I need to have buffers that I will use it in multiple different types of threads. So the array needs to be global.
Buffer size and number of buffers are given as input to the program.
As an alternative I could implement linked list maybe.
What is the best way to implement such buffers? Can you provide a sample?
Any help is appreciated!
I don't understand what do you mean by "without knowing length", if you pass size of each buffer and number of buffers as input parameters then you know every required length.
Maybe this is not the best, but that would be my way.
First declare global buffer and threads.
static void ** buffer;
pthread_t tid[2];
Here is described how the threads will work. First buffer will assign with data first two sub-buffers. Second will do the same with the other two.
void *assignBuffer(void *threadid) {
pthread_t id = pthread_self();
if (pthread_equal(id, tid[0])) {
strcpy(buffer[0], "foo");
strcpy(buffer[1], "bar");
} else {
strcpy(buffer[2], "oof");
strcpy(buffer[3], "rab");
}
return NULL;
}
Converting program args from string to integer.
Here we assign buffer with arrays of unknown type.
Here we assign each buffer with his size in bytes.
Finally we create working threads. The important thing is that they
will run simultaneously.
Waiting until all threads done their job.
Simple print buffer contents.
Ok, here is the code.
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
//1
int bufferSize = atoi(argv[1]);
int buffersAmount = atoi(argv[2]);
//2
buffer = malloc(sizeof(void *)*buffersAmount);
//3
int i;
for (i = 0; i < buffersAmount; ++i) {
buffer[i] = malloc(bufferSize);
}
//4
i = 0;
while (i < 2) {
pthread_create(&tid[i], NULL, &assignBuffer, NULL);
++i;
}
//5
for (i = 0; i < 2; i++)
pthread_join(tid[i], NULL);
//6
for (i = 0; i < 4; ++i) {
printf("%d %s\n", i, (char*)buffer[i]);
}
for (i = 0; i < buffersAmount; ++i) {
free(buffer[i]);
}
return 0;
}
Feel free to ask if you don't understand something, also sorry for my english it is not my native language.
Related
i have a problem. I want to write into the Memory of Process so i have programmed the following code. deleteMemoryString() does work normally, but if i pass memory addresses that are longer that 8 characters i wouldnt work. Can i avoid this? Is there specific type i can use or split it into a array?
Thanks
`
[...]
void deleteMemoryString(int pId, DWORD address, int length) {
HANDLE pHandle = OpenProcess(PROCESS_ALL_ACCESS, false, pId);
uint16_t buffer = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < length / 2; i++) {
WriteProcessMemory(pHandle, (LPVOID) address + (i * 2), &buffer, sizeof(buffer), NULL);
}
CloseHandle(pHandle);
}
int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
deleteMemoryString(getExplorerPID(), 0x7df45c09c0f6, 20);
printf("%x", 0x7df45c09c0f6);
}
`
I excepted that i can write into the memory of a process
I have a problem for accessing an array from several threads. I have written a struct which gathers all informations needed for the job I want to do.
The structure is defined like this:
struct thread_blk
{
size_t th_blk_count;
size_t th_blk_size;
size_t th_blk_current;
size_t* th_blk_i_start;
void* data;
pthread_t* th_id;
ThreadBlockAdaptive th_blk_adapt;
};
The idea is to fill an array from multiple threads, each one working on a delimited field of memory of an array.
The th_blk_count field represents the amount of block that has to
be treated,
The th_blk_size field represents the size of a block,
The th_blk_current field represents the processed block (they are
listed from 0 to n),
The th_blk_i_start is an array which contains indexes of the array
that has to be filled.
Just a single function applied to the thread_blk struct is not working properly:
int startAllThreadBlock(struct thread_blk* th_blk, worker_func f)
{
int res = 0;
for(size_t i = 0; i < th_blk->th_blk_count; ++i)
{
res |= pthread_create(th_blk->th_id + i, NULL, f, th_blk);
th_blk->th_blk_current++;
}
return res;
}
In fact, the th_blk_current field is not incremented properly. I used it to retrieve the th_blk_i_start indexes which serve as intervals. As a result, my worker (shown bellow) is processing the same indexes of the double array.
