How to use napi_threadsafe_function for NodeJS Native Addon - c

I've been looking through the NAPI documentation to try and understand how it deals with multithreading. According to the documentation napi_create_threadsafe_function() and napi_call_threadsafe_function() are used to create and call js functions from multiple threads. The issue is that the documentation is not that straight forward, and there are no examples and I can't find any anywhere else.
If anyone has any experience using napi_create_threadsafe_function() and napi_call_threadsafe_function() or know where to find examples of them being used. Please if you could help out with a a basic example so I can just understand how to use them correctly.
I'm writting a C addon not C++ and need to use these functions. I am not using the wrapper node-addon-api, but napi directly

As a summery tag we may say, the N-API ThreadSafeFunctions acts as a safe tunnel between the asynchronous C/C++ code executing on a worker thread and the JavaScript layer for information exchange.
Before going technical let us consider a scenario that we have a very long running process heavy task to be completed. We all know putting this task on node.js main thread is not a good choice, it will chock the event loop and block all other task in the queue. So a good choice could be to consider this task in a separate thread (let us call this thread as a worker thread). JavaScript asynchronous callback and Promise are doing exactly this approach.
Let us say we have deployed the task on a worker thread and we are ready with a portion of result and we would like it to be send to JavaScript layer. Then the process involve are, converting the result into napi_value and then call the Callback JavaScript function from C/C++. Unfortunately neither of the operation can be performed from a worker thread; these operations should be exclusively done from the main thread. The JavaScript Promise and Callback, wait till the task completion and then switch over to main thread along with the task result in a normal C/C++ storage facility such as structure etc. Then do the napi_value conversion and call the JavaScript callback function from the main thread.
Since our task is extremely long running probably we don't want to wait till the end of the task before exchanging the result with JavaScript layer.
Let us consider a scenario where we are searching objects in a very large video where we prefer to get the detected objects send to JavaScript layer as on when it is found.
In such a scenario we will have to start sending task result while the task is still in progress. This is the scenario where Asynchronous Thread-safe Function Calls come for our help. It acts as a safe tunnel between the worker thread and the JavaScript layer for information exchange. Let us consider the following function snippet
napi_value CAsyncStreamSearch(napi_env env, napi_callback_info info)
{
// The native addon function exposed to JavaScript
// This will be the funciton a node.js application calling.
}
void ExecuteWork(napi_env env, void* data)
{
// We will use this function to get the task done.
// This code will be executed on a worker thread.
}
void OnWorkComplete(napi_env env, napi_status status, void* data)
{
// after the `ExecuteWork` function exits, this
// callback function will be called on the main thread
}
void ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS(napi_env env, napi_value js_cb,
void* context, void* data)
{
// This funcion acts as a safe tunnel between the asynchronous C/C++ code
// executing the worker thread and the JavaScript layer for information exchange.
}
In this first three functions are nearly same as JavaScript Promise and Callback that we are familiar with. The fourth one is specifically for the Asynchronous Thread-safe Function Calls. In this, our long running task is being executed by ExecuteWork() function on a worker thread. Let us say it has instructed us not to call JavaScript (and also any napi_value conversion of result) from ExecuteWork() but permitted to do so from ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS as long as we are calling ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS with an napi equivalent of C/C++ function pointer. Then we could pack the JavaScript calls inside this ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS() function. Then when ExecuteWork() function could pass the result to ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS() while it is being invoked in a plain C/C++ storage units such as structure etc. The ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS() convert this result to napi_value and call JavaScript function.
Under the cover the ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS() function is being queue to the event loop, and eventually it get executed by main thread.
The following code snippet packed inside CAsyncStreamSearch() is responsible for creating a C/C++ function pointer equivalent of N-API by usng napi_create_threadsafe_function() and it is being done from the native addon's main thread itself. Similarly the request for creation of worker thread by using napi_create_async_work() function then placing the work int the event queue by using napi_queue_async_work() so that a worker thread will pickup this item in the future.
napi_value CAsyncStreamSearch(napi_env env, napi_callback_info info)
{
-- -- -- --
-- -- -- --
// Create a thread-safe N-API callback function correspond to the C/C++ callback function
napi_create_threadsafe_function(env,
js_cb, NULL, work_name, 0, 1, NULL, NULL, NULL,
ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS, // the C/C++ callback function
// out: the asynchronous thread-safe JavaScript function
&(async_stream_data_ex->tsfn_StreamSearch));
// Create an async work item, that can be deployed in the node.js event queue
napi_create_async_work( env, NULL,
work_name,
ExecuteWork,
OnWorkComplete,
async_stream_data_ex,
// OUT: THE handle to the async work item
&(async_stream_data_ex->work_StreamSearch);)
// Queue the work item for execution.
napi_queue_async_work(env, async_stream_data_ex->work_StreamSearch);
return NULL;
}
Then during the asynchronous execution of task (ExecuteWork() function) invokes ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS() by calling napi_call_threadsafe_function() function as shown bellow.
static void ExecuteWork(napi_env env, void *data)
{
// tsfn is napi equivalent of point to ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS
// function that we created at CAsyncStreamSearch function
napi_acquire_threadsafe_function( tsfn )
Loop
{
// this will eventually invoke ThreadSafeCFunction4CallingJS()
// we may call any number of time (in fact it can be called from any thread)
napi_call_threadsafe_function( tsfn, WorkResult, );
}
napi_release_threadsafe_function( tsfn,);
}
The example you pointed out is one of the best source of information and it is directly form node.js team itself. When I was learning this concept I too was referring the same example, during my study the example has been recreated by extracting original idea from it, hope you may find this much simplified. and it is available at
https://github.com/msatyan/MyNodeC/blob/master/src/mync1/ThreadSafeAsyncStream.cpp
https://github.com/msatyan/MyNodeC/blob/master/test/ThreadSafeAsyncStream.js

