of the stack to find out the parameters passed to kernel32!BaseThreadStart. I grab the first param, which is the desired start address of the thread, which is the address of kernel32!CtrlRoutine. Then I return from my handler, indicating that I have handled the signal and my app should not be terminated. Back in the main thread, I wait until the address of kernel32!CtrlRoutine has been retrieved. Once I've got it, I create a remote thread in the target process with the discovered start address. This causes the ctrl handlers in the target process to be evaluated as if ctrl-break had been pressed!
The nice thing is that only the target process is affected, and any process (even a windowed process) can be targeted. One downside is that my little app can't be used in a batch file, since it will kill it when it sends the ctrl-break event in order to discover the address of kernel32!CtrlRoutine.
(Precede it with start if running it in a batch file.)
I guess I'm a bit late on this question but I'll write something anyway for anyone having the same problem.
This is the same answer as I gave to this question.
My problem was that I'd like my application to be a GUI application but the processes executed should be run in the background without any interactive console window attached. I think this solution should also work when the parent process is a console process. You may have to remove the "CREATE_NO_WINDOW" flag though.
I managed to solve this using GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent() with a wrapper app. The tricky part is just that the documentation is not really clear on exactly how it can be used and the pitfalls with it.
My solution is based on what is described here. But that didn't really explain all the details either and with an error, so here is the details on how to get it working.
Create a new helper application "Helper.exe". This application will sit between your application (parent) and the child process you want to be able to close. It will also create the actual child process. You must have this "middle man" process or GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent() will fail.
Use some kind of IPC mechanism to communicate from the parent to the helper process that the helper should close the child process. When the helper get this event it calls "GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(CTRL_BREAK, 0)" which closes down itself and the child process. I used an event object for this myself which the parent completes when it wants to cancel the child process.
To create your Helper.exe create it with CREATE_NO_WINDOW and CREATE_NEW_PROCESS_GROUP. And when creating the child process create it with no flags (0) meaning it will derive the console from its parent. Failing to do this will cause it to ignore the event.
It is very important that each step is done like this. I've been trying all different kinds of combinations but this combination is the only one that works. You can't send a CTRL_C event. It will return success but will be ignored by the process. CTRL_BREAK is the only one that works. Doesn't really matter since they will both call ExitProcess() in the end.
You also can't call GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent() with a process groupd id of the child process id directly allowing the helper process to continue living. This will fail as well.
I spent a whole day trying to get this working. This solution works for me but if anyone has anything else to add please do. I went all over the net finding lots of people with similar problems but no definite solution to the problem. How GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent() works is also a bit weird so if anyone knows more details on it please share.
Somehow GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent() return error if you call it for another process, but you can attach to another console application and send event to all child processes.
void SendControlC(int pid)
{
AttachConsole(pid); // attach to process console
SetConsoleCtrlHandler(NULL, TRUE); // disable Control+C handling for our app
GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(CTRL_C_EVENT, 0); // generate Control+C event
}
Edit:
For a GUI App, the "normal" way to handle this in Windows development would be to send a WM_CLOSE message to the process's main window.
For a console app, you need to use SetConsoleCtrlHandler to add a CTRL_C_EVENT.
If the application doesn't honor that, you could call TerminateProcess.
Here is the code I use in my C++ app.
Positive points :
Works from console app
Works from Windows service
No delay required
Does not close the current app
Negative points :
The main console is lost and a new one is created (see FreeConsole)
The console switching give strange results...
// Inspired from http://stackoverflow.com/a/15281070/1529139
// and http://stackoverflow.com/q/40059902/1529139
bool signalCtrl(DWORD dwProcessId, DWORD dwCtrlEvent)
{
bool success = false;
DWORD thisConsoleId = GetCurrentProcessId();
// Leave current console if it exists
// (otherwise AttachConsole will return ERROR_ACCESS_DENIED)
bool consoleDetached = (FreeConsole() != FALSE);
if (AttachConsole(dwProcessId) != FALSE)
{
// Add a fake Ctrl-C handler for avoid instant kill is this console
// WARNING: do not revert it or current program will be also killed
SetConsoleCtrlHandler(nullptr, true);
success = (GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(dwCtrlEvent, 0) != FALSE);
FreeConsole();
}
if (consoleDetached)
{
// Create a new console if previous was deleted by OS
if (AttachConsole(thisConsoleId) == FALSE)
{
int errorCode = GetLastError();
if (errorCode == 31) // 31=ERROR_GEN_FAILURE
{
AllocConsole();
}
}
}
return success;
}
Usage example :
DWORD dwProcessId = ...;
if (signalCtrl(dwProcessId, CTRL_C_EVENT))
{
cout << "Signal sent" << endl;
}
A solution that I have found from here is pretty simple if you have python 3.x available in your command line. First, save a file (ctrl_c.py) with the contents:
import ctypes
import sys
kernel = ctypes.windll.kernel32
pid = int(sys.argv[1])
kernel.FreeConsole()
kernel.AttachConsole(pid)
kernel.SetConsoleCtrlHandler(None, 1)
kernel.GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(0, 0)
sys.exit(0)
Then call:
python ctrl_c.py 12345
If that doesn't work, I recommend trying out the windows-kill project:
Choco: https://github.com/ElyDotDev/windows-kill
Node: https://github.com/ElyDotDev/node-windows-kill
void SendSIGINT( HANDLE hProcess )
{
DWORD pid = GetProcessId(hProcess);
FreeConsole();
if (AttachConsole(pid))
{
// Disable Ctrl-C handling for our program
SetConsoleCtrlHandler(NULL, true);
GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(CTRL_C_EVENT, 0); // SIGINT
//Re-enable Ctrl-C handling or any subsequently started
//programs will inherit the disabled state.