Here is the function I use in the startAllThreadBlock function:
void* parallel_for(void* th_blk_void)
{
ThreadBlock th_blk = (ThreadBlock)th_blk_void;
size_t i = getThreadBlockStartIndex(th_blk, getThreadBlockCurrentIndex(th_blk));
printf(
"Running thread %p\n"
" -Start index %zu\n\n",
pthread_self(),
i
);
if(getThreadBlockCurrentIndex(th_blk) == (getThreadBlockCount(th_blk) - 1))
{
for(; i < MAX; ++i)
{
result[i] = tan(atan((double)i));
}
}
else
{
size_t threshold = getThreadBlockStartIndex(th_blk, getThreadBlockCurrentIndex(th_blk) + 1);
for(; i < threshold; ++i)
{
result[i] = tan(atan((double)i));
}
}
return NULL;
}
ThreadBlock is just a typedef over a thread_blk*; result is the array of double.
I am pretty sure that the problem lies around the startAllThreadBlock (if I use a 1 second sleep everything run as expected). But I don't know how to fix it.
Does someone have an idea?
Thanks for your answers.
Update
Placing the incrementation in the worker solved the problem. But I think it is not safe though, for the reason Some programmer dude mentioned.
void* parallel_for(void* th_blk_void)
{
ThreadBlock th_blk = (ThreadBlock)th_blk_void;
size_t i = getThreadBlockStartIndex(th_blk, getThreadBlockCurrentIndex(th_blk));
size_t n;
if(getThreadBlockCurrentIndex(th_blk) == (getThreadBlockCount(th_blk) - 1))
{
n = MAX;
}
else
{
n = getThreadBlockStartIndex(th_blk, getThreadBlockCurrentIndex(th_blk) + 1);
}
incThreadBlockCurrent(th_blk);
printf(
"Running thread %p\n"
" -Start index %zu\n\n",
pthread_self(),
i
);
for(; i < n; ++i)
{
result[i] = tan(atan((double)i));
}
return NULL;
}
It would do it with a mutex on th_blk_current no?
I think the problem here is that you think the thread gets passed a copy of the structure. It doesn't, it gets a pointer. All the threads get a pointer to the same structure. So any changes to the structure will affect all threads.
You need to come up with a way to pass individual data to the individual threads. For example a thread-specific structure containing only the thread-specific data, and you dynamically allocate an instance of that structure to pass to the thread.
I have a dynamic 2d array inside this struct:
struct mystruct{
int mySize;
int **networkRep;
};
In my code block I use it as follows:
struct myStruct astruct[100];
astruct[0].networkRep = declareMatrix(astruct[0].networkRep, 200, 200);
// do stuff...
int i;
for(i=0; i<100; i++)
freeMatrix(astruct[i].networkRep, 200);
This is how I declare the 2d array:
int** declareMatrix(int **mymatrix, int rows, int columns)
{
mymatrix = (int**) malloc(rows*sizeof(int*));
if (mymatrix==NULL)
printf("Error allocating memory!\n");
int i,j;
for (i = 0; i < rows; i++)
mymatrix[i] = (int*) malloc(columns*sizeof(int));
for(i=0; i<rows; i++){
for(j=0; j<columns; j++){
mymatrix[i][j] = 0;
}
}
return mymatrix;
}
And this is how I free the 2d array:
void freeMatrix(int **matrix, int rows)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < rows; i++){
free(matrix[i]);
}
free(matrix);
matrix = NULL;
}
The strange behvior that I'm seeing is that when I compile and run my program everything looks OK. But when I pipe the stdout to a txt file, I'm getting a seg fault. However, the seg fault doesn't occur if I comment out the loop containing the "freeMatrix" call. What am I doing wrong?
I don't see any problem in free code, except, freeMatrix get called for 100 times whereas your allocation is just 1.
So, either you allocate as below:
for(int i=0; i<100; i++) //Notice looping over 100 elements.
astruct[i].networkRep = declareMatrix(astruct[i].networkRep, 200, 200);
Or, free for only 0th element which you have allocated in your original code.
freeMatrix(astruct[0].networkRep, 200);
On sidenote: Initialize your astruct array.
mystruct astruct[100] = {};
struct myStruct astruct[100];
astruct[0].networkRep = declareMatrix(astruct[0].networkRep, 200, 200);
// do stuff...
int i;
for(i=0; i<100; i++)
freeMatrix(astruct[i].networkRep, 200);
You allocated one astruct but free 100 of them; that will crash if any of the 99 extra ones isn't NULL, which probably happens when you do your redirection. (Since astruct is on the stack, it will contain whatever was left there.)