If anyone else gets stuck with this issue. I finally managed to hunt down an example here.
Once I understand it better and have gotten a working sample, I will update here. Hopefully someone needing this in the future will have an easier time than me.
See Satyan's answer

The solution from this site worked for me here
struct ThreadCtx {
ThreadCtx(Napi::Env env) {};
std::thread nativeThread;
Napi::ThreadSafeFunction tsfn;
};
void Target::Connect(const Napi::CallbackInfo& info) {
Napi::Env env = info.Env();
threadCtx = new ThreadCtx(env);
// Create a ThreadSafeFunction
threadCtx->tsfn = Napi::ThreadSafeFunction::New(env, info[0].As<Napi::Function>(), "Resource Name", 0 /* Unlimited queue */, 1 /* Only 1 thread */, threadCtx,
[&]( Napi::Env, void *finalizeData, ThreadCtx *context ) {
printf("Thread cleanup\n");
threadCtx->nativeThread.join();
},
(void*)nullptr
);
// Create a native thread
threadCtx->nativeThread = std::thread([&] {
auto callback = [](Napi::Env env, Napi::Function cb, char* buffer) {
cb.Call({Napi::String::New(env, buffer)});
};
char reply[1024];
memset(reply, 0, sizeof(reply));
while(true)
{
size_t reply_length = boost::asio::read(s, boost::asio::buffer(reply, sizeof(reply)));
if(reply_length <= 0) {
printf("Bad read from boost asio\n");
break;
}
// Callback (blocking) to JS
napi_status status = threadCtx->tsfn.BlockingCall(reply, callback);
if (status != napi_ok)
{
// Handle error
break;
}
}
// Release the thread-safe function
threadCtx->tsfn.Release();
});
}

