I'm puzzling over how multithreading can work with delegates.
The main thread has an object "A", which has created an object "B". Object "A" is the delegate for object "B". Object "B" uses a thread to run the code.
When object "B" wants to notify the delegate, it does:
[[self delegate] performSelectorOnMainThread:@selector(didFinish:) withObject:self waitUntilDone:[NSThread isMainThread]];
The "delegate" property is an assign, atomic @property. Hence it would appear that the generated getter will do [[delegate retain] autorelease], according to objective c manual.
The dealloc method for "A" is:
- (void)dealloc
{
[b setDelegate:nil];
[b release];
[super dealloc];
}
This would appear to lead to the possible situation where the threads run like this:
At step 2, it would seem that retain cannot succeed, as dealloc is already committed to - is this race condition? What happens if you call retain on an object that is in the process of being dealloced? Can it actually occur?
If it is a race condition, how do multi-threaded objects with delegates usually avoid it?
(This arose from a slightly similar but simpler question/answer I previously asked, how to handle setDelegate with multiple threads.)
Update
It is a race conditon, as the accepted answer proves.
The solution to my original problem is to avoid this case all together, I've updated How to handle setDelegate: when using multipe threads to show this.
I don't think there's a lock on dealloc versus retain/release. The following example has a dealloc method with a sleep() in it (does anyone know if sleep() breaks locks? I don't think it does, but you never know). A better example might be to repeatedly instantiate/destroy instances of A and B until you get a situation like the one mentioned here, without the sleep().
View controller, in my case, but could be anything:
-(void)septhreadRetainDel
{
NSAutoreleasePool *pool = [[NSAutoreleasePool alloc] init];
NSLog(@"[thread#2] sleep(1.f);");
sleep(1.f);
NSLog(@"[thread#2] [b retainDelegate];");
[b retainDelegate];
NSLog(@"[thread#2] sleep(2.f);");
sleep(2.f);
NSLog(@"[thread#2] [b release];");
[b release];
[pool release];
}
- (void)viewDidLoad {
NSLog(@"-(void)viewDidLoad:");
[super viewDidLoad];
NSLog(@"a = [[A alloc] init];");
a = [[A alloc] init];
NSLog(@"[a autorelease];");
[a autorelease];
NSLog(@"b = [[B alloc] init];");
b = [[B alloc] init];
NSLog(@"b.delegate = a;");
b.delegate = a;
NSLog(@"[NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(septhreadRetainDel) toTarget:self withObject:nil];");
[NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(septhreadRetainDel) toTarget:self withObject:nil];
}
A:
#import "A.h"
@implementation A
-(void)dealloc
{
NSLog(@"A: dealloc; zzz for 2s");
sleep(2.f);
NSLog(@"A: dealloc; waking up in time for my demise!");
[super dealloc];
}
-(id)retain
{
NSLog(@"A retain (%d++>%d)", self.retainCount, self.retainCount+1);
return [super retain];
}
-(void)release
{
NSLog(@"A release (%d-->%d)", self.retainCount, self.retainCount-1);
[super release];
}
@end
B (.h):
#import "A.h"
@interface B : NSObject {
A *delegate;
}
-(void) retainDelegate;
@property (nonatomic, assign) A *delegate;
@end
B (.m):
#import "B.h"
@implementation B
@synthesize delegate;
-(void)retainDelegate
{
NSLog(@"B:: -(void)retainDelegate (delegate currently has %d retain count):", delegate.retainCount);
NSLog(@"B:: [delegate retain];");
[delegate retain];
}
-(void)releaseDelegate
{
NSLog(@"B releases delegate");
[delegate release];
delegate = nil;
}
-(void)dealloc
{
NSLog(@"B dealloc; closing shop");
[self releaseDelegate];
[super dealloc];
}
-(id)retain
{
NSLog(@"B retain (%d++>%d)", self.retainCount, self.retainCount+1);
return [super retain];
}
-(void)release
{
NSLog(@"B release (%d-->%d)", self.retainCount, self.retainCount-1);
[super release];
}
@end
The program ends up crashing with EXC_BAD_ACCESS at B's releaseDelegate method. The following is the output from the NSLogs:
2010-07-10 11:49:27.044 race[832:207] -(void)viewDidLoad:
2010-07-10 11:49:27.050 race[832:207] a = [[A alloc] init];
2010-07-10 11:49:27.053 race[832:207] [a autorelease];
2010-07-10 11:49:27.056 race[832:207] b = [[B alloc] init];
2010-07-10 11:49:27.058 race[832:207] b.delegate = a;
2010-07-10 11:49:27.061 race[832:207] [NSThread detachNewThreadSelector:@selector(septhreadRetainDel) toTarget:self withObject:nil];
2010-07-10 11:49:27.064 race[832:4703] [thread#2] sleep(1.f);
2010-07-10 11:49:27.082 race[832:207] A release (1-->0)
2010-07-10 11:49:27.089 race[832:207] A: dealloc; zzz for 2s
2010-07-10 11:49:28.066 race[832:4703] [thread#2] [b retainDelegate];
2010-07-10 11:49:28.072 race[832:4703] B:: -(void)retainDelegate (delegate currently has 1 retain count):
2010-07-10 11:49:28.076 race[832:4703] B:: [delegate retain];
2010-07-10 11:49:28.079 race[832:4703] A retain (1++>2)
2010-07-10 11:49:28.081 race[832:4703] [thread#2] sleep(2.f);
2010-07-10 11:49:29.092 race[832:207] A: dealloc; waking up in time for my demise!
2010-07-10 11:49:30.084 race[832:4703] [thread#2] [b release];
2010-07-10 11:49:30.089 race[832:4703] B release (1-->0)
2010-07-10 11:49:30.094 race[832:4703] B dealloc; closing shop
2010-07-10 11:49:30.097 race[832:4703] B releases delegate
Program received signal: “EXC_BAD_ACCESS”.
Once -dealloc is called, retain counts are no longer of import. The object will be destroyed (this is probably obvious, though I wonder what would happen if you checked self's retainCount and DID NOT call [super dealloc] if the object had retains... insane idea). Now if we modify the -dealloc for A to set B's delegate to nil first, the program works but only because we're nil'ing delegate in B in releaseDelegate.
I don't know if that answers your question, really, but presuming sleep()'s are not somehow breaking thread locks, the exact same behavior should happen when dealloc is called right before a retain.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With