Other issues:
You're using numeric literals rather than manifest constants ... define NUMROWS and NUMCOLS and use them consistently.
Get rid of the first parameter to declareMatrix ... you pass a value but never use it.
In freeMatrix,
matrix = NULL;
does nothing. With optimization turned on, the compiler won't even generate any code.
if (mymatrix==NULL)
printf("Error allocating memory!\n");
You should exit(1) upon error, otherwise your program will crash and you may not even see the error message because a) stdout is buffered and b) you're redirecting it to a file. Which is also a reason to write error messages to stderr, not stdout.
astruct[0].networkRep = declareMatrix(astruct[0].networkRep, 200, 200);
your not passing the address of the pointer. It just passes the value in the memory to the function which is unncessary.
And your only initializing first variable of struct but while you are trying to free the memory you are unallocating memory which is not yet allocated (astruct[1] and so on till 100 ).
When you use a malloc , it actually allocates a bit more memory than you you specified. extra memory is used to store information such as the size of block, and a link to the next free/used block and sometimes some guard data that helps the system to detect if you write past the end of your allocated block.
If you pass in a different address, it will access memory that contains garbage, and hence its behaviour is undefined (but most frequently will result in a crash)
To index and count an unsigned integer type is enough. size_tis the type of choice for this as it is guaranteed to be larger enough to address/index every byte of memory/array's element on the target machine.
struct mystruct
{
size_t mySize;
int ** networkRep;
};
Always properly initialise variables:
struct myStruct astruct[100] = {0};
Several issues with the allocator:
Give it a chance to returned specific error codes. This typically is done by setting using the function returned value to to so.
Use size_t for counters and indicies and sizes ("rows", "columns")(for why please see above).
Do proper error checking.
Clean up in case an error occurs during work.
do not cast the value returned by malloc(), as in C it's not necessary, not recommended
Use perror() to log error, as it gets the most from the OS about the as possibe.
A possible to do this:
int declareMatrix(int *** pmymatrix, size_t rows, size_t columns)
{
int result = 0; /* Be optimistc. */
assert(NULL != pmatrix);
*pmymatrix = malloc(rows * sizeof(**pmymatrix));
if (NULL == *pmymatrix)
{
perror("malloc() failed");
result = -1;
goto lblExit;
}
{
size_t i, j;
for (i = 0; i < rows; i++)
{
(*pmymatrix)[i] = malloc(columns * sizeof(***pmymatrix));
if (NULL == (*pmymatrix)[i])
{
perror("malloc() failed");
freeMatrix(pmymatrix); /* Clean up. */
result = -1;
goto lblExit;
}
for(i = 0; i < rows; ++i)
{
for(j = 0; j < columns; ++j)
{
(*pmymatrix)[i][j] = 0;
}
}
}
}
lblExit:
return 0;
}
Two issues for the de-allocator:
Mark it's work as done be properly de-initilaising the pointer.
Perform validation of input prior to acting on it.
A possible to do this:
void freeMatrix(int *** pmatrix, size_t rows)
{
if (NULL != pmatrix)
{
if (NULL != *pmatrix)
{
size_t i;
for (i = 0; i < rows; ++i)
{
free((*pmatrix)[i]);
}
}
free(*pmatrix);
*pmatrix = NULL;
}
}
Then use the stuff like this:
struct myStruct astruct[100] = {0};
...
int result = declareMatrix(&astruct[0].networkRep, 200, 200);
if (0 != result)
{
fprintf("declareMatrix() failed.\n");
}
else
{
// Note: Arriving here has only the 1st element of astruct initialised! */
// do stuff...
}
{
size_t i;
for(i = 0; i < 100; ++i)
{
freeMatrix(&astruct[i].networkRep, 200);
}
}
I believe I have a very basic pointer question... I am wanting to use Windows APIs (so things like malloc are out of the question) to create a dynamic block of memory to use for various things, save C strings, integer values, etc. at various offsets within the allocated area.
The code I am using is as follows:
HANDLE hProcess = NULL;
LONG32 *lpHeapAddr = NULL;
hHeap = GetProcessHeap();
lpHeapAddr = (LONG32*)HeapAlloc(hHeap, HEAP_ZERO_MEMORY, 0xC00);
My question is, how can I access specific offsets within the returned space. The variable lpHeapAddr contains the base address of the memory allocation. I suspected lpHeapAddr[0x10] would give me access to the 16th offset into this allocation. But I'm finding things like this aren't working and I suspect it's simply because my logic or understanding is incorrect:
char some_array[] = {0xED, 0x84, 0x5A, 0x20};
for(i = 0; i < 0x04; i++){
lpHeapAddr[0x30+i] = some_array[i];
}
The values in lpHeapAddr[0x30] are not the values in some_array.