addon.cc - (tested and 100% working)
#include <napi.h>
Napi::Value SAFE_THREAD(const Napi::CallbackInfo& info) {
std::thread([](Napi::ThreadSafeFunction tsfn){
struct output_data{
int arg1;
std::string arg2;
};
auto data = new output_data();
///---------------
///fill output data
data->arg1=1;
data->arg2="string data";
std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(2000));
///---------------
///output thread result to nodejs
napi_status status = tsfn.BlockingCall(data,[](Napi::Env env, Napi::Function jsCallback,output_data* data){
jsCallback.Call({Napi::Number::New(env, data->arg1), String::New(env, data->arg2)});
delete data;
});
if(status != napi_ok) { std::cout << "error!" << "\n"; }
tsfn.Release();
},Napi::ThreadSafeFunction::New(info.Env(), info[0].As<Function>(), "TSFN", 0, 1,[](Napi::Env env, void *finalizeData){},(void *)nullptr)).detach();
return info.Env().Null();
}
index.js
const ADDON = require('./THREAD/build/Release/addon');
function time_sec(){return (new Date()).getTime()/1000;}
var t = time_sec();
ADDON.SAFE_THREAD((arg1,arg2)=>{
console.log(time_sec()-t, 'arg1 = '+arg1)
console.log(time_sec()-t, 'arg2 = '+arg2)
});
console.log(time_sec()-t, 'fin')
output:
0.00099992752075 fin
2.00499987602233 arg1 = 1
2.00600004196167 arg2 = string data
see also how to emit data from thread

Related

GtkSpinner with long-lasting function with C

I'm making a GTK+3 application in C and I want a spinner to show when the program is processing the data. Here's what I generally have:
main()
{
//Some statements
g_signal_connect(G_OBJECT(btnGenerate), "clicked", G_CALLBACK(Generate), &mainform);
}
void Generate(GtkWidget *btnGenerate, form_widgets *p_main_form)
{
gtk_spinner_start(GTK_SPINNER(p_main_form->spnProcessing));
Begin_Lengthy_Processing(Parameters, Galore, ...);
//gtk_spinner_stop(GTK_SPINNER(p_main_form->spnProcessing));
}
I have the stop function commented out so I can see the spinner spin even after the function has finished, but the spinner starts after the function is finished, and I suspect it turns on in the main loop.
I also found out that the entire interface freezes during the execution of the long going function.
Is there a way to get it to start and display inside the callback function? I found the same question, but it uses Python and threads. This is C, not Python, so I would assume things are different.
You need to run your lengthy computation in a separate thread, or break it up into chunks and run each of them separately as idle callbacks in the main thread.
If your lengthy computation takes a single set of inputs and doesn’t need any more inputs until it’s finished, then you should construct it as a GTask and use g_task_run_in_thread() to start the task. Its result will be delivered back to the main thread via the GTask’s GAsyncReadyCallback. There’s an example here.
If it takes more input as it progresses, you probably want to use a GAsyncQueue to feed it more inputs, and a GThreadPool to provide the threads (amortising the cost of creating threads over multiple calls to the lengthy function, and protecting against denial of service).
The GNOME developer docs give an overview of how to do threading.
This is what I got:
int main()
{
// Statements...
g_signal_connect(G_OBJECT(btnGenerate), "clicked", G_CALLBACK(Process), &mainform);
// More statements...
}
void Process(GtkWidget *btnGenerate, form_widgets *p_main_form)
{
GError *processing_error;
GThread *start_processing;
gtk_spinner_start(GTK_SPINNER(p_main_form->spnProcessing));
active = true;
if((start_processing = g_thread_try_new(NULL, (GThreadFunc)Generate, p_main_form, &processing_error)) == NULL)
{
printf("%s\n", processing_error->message);
printf("Error, cannot create thread!?!?\n\n");
exit(processing_error->code);
}
}
void Generate(form_widgets *p_main_form)
{
// Long process
active = false;
}
My program, once cleaned up and finished, as there are many other bugs in the program, will be put on GitHub.
Thank you all for your help. This answer comes from looking at all of your answers and comments as well as reading some more documentation, but mostly your comments and answers.
I did something similar in my gtk3 program. It's not that difficult. Here's how I would go about it.
/**
g_idle_add_full() expects a pointer to a function with the signature below:
(*GSourceFunc) (gpointer user_data).
So your function signature must adhere to that in order to be called.
But you might want to pass variables to the function.
If you don't want to have the variables in the global scope
then you can do this:
typedef struct myDataType {
char* name;
int age;
} myDataType;
myDataType person = {"Max", 25};
then when calling g_idle_add_full() you do it this way:
g_idle_add_full(G_PRIORITY_HIGH_IDLE, myFunction, person, NULL);
*/
int main()
{
// Assumming there exist a pointer called data
g_idle_add_full(G_PRIORITY_HIGH_IDLE, lengthyProcessCallBack, data, NULL);
// GTK & GDK event loop continues and window should be responsive while function runs in background
}
gboolean lengthyProcessCallBack(gpointer data)
{
myDataType person = (myDataType) *data;
// Doing lenghthy stuff
while(;;) {
sleep(3600); // hypothetical long process :D
}
return FALSE; // removed from event sources and won't be called again.
}

