why delay makes co routine cancelable - kotlin

fun main() = runBlocking {
var i = 1
var job = launch (Dispatchers.Default){
println("Thread name = ${Thread.currentThread().name}")
while (i < 10) { // replace i < 10 to isActive to make coroutine cancellable
delay(500L)
// runBlocking { delay(500L) }
println("$isActive ${i++}")
}
}
println("Thread name = ${Thread.currentThread().name}")
delay(2000L) // delay a bit
println("main: I'm tired of waiting!")
job.cancelAndJoin() // cancels the job and waits for its completion
println("main: Now I can quit.")
}
output
Thread name = main
Thread name = DefaultDispatcher-worker-1
true 1
true 2
true 3
main: I'm tired of waiting!
main: Now I can quit.
if i use runBlocking { delay(500L) } then the above co-routine is not cancelable. So, it will print all values upto 9.
but when i use delay(500L) automatically the co-routine can be cancelled. Why ?

delay doesn't actually do anything on its own, it just schedules the coroutine to be resumed at a later point in time. Continuations can, of course, be cancelled at any time.
runBlocking, on the other hand, actually blocks a thread (which is why the compiler will complain about a blocking operation within a coroutine, and why you should never use runBlocking outside of e.g. unit tests).
Note: Since main can now be a suspending function, there's generally no need to use it whatsoever in your core application code.
This function should not be used from a coroutine
runBlocking
Coroutines, like threads, are not truly interruptible; they have to rely on cooperative cancellation (see also why stopping threads is bad). This means that cancellation doesn't actually do anything either; when you cancel a context, it simply notifies all of its child contexts to cancel themselves, but any code that is still running will continue to run until a cancellation check is reached.
It is important to realize that runBlocking is not a suspend function. It cannot be paused, resumed, or cancelled. The parent context is not passed to it by default (it receives an EmptyCoroutineContext), so the coroutine used for the execution of runBlocking won't react to anything that happens upstream.
When you write
while (i < 10) {
runBlocking { delay(500L) }
println("$isActive ${i++}")
}
there are no operations here that are cancellable. Therefore, the code never checks whether its context has been cancelled, so it will continue until it finishes.
delay, however, is cancellable; as soon as its parent context is cancelled, it resumes immediately and throws an exception (i.e., it stops.)
Take a look at the generated code:
#Nullable
public final Object invokeSuspend(#NotNull Object $result) {
switch (this.label) {
case 0:
while (i.element < 10) {
BuildersKt.runBlocking$default( ... );
...
System.out.println(var3);
}
return Unit.INSTANCE;
default:
throw new IllegalStateException( ... );
}
}
Contrast this
while (i.element < 10) {
BuildersKt.runBlocking$default( ... );
...
System.out.println(var3);
}
with
do {
...
System.out.println(var3);
if (i.element >= 10) {
return Unit.INSTANCE;
}
...
} while (DelayKt.delay(500L, this) != var5);
Variable declarations and arguments omitted (...) for brevity.
runBlocking will terminate early if the current thread is interrupted, but again this is the exact same cooperative mechanism, except that it operates at the level of the thread rather than on a coroutine.

The official documentation states:
All the suspending functions in kotlinx.coroutines are cancellable.
and delay is one of them.
You can check that here.
I think the real question should be: Why a nested runBlocking is not cancellable? at least an attempt to create a new coroutine with runBlocking when isActive is false should fail, altough making a coroutine cooperative is your responsability. Besides runBlocking shouldn't be used in the first place.
Turns out if you pass this.coroutineContext as CoroutineContext to runBlocking, it gets cancelled:
fun main() = runBlocking {
var i = 1
var job = launch (Dispatchers.Default){
println("Thread name = ${Thread.currentThread().name}")
while (i < 10) { // replace i < 10 to isActive to make coroutine cancellable
runBlocking(this.coroutineContext) { delay(500L) }
println("$isActive ${i++}")
}
}
println("Thread name = ${Thread.currentThread().name}")
delay(2000L) // delay a bit
println("main: I'm tired of waiting!")
job.cancelAndJoin() // cancels the job and waits for its completion
println("main: Now I can quit.")
}

I modified your code a little
try {
while (i < 10) { // replace i < 10 to isActive to make coroutine cancellable
delay(500L)
println("$isActive ${i++}")
}
} catch (e : Exception){
println("Exception $e")
if (e is CancellationException) throw e
}
the output
Thread name = main
Thread name = DefaultDispatcher-worker-1
true 1
true 2
true 3
main: I'm tired of waiting!
Exception kotlinx.coroutines.JobCancellationException: StandaloneCoroutine was cancelled; job=StandaloneCoroutine{Cancelling}#40bcb892
main: Now I can quit.
can you see the exception StandaloneCoroutine was cancelled its because,
If the Job of the current coroutine is cancelled or completed while this suspending function is waiting i.e delay(500L), this function immediately resumes with CancellationException.
So, the point is if you add a suspending function inside your launch it can be cancellable.
you can try that with user defined suspend fun also