Hopefully this is clear as to what my confusion is, as always, any help is greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
You need to be aware of pointer math;
type *pointer ;
pointer+index; // address=pointer+sizeof(type)*index
pointer[index] // address=pointer+sizeof(type)*index
++pointer ; // address=pointer+sizeof(type)
Here is code:
char *memchar_addr=(char*)(lpHeapAddr[0x30]);
for(i = 0; i < 0x04; i++){
memAddr[i] = some_array[i];
printf("%c\t",memAddr[i]);
}
Here is full code.
#include <stdio.h>
#include "windows.h"
int main()
{
HANDLE hHeap; // heap handle
hHeap=GetProcessHeap();
char some_array[0x3F];
memset(some_array,(int)65,sizeof(some_array));
if (hHeap!=NULL)
{
int *memAddr=NULL; //pointer to memory
memAddr=(int*)HeapAlloc(hHeap,0,0xC00);
if (memAddr!=NULL)
{
int i;
for(i = 0; i < 0x3F; i++){
memAddr[0x20+i] = some_array[i];
printf("%d\t",memAddr[0x20+i]);
}
char some_array2[] = {0xED, 0x84, 0x5A, 0x20};
for(i = 0; i < 0x04; i++){
memAddr[0x30+i] =(int) some_array2[i];
printf("%d\t",memAddr[0x30+i]);
}
if (HeapFree(hHeap,0,memAddr)==0)
printf("free error");
}
}
}
I'm writing a variant of the producer-consumer problem with multi threading. I'm trying to use a queue to store the "produced" items until they get "consumed" later on. My problem is that when the consumer thread runs, it only processes the most recent item added to the queue (rather than the oldest item on the queue). Further, it processes that item repeatedly (up to the number of items on the queue itself).
I think that my problem might be that I need to allocate some memory when I push an item onto the queue (not sure about this, though). But then, I need a way to refer to this memory when that item is about to be consumed.
Anyway, here is a paired down version of my program. I realize that what I am posting here is incomplete (this is an infinite loop), but I'm trying just show the part that is relevant to this issue. The functions queue_push() and and queue_pop() are well tested, so I don't think that the problem lies there. I'll post more if needed.
Can anyone see why my consumer thread only processes the newest queue item? Thank you!
sem_t mutex;
queue q;
FILE* inputFPtr[10];
char host_in[BUFFERSIZE];
char host_out[BUFFERSIZE];
void* p(void* inputFile) {
while (fscanf(inputFile, INPUTFS, host_in) > 0)
{
sem_wait(&mutex);
queue_push(&q, host_in); //this function pushes the hostname onto the back of the queue
fprintf(stdout, "Produced: %d) %s\n", i, host_in);
sem_post(&mutex);
}
fclose (inputFile);
}
void* c() {
while (TRUE)
{
sem_wait(&mutex);
sprintf(hostname_out, "%s", (char *) queue_pop(&q));
printf("%s\n", host_out);
sem_post(&mutex);
}
}
int main (int argc, char* argv[]) {
int i;
pthread_t *th_in[argc-2];
pthread_t *th_out[2];
for (i = 0; i < (argc-2); i++) {
th_in[i] = (pthread_t *) malloc(sizeof(pthread_t));
inputFPtr[i] = fopen(argv[i+1], "r");
pthread_create (th_in[i], NULL, p, inputFPtr[i]);
}
for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
th_out[i] = (pthread_t *) malloc(sizeof(pthread_t));
pthread_create (th_out[i], NULL, c, null);
}
for (i = 0; i < (argc - 2); i++) {
pthread_join(*th_in[i], 0);
free(th_in[i]);
}
for (i = 0; i < (2); i++) {
pthread_join(*th_out[i], 0);
free(th_out[i]);
}
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
You forgot to post you code. However from your description, it seems like all the queue members point to the same memory block. This is why all your pops result with the same item.
The answer to you question is YES. You need to allocate memory for each one of the items and free it after it was "consumed".
Try to post some code for more specific answers...