Alternative to blocking code

Attempting to use mbed OS scheduler for a small project.
As mbed os is Asynchronous I need to avoid blocking code.
However the library for my wireless receiver uses a blocking line of:
while (!(wireless.isRxData()));
Is there an alternative way to do this that won't block all the code until a message is received?
static void listen(void) {
wireless.quickRxSetup(channel, addr1);
sprintf(ackData,"Ack data \r\n");
wireless.acknowledgeData(ackData, strlen(ackData), 1);
while (!(wireless.isRxData()));
len = wireless.getRxData(msg);
}
static void motor(void) {
pc.printf("Motor\n");
m.speed(1);
n.speed(1);
led1 = 1;
wait(0.5);
m.speed(0);
n.speed(0);
}
static void sendData() {
wireless.quickTxSetup(channel, addr1);
strcpy(accelData, "Robot");
wireless.transmitData(accelData ,strlen(accelData));
}
void app_start(int, char**) {
minar::Scheduler::postCallback(listen).period(minar::milliseconds(500)).tolerance(minar::milliseconds(1000));
minar::Scheduler::postCallback(motor).period(minar::milliseconds(500));
minar::Scheduler::postCallback(sendData).period(minar::milliseconds(500)).delay(minar::milliseconds(3000));
}
You should remove the while (!(wireless.isRxData())); loop in your listen function. Replace it with:
if (wireless.isRxData()) {
len = wireless.getRxData(msg);
// Process data
}
Then, you can process your data in that if statement, or you can call postCallback on another function that will do your processing.
Instead of looping until data is available, you'll want to poll for data. If RX data is not available, exit the function and set a timer to go off after a short interval. When the timer goes off, check for data again. Repeat until data is available. I'm not familiar with your OS so I can't offer any specific code. This may be as simple as adding a short "sleep" call inside the while loop, or may involve creating another callback from the scheduler.

