Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8220123
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 7, 20262026-06-07T13:24:46+00:00 2026-06-07T13:24:46+00:00

I have a std::future in one thread which is waiting on a std::promise being

  • 0

I have a std::future in one thread which is waiting on a std::promise being set in another thread.

EDIT: Updated the question with an exemplar app which will block forever:

UPDATE: If I use a pthread_barrier instead, the below code does not block.

I have created a test-app which illustrates this:

Very basically class foo creates a thread which sets a promise in its run function, and waits in the constructor for that promise to be set. Once set, it increments an atomic count

I then create a bunch of these foo objects, tear them down, and then check my count.

#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <atomic>
#include <future>
#include <list>
#include <unistd.h>

struct foo
{
    foo(std::atomic<int>& count)
        : _stop(false)
    {
        std::promise<void> p;
        std::future <void> f = p.get_future();

        _thread = std::move(std::thread(std::bind(&foo::run, this, std::ref(p))));

        // block caller until my thread has started 
        f.wait();

        ++count; // my thread has started, increment the count
    }
    void run(std::promise<void>& p)
    {
        p.set_value(); // thread has started, wake up the future

        while (!_stop)
            sleep(1);
    }
    std::thread _thread;
    bool _stop;
};

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
    if (argc != 2)
    {
        std::cerr << "usage: " << argv[0] << " num_threads" << std::endl;
        return 1;
    }
    int num_threads = atoi(argv[1]);
    std::list<foo*> threads;
    std::atomic<int> count(0); // count will be inc'd once per thread

    std::cout << "creating threads" << std::endl;
    for (int i = 0; i < num_threads; ++i)
        threads.push_back(new foo(count));

    std::cout << "stopping threads" << std::endl;
    for (auto f : threads)
        f->_stop = true;

    std::cout << "joining threads" << std::endl;
    for (auto f : threads)
    {
        if (f->_thread.joinable())
            f->_thread.join();
    }

    std::cout << "count=" << count << (num_threads == count ? " pass" : " fail!") << std::endl;
    return (num_threads == count);
}

If I run this in a loop with 1000 threads, it only has to execute it a few times until a race occurs and one of the futures is never woken up, and therefore the app gets stuck forever.

# this loop never completes
$ for i in {1..1000}; do ./a.out 1000; done

If I now SIGABRT the app, the resulting stack trace shows it’s stuck on the future::wait
The stack trace is below:

// main thread
    pthread_cond_wait@@GLIBC_2.3.2 () from /lib64/libpthread.so.0
    __gthread_cond_wait (__mutex=<optimized out>, __cond=<optimized out>) at libstdc++-v3/include/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bits/gthr-default.h:846
    std::condition_variable::wait (this=<optimized out>, __lock=...) at ../../../../libstdc++-v3/src/condition_variable.cc:56
    std::condition_variable::wait<std::__future_base::_State_base::wait()::{lambda()#1}>(std::unique_lock<std::mutex>&, std::__future_base::_State_base::wait()::{lambda()#1}) (this=0x93a050, __lock=..., __p=...) at include/c++/4.7.0/condition_variable:93
    std::__future_base::_State_base::wait (this=0x93a018) at include/c++/4.7.0/future:331
    std::__basic_future<void>::wait (this=0x7fff32587870) at include/c++/4.7.0/future:576
    foo::foo (this=0x938320, count=...) at main.cpp:18
    main (argc=2, argv=0x7fff32587aa8) at main.cpp:52


// foo thread
    pthread_once () from /lib64/libpthread.so.0
    __gthread_once (__once=0x93a084, __func=0x4378a0 <__once_proxy@plt>) at gthr-default.h:718
    std::call_once<void (std::__future_base::_State_base::*)(std::function<std::unique_ptr<std::__future_base::_Result_base, std::__future_base::_Result_base::_Deleter> ()>&, bool&), std::__future_base::_State_base* const, std::reference_wrapper<std::function<std::unique_ptr<std::__future_base::_Result_base, std::__future_base::_Result_base::_Deleter> ()> >, std::reference_wrapper<bool> >(std::once_flag&, void (std::__future_base::_State_base::*&&)(std::function<std::unique_ptr<std::__future_base::_Result_base, ...) at include/c++/4.7.0/mutex:819
    std::promise<void>::set_value (this=0x7fff32587880) at include/c++/4.7.0/future:1206
    foo::run (this=0x938320, p=...) at main.cpp:26

I’m pretty sure that I’m not doing anything wrong in my code, right?

Is this an issue with the pthread implementation, or the std::future/std::promise implementation?

My library versions are:

libstdc++.so.6
libc.so.6 (GNU C Library stable release version 2.11.1 (20100118))
libpthread.so.0 (Native POSIX Threads Library by Ulrich Drepper et al Copyright (C) 2006)
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-07T13:24:47+00:00Added an answer on June 7, 2026 at 1:24 pm

    Indeed, there is a race condition between the destructor of the local promise object (at the end of the constructor and the call to set_value() from the thread. That is, set_value() wakes the main tread, that just next destroys the promise object, but the set_value() function has not yet finished, and dead-locks.

    Reading the C++11 standard, I’m not sure if your use is allowed:

    void promise<void>::set_value();

    Effects: atomically stores the value r in the shared state and makes that state ready.

    But somewhere else:

    The set_value, set_exception, set_value_at_thread_exit, and set_exception_at_thread_exit member functions behave as though they acquire a single mutex associated with the promise object while updating the promise object.

    Are set_value() calls supposed to be atomic with regards to other functions, such as the destructor?

    IMHO, I’d say no. The effects would be comparable to destroying a mutex while other thread is still locking it. The result is undefined.

    The solution would be to make p outlive the thread. Two solutions that I can think of:

    1. Make p a member of the class, just as Michael Burr suggested in the other answer.

    2. Move the promise into the thread.

    In the constructor:

    std::promise<void> p;
    std::future <void> f = p.get_future();
    _thread = std::thread(&foo::run, this, std::move(p));
    

    BTW, you don’t need the call to bind, (the thread constructor is already overloaded), or call to std::move to move the thread (the right value is already an r-value). The call to std::move into the promise is mandatory, though.

    And the thread function does not receive a reference, but the moved promise:

    void run(std::promise<void> p)
    {
        p.set_value();
    }
    

    I think that this is precisely why C++11 defines two different classes: promise and future: you move the promise into the thread, but you keep the future to recover the result.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have some question about behavior of std::async function with std::launch::async policy & std::future
I have a std::map<std::string, HANDLE> SampleMap which stores HANDLE objects as value. After the
I have a std::atomic which contains a pointer to a member function. Everything compiles
I've been thinking about std::async and how one should use it in future compiler
I have a timer thread that executes five seconds in the future and a
I have some C++ methods that have std::set<std::string> as argument or return value. I
I have this map which compiles fine in MSVC10 : std::map<std::string, std::ofstream> m_logFiles; But
EDIT: Dear Future Readers, the std::string had nothing to do with the problem. It
Does VC++ 2010 Express not have std::thread? I am using the multi-threaded DLL. The
let's say I have std::map< std::string, std::string > m_someMap as a private member variable

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.