SetConsoleCtrlHandler(NULL, false);
WaitForSingleObject(hProcess, 10000);
}
}
Thanks to jimhark's answer and other answers here, I found a way to do it in PowerShell:
$ProcessID = 1234
$MemberDefinition = '
[DllImport("kernel32.dll")]public static extern bool FreeConsole();
[DllImport("kernel32.dll")]public static extern bool AttachConsole(uint p);
[DllImport("kernel32.dll")]public static extern bool GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(uint e, uint p);
public static void SendCtrlC(uint p) {
FreeConsole();
if (AttachConsole(p)) {
GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(0, p);
FreeConsole();
}
AttachConsole(uint.MaxValue);
}'
Add-Type -Name 'dummyName' -Namespace 'dummyNamespace' -MemberDefinition $MemberDefinition
[dummyNamespace.dummyName]::SendCtrlC($ProcessID)
What made things work was sending the GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent to the desired process group instead of sending it to all processes that share the console of the calling process and then AttachConsole back to the current process' parent's console.
Yes. The https://github.com/ElyDotDev/windows-kill project does exactly what you want:
windows-kill -SIGINT 1234
It should be made crystal clear because at the moment it isn't.
There is a modified and compiled version of SendSignal to send Ctrl-C (by default it only sends Ctrl+Break). Here are some binaries:
(2014-3-7) : I built both 32-bit and 64-bit version with Ctrl-C, it's called SendSignalCtrlC.exe and you can download it at: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/49065779/sendsignalctrlc/x86/SendSignalCtrlC.exe https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/49065779/sendsignalctrlc/x86_64/SendSignalCtrlC.exe -- Juraj Michalak
I have also mirrored those files just in case:
32-bit version: https://www.dropbox.com/s/r96jxglhkm4sjz2/SendSignalCtrlC.exe?dl=0
64-bit version: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hhe0io7mcgcle1c/SendSignalCtrlC64.exe?dl=0
Disclaimer: I didn't build those files. No modification was made to the compiled
original files. The only platform tested is the 64-bit Windows 7. It is recommended to adapt the source available at http://www.latenighthacking.com/projects/2003/sendSignal/ and compile it yourself.
In Java, using JNA with the Kernel32.dll library, similar to a C++ solution. Runs the CtrlCSender main method as a Process which just gets the console of the process to send the Ctrl+C event to and generates the event. As it runs separately without a console the Ctrl+C event does not need to be disabled and enabled again.
CtrlCSender.java - Based on Nemo1024's and KindDragon's answers.
Given a known process ID, this consoless application will attach the console of targeted process and generate a CTRL+C Event on it.
import com.sun.jna.platform.win32.Kernel32;
public class CtrlCSender {
public static void main(String args[]) {
int processId = Integer.parseInt(args[0]);
Kernel32.INSTANCE.AttachConsole(processId);
Kernel32.INSTANCE.GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent(Kernel32.CTRL_C_EVENT, 0);
}
}
Main Application - Runs CtrlCSender as a separate consoless process
ProcessBuilder pb = new ProcessBuilder();
pb.command("javaw", "-cp", System.getProperty("java.class.path", "."), CtrlCSender.class.getName(), processId);
pb.redirectErrorStream();
pb.redirectOutput(ProcessBuilder.Redirect.INHERIT);
pb.redirectError(ProcessBuilder.Redirect.INHERIT);
Process ctrlCProcess = pb.start();
ctrlCProcess.waitFor();
I found all this too complicated and used SendKeys to send a CTRL-C keystroke to the command line window (i.e. cmd.exe window) as a workaround.
A friend of mine suggested a complete different way of solving the problem and it worked for me. Use a vbscript like below. It starts and application, let it run for 7 seconds and close it using ctrl+c.