calling IO Operations from thread in ruby c extension will cause ruby to hang

I have a problem with using threads in a C Extension to run ruby code async.
I have the following C code:
struct DATA {
VALUE callback;
pthread_t watchThread;
void *ptr;
};
void *executer(void *ptr) {
struct DATA *data = (struct DATA *) ptr;
char oldVal[20] = "1";
char newVal[20] = "1";
pthread_cleanup_push(&threadGarbageCollector, data);
while(1) {
if(triggerReceived) {
rb_funcall(data->callback, rb_intern("call"), 0);
}
}
pthread_cleanup_pop(1);
return NULL;
}
VALUE spawn_thread(VALUE self) {
VALUE block;
struct DATA *data;
Data_Get_Struct(self, struct DATA, data);
block = rb_block_proc();
data->callback = block;
pthread_create(&data->watchThread, NULL, &executer, data);
return self;
}
I am using this because I want to provide ruby-code as a callback, which will be executed, once the Thread receives a signal.
In general this is working fine, if the callback is something like this ruby-code:
1 + 1
But, if the callbacks ruby-code looks like this:
puts "test"
than the main ruby process will stop responding, once the callback is getting executed.
The thread is still running and able to react to signals and puts the "test" everytime, the thread receives a message.
Can somebody maybe tell me, how to fix this?
Thanks a lot
From the Ruby C API docs:
As of Ruby 1.9, Ruby supports native 1:1 threading with one kernel
thread per Ruby Thread object. Currently, there is a GVL (Global VM
Lock) which prevents simultaneous execution of Ruby code which may be
released by the rb_thread_call_without_gvl and
rb_thread_call_without_gvl2 functions. These functions are
tricky-to-use and documented in thread.c; do not use them before
reading comments in thread.c.
TLDR; the Ruby VM is not currently (at the time of writing) thread safe. Check out this nice write-up on Ruby Threading for a better overall understanding of how to work within these confines.
You can use Ruby's native_thread_create(rb_thread_t *th) which will use pthread_create behind the scenes. There are some drawbacks that you can read about in the documentation above the method definition. You can then run your callback with Ruby's rb_thread_call_with_gvl method. Also, I haven't done it here, but it might be a good idea to create a wrapper method so you can use rb_protect to handle exceptions your callback may raise (otherwise they will be swallowed by the VM).
VALUE execute_callback(VALUE callback)
{
return rb_funcall(callback, rb_intern("call"), 0);
}
// execute your callback when the thread receives signal
rb_thread_call_with_gvl(execute_callback, data->callback);

Extending scope of local variables in C over function calls

I have a library which provides function calls to a user as below:
int* g_ID = NULL;
void processing(int p1, char p2)
{
int ID = newID();
g_ID = &ID;
callback(p1, p2);
return ID;
}
void SendResponse()
{
sendID(*g_ID);
}
The user sets up its application by registering its callback function with the signature void (f*)(int p1, char p2) and should not have knowledge about the ID used internally the library. So the user space code looks something like:
main()
{
RegisterCallback(HandleRequest);
while (inProgress())
sleep(1); /* just sleep here */
}
void (HandleRequest*)(int val1, char val2)
{
/* ... do something user specific ... */
SendResponse();
return;
}
The problem here is, that the library (handling IDs and g_ID is not thread safe) !! User's callback is invoked asynchronously by other library functions, as threads. Several threads can be executed this way in parallel. But I won't give the user visibility of library internal IDs.
I know the code snippets above are not perfect. There're just to demonstrate my intention ... SendResponse() is not yet implemented ;-).
I hope, someone can give some ideas how to "implement" SendResponse() and to keep thread safety.
You could use a threadlocal here to keep the g_ID, rather than making using a global. This will work in the scenario, as I understand it, that there may be multiple concurrent calls to process() from different threads, but that the process() method is as shown - that the SendResponse() call will only occur within the scope (runtime scope, not lexical) of the callback() method. That is true in the code shown. It could be untrue if HandleRequest did something exotic like kick off another thread an then return (but you could certainly ban that by documentation).
The other, more classic, approach is to encapsulate all the state you care about, like g_ID, into a void *, or opaque_state * or whatever, that you pass to the callback, and then methods like SendRespose() take that as an argument. If you don't like void * you can implement the opaque_state * version without exposing any details of that structure using a forward declaration.