Related

Cancelling a non-cancelable coroutine in Kotlin

Consider this non cancellable coroutine that works as its name implies.
fun main(args: Array<String>) = runBlocking {
val nonCancellableJob = launch(Dispatchers.Default) {
for (i in 1..1000) {
if (i % 100 == 0) {
println("Non cancellable iteration $i")
}
}
}
println("Cancelling non cancellable job...")
nonCancellableJob.cancelAndJoin()
}
Now, if I get rid of the explicit dispatcher Dispatchers.Default and use the inherited one i.e. launch {...} the coroutine gets cancelled immediately without printing anything. It seems that a non cancelling coroutine is being cancelled! Is it a bug or what?
When you don't use Dispatchers.Default then launch is inheriting dispatcher of runBlocking which seems to defer execution until needed.
Even though your coroutine cannot be canceled while running (since it doesn't have any activity check nor does it have suspension points) it's still possible to cancel it before it starts executing.
You can modify CoroutineStart of your launch builder to alter this behavior:
To execute it immediately when declared:
val nonCancellableJob = launch(start = CoroutineStart.UNDISPATCHED) { ... }
To prevent cancellation before it starts:
val nonCancellableJob = launch(start = CoroutineStart.ATOMIC) { ... }
The inherited dispatcher runs on the same thread where you launched it. This works such that runBlocking establishes a top-level loop that goes over the coroutines running inside it, resuming them one by one. It can't resume the next coroutine before the current one has suspended itself.
In your code, the top-level runBlocking coroutine created one child coroutine and then, without suspending, went on to do some more things: print a message and cancel the coroutine it just created. At this point the coroutine is still hanging in the limbo of having been created but not run. Your cancelAndJoin call cancels it in this state, before it has got its chance to hog the runBlocking dispatcher forever. It immediately changes the state to "completed through cancellation" and the whole program ends.

How delay function is working in Kotlin without blocking the current thread?

Past few days I am learning coroutines, most of thee concepts are clear but I don't understand the implementation of the delay function.
How delay function is resuming the coroutine after the delayed time? For a simple program, there is only one main thread, and to resume the coroutine after the delayed time I assume there should be another timer thread that handles all the delayed invocations and invokes them later. Is it true? Can someone explain the implementation detail of the delay function?
TL; DR;
When using runBlocking, delay is internally wrapped and runs on same thread and when using any other dispatcher it suspends and is resumed by resuming the continuation by event-loop thread. Check the long answer below to understand the internals.
Long answer:
#Francesc answer is pointing correctly but is somewhat abstract, and still does not explains how actually delay works internally.
So, as he pointed to the delay function:
public suspend fun delay(timeMillis: Long) {
if (timeMillis <= 0) return // don't delay
return suspendCancellableCoroutine sc# { cont: CancellableContinuation<Unit> ->
cont.context.delay.scheduleResumeAfterDelay(timeMillis, cont)
}
}
What it does is "Obtains the current continuation instance inside suspend functions and suspends the currently running coroutine after running the block inside the lambda"
So this line cont.context.delay.scheduleResumeAfterDelay(timeMillis, cont) is going to be executed and then the current coroutine gets suspended i.e. frees the current thread it was stick on.
cont.context.delay points to
internal val CoroutineContext.delay: Delay get() = get(ContinuationInterceptor) as? Delay ?: DefaultDelay
that says if ContinuationInterceptor is implementation of Delay then return that otherwise use DefaultDelay which is internal actual val DefaultDelay: Delay = DefaultExecutor a DefaultExecutor which is internal actual object DefaultExecutor : EventLoopImplBase(), Runnable {...} an implementation of EventLoop and has a thread of its own to run on.
Note: ContinuationInterceptor is an implementation of Delay when coroutine is in the runBlocking block in order to make sure the delay run on same thread otherwise it is not. Check this snippet to see the results.
Now I couldn't find implemenation of Delay created by runBlocking since internal expect fun createEventLoop(): EventLoop is an expect function which is implemented from outside, not by the source. But the DefaultDelay is implemented as follows
public override fun scheduleResumeAfterDelay(timeMillis: Long, continuation: CancellableContinuation<Unit>) {
val timeNanos = delayToNanos(timeMillis)
if (timeNanos < MAX_DELAY_NS) {
val now = nanoTime()
DelayedResumeTask(now + timeNanos, continuation).also { task ->
continuation.disposeOnCancellation(task)
schedule(now, task)