'VBScript Example
Set WshShell = WScript.CreateObject("WScript.Shell")
WshShell.Run "notepad.exe"
WshShell.AppActivate "notepad"
WScript.Sleep 7000
WshShell.SendKeys "^C"
// Send [CTRL-C] to interrupt a batch file running in a Command Prompt window, even if the Command Prompt window is not visible,
// without bringing the Command Prompt window into focus.
// [CTRL-C] will have an effect on the batch file, but not on the Command Prompt window itself -- in other words,
// [CTRL-C] will not have the same visible effect on a Command Prompt window that isn't running a batch file at the moment
// as bringing a Command Prompt window that isn't running a batch file into focus and pressing [CTRL-C] on the keyboard.
ulong ulProcessId = 0UL;
// hwC = Find Command Prompt window HWND
GetWindowThreadProcessId (hwC, (LPDWORD) &ulProcessId);
AttachConsole ((DWORD) ulProcessId);
SetConsoleCtrlHandler (NULL, TRUE);
GenerateConsoleCtrlEvent (CTRL_C_EVENT, 0UL);
SetConsoleCtrlHandler (NULL, FALSE);
FreeConsole ();
SIGINT can be send to program using windows-kill, by syntax windows-kill -SIGINT PID, where PID can be obtained by Microsoft's pslist.
Regarding catching SIGINTs, if your program is in Python then you can implement SIGINT processing/catching like in this solution.
Based on process id, we can send the signal to process to terminate forcefully or gracefully or any other signal.
List all process :
C:\>tasklist
To kill the process:
C:\>Taskkill /IM firefox.exe /F
or
C:\>Taskkill /PID 26356 /F
Details:
http://tweaks.com/windows/39559/kill-processes-from-command-prompt/
Recently ,I come across this problem as I memtioned in this Title.
I have tried by using QThread::terminate(),but I just can NOT stop
the thread ,which is in a dead loop (let's say,while(1)).
thanks a lot.
Terminating the thread is the easy solution to stopping an async operation, but it is usually a bad idea: the thread could be doing a system call or could be in the middle of updating a data structure when it is terminated, which could leave the program or even the OS in an unstable state.
Try to transform your while(1) into while( isAlive() ) and make isAlive() return false when you want the thread to exit.
QThreads can deadlock if they finish "naturally" during termination.
For example in Unix, if the thread is waiting on a "read" call, the termination attempt (a Unix signal) will make the "read" call abort with an error code before the thread is destroyed.
That means that the thread can still reach it's natural exit point while being terminated. When it does so, a deadlock is reached since some internal mutex is already locked by the "terminate" call.
My workaround is to actually make sure that the thread never returns if it was terminated.
while( read(...) > 0 ) {
// Do stuff...
}
while( wasTerminated )
sleep(1);
return;
wasTerminated here is actually implemented a bit more complex, using atomic ints:
enum {
Running, Terminating, Quitting
};
QAtomicInt _state; // Initialized to Running
void myTerminate()
{
if( _state.testAndSetAquire(Running, Terminating) )
terminate();
}
void run()
{
[...]
while(read(...) > 0 ) {
[...]
}
if( !_state.testAndSetAquire(Running, Quitting) ) {
for(;;) sleep(1);
}
}
Have you tried exit or quit?
Did the thread call QThread::setTerminationEnabled(false)? That would cause thread termination to delay indefinitely.
EDIT: I don't know what platform you're on, but I checked the Windows implementation of QThread::terminate. Assuming the thread was actually running to begin with, and termination wasn't disabled via the above function, it's basically a wrapper around TerminateThread() in the Windows API. This function accepts disrespect from no thread, and tends to leave a mess behind with resource leaks and similar dangling state. If it's not killing the thread, you're either dealing with zombie kernel calls (most likely blocked I/O) or have even bigger problems somewhere.
To use unnamed pipes
int gPipeFdTest[2]; //create a global integer array
As an when where you intend to create pipes use
if( pipe(gPipeFdTest) < 0)
{
perror("Pipe failed");
exit(1);
}
The above code will create a pipe which has two ends gPipeFdTest[0] for reading and gPipeFdTest[1] for writing. What you can do is in your run function set up to read the pipe using select system call. And from where you want to come out of run, there set up to write using write system call. I have used select system call for monitoring the read end of the pipe as it suits my implmentation. Try to figure all this out in your case. If you need any more help, give me a buzz.
Edit:
My problem was just like yours. I had a while(1) loop and the other things I tried needed mutexes and other fancy multithreading mumbo jumbo, which added complexity and debugging was nightmare. Using pipes absolved me from those complexities besides simplified the code. I am not saying that it is the best option but in my case it turned out to be the best and cleanest alternative. I was bugged my hung application before this solution.