std::thread: How to wait (join) for any of the given threads to complete?

Question

For example, I have two threads, t1 and t2 . I want to wait for t1 or t2 to finish. Is this possible?

If I have a series of threads, say, a std::vector<std::thread> , how can I do it?

Answer 1

There's always wait & notify using std::condition_variable , eg :

std::mutex m;
std::condition_variable cond;
std::atomic<std::thread::id> val;

auto task = [&] {
    std::this_thread::sleep_for(1s); // Some work

    val = std::this_thread::get_id();
    cond.notify_all();
};

std::thread{task}.detach();
std::thread{task}.detach();
std::thread{task}.detach();

std::unique_lock<std::mutex> lock{m};
cond.wait(lock, [&] { return val != std::thread::id{}; });

std::cout << "Thread " << val << " finished first" << std::endl;

_{Note: val doesn't necessarily represent the thread that finished first as all threads finish at about the same time and an overwrite migh occur, but it is only for the purposes of this example.}

Answer 2

No, there is no wait for multiple objects equivalent in C++11's threading library.

If you want to wait on the first of a set of operations, consider having them feed a thread-safe producer-consumer queue.

Here is a post I made containing a threaded_queue<T> . Have the work product of your threads be delivered to such a queue. Have the consumer read off of the other end.

Now someone can wait on (the work product) of multiple threads at once. Or one thread. Or a GPU shader. Or work product being delivered over a RESTful web interface. You don't care.

The threads themselves should be managed by something like a thread pool or other higher level abstraction on top of std::thread , as std::thread makes a poor client-facing threading abstraction.

template<class T>
struct threaded_queue {
  using lock = std::unique_lock<std::mutex>;
  void push_back( T t ) {
    {
      lock l(m);
      data.push_back(std::move(t));
    }
    cv.notify_one();
  }
  boost::optional<T> pop_front() {
    lock l(m);
    cv.wait(l, [this]{ return abort || !data.empty(); } );
    if (abort) return {};
    auto r = std::move(data.back());
    data.pop_back();
    return r;
  }
  void terminate() {
    {
      lock l(m);
      abort = true;
      data.clear();
    }
    cv.notify_all();
  }
  ~threaded_queue()
  {
    terminate();
  }
private:
  std::mutex m;
  std::deque<T> data;
  std::condition_variable cv;
  bool abort = false;
};

I'd use std::optional instead of boost::optional in C++17. It can also be replaced with a unique_ptr , or a number of other constructs.

Answer 3

It's easy to do with a polling wait:

#include<iostream>
#include<thread>
#include<random>
#include<chrono>
#include<atomic>

void thread_task(std::atomic<bool> & boolean) {
    std::default_random_engine engine{std::random_device{}()};
    std::uniform_int_distribution<int64_t> dist{1000, 3000};
    int64_t wait_time = dist(engine);
    std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds{wait_time});
    std::string line = "Thread slept for " + std::to_string(wait_time) + "ms.\n";
    std::cout << line;
    boolean.store(true);
}

int main() {
    std::vector<std::thread> threads;
    std::atomic<bool> boolean{false};
    for(int i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
        threads.emplace_back([&]{thread_task(boolean);});
    }
    std::string line = "We reacted after a single thread finished!\n";
    while(!boolean) std::this_thread::yield();
    std::cout << line;
    for(std::thread & thread : threads) {
        thread.join();
    }
    return 0;
}

Example output I got on Ideone.com:

Thread slept for 1194ms.
We reacted after a single thread finished!
Thread slept for 1967ms.
Thread slept for 2390ms.
Thread slept for 2984ms.

This probably isn't the best code possible, because polling loops are not necessarily best practice, but it should work as a start.

Answer 4

There is no standard way of waiting on multiple threads.

You need to resort to operating system specific functions like WaitForMultipleObjects on Windows. A Windows only example:

HANDLE handles[] = { t1.native_handle(), t2.native_handle(),  };
auto res = WaitForMultipleObjects(2 , handles, FALSE, INFINITE);

Funnily , when std::when_any will be standardized, one can do a standard but wasteful solution:

std::vector<std::thread> waitingThreads;
std::vector<std::future<void>> futures;
for (auto& thread: threads){
    std::promise<void> promise;
    futures.emplace_back(promise.get_future());
    waitingThreads.emplace_back([&thread, promise = std::move(promise)]{
         thread.join();
         promise.set_value();
    });
}

auto oneFinished = std::when_any(futures.begin(), futures.end());

very wastefull, still not available , but standard.