Problem with Array of Queues in FreeRTOS

I am building a FreeRTOS application. I created a module which registers a freeRTOS queue handle from another module and when an interrupt in this module module occurs, it sends a message to all the registered queues. But it seems I am able to send the message from the queue but not able to receive it at the other module.
Here is my code.
remote module:-
CanRxMsg RxMessage;
can_rx0_queue = xQueueCreate( 10, sizeof(CanRxMsg) ); // can_rx0_queue is globally defined
// Register my queue with can module
if (registerRxQueueWithCAN(can_rx0_queue) == -1)
{
TurnLedRed();
}
while(1)
{
if(can_rx0_queue){
while( xQueueReceive( can_rx0_queue, ( void * ) &RxMessage, portMAX_DELAY))
{
}
.....
Here is the registration module
#define MAX_NUMBER_OF_RX_QUEUES 2
//xQueueHandle rxQueueStore[MAX_NUMBER_OF_RX_QUEUES];
typedef struct QUEUE_REGISTRY_ITEM
{
// signed char *pcQueueName;
xQueueHandle xHandle;
} xQueueRegistryItem;
xQueueRegistryItem rxQueueStore[MAX_NUMBER_OF_RX_QUEUES];
int numberOfQueuesRegistered;
#define cError -1
#define cSuccess 0
void processInterrupt()
{
for(int i=0; i < numberOfQueuesRegistered; i++)
{
if(xQueueSendFromISR(rxQueueStore[i].xHandle,(void *) &RxMessage,&tmp) != pdTRUE)
TurnLedRed();
if(tmp)resched_needed = pdTRUE;
}
portEND_SWITCHING_ISR(resched_needed);
}
int registerRxQueueWithCAN(xQueueHandle myQueue)
{
if(numberOfQueuesRegistered == MAX_NUMBER_OF_RX_QUEUES)
{
// Over Flow of registerations
TurnLedRed();
return cError;
}else
{
rxQueueStore[numberOfQueuesRegistered].xHandle = myQueue;
numberOfQueuesRegistered++;
}
return cSuccess;
}
Few points:-
xQuehandle is typdefed to "void *"
The code works if remove the registration thing and just do with directly pointer of queue in xQueueSendFromISR if I take the pointer by extern.
Any advice or information required?
At first glance I cannot see anything obviously wrong. The problem might be outside of the code you have shown, like how is can_rx0_queue declared, how is the interrupt entered, which port are you using, etc.
There is a FreeRTOS support forum, linked to from the FreeRTOS home page http://www.FreeRTOS.org
Regards.
I think Richard is right. The problem could be issues that are not within your code that you have posted here.
Are you calling any form of suspension on the receiving Task that is waiting on the Queue? When you invoke a vTaskSuspend() on a Task that is blocked waiting on a Queue, the Task that is suspended will be moved to the pxSuspendedTaskList and it will "forget" that it is waiting on an Event Queue because the pvContainer of xEventListItem in that Task will be set to NULL.
You might want to check if your receiving Task is ever suspended while waiting on a Queue. Hope that helped. Cheers!
Your shared memory should at least be declared volatile:
volatile xQueueRegistryItem rxQueueStore[MAX_NUMBER_OF_RX_QUEUES] ;
volatile int numberOfQueuesRegistered ;
otherwise the compiler may optimise out read or writes to these because it has no concept of different threads of execution (between the ISR and the main thread).
Also I recall that some PIC C runtime start-up options do not apply zero-initialisation of static data in order to minimise start-up time, if you are using such a start-up, you should explicitly initialise numberOfQueuesRegistered. I would suggest that to do so would be a good idea in any case.
It is not clear from your code that RxMessage in the ISR is not the same as RxMessage in the 'remote module'; they should not be shared, since that would allow the ISR to potentially modify the data while the receiving thread was processing it. If they could be shared, there would ne no reason to have a queue in the first place, since shared memory and a semaphore would suffice.
As a side-note, there is never any need to cast a pointer to void*, and you should generally avoid doing so, since it will prevent the compiler from issuing an error if you were to pass something other than a pointer. The whole point of a void* is rather that it can accept any pointer type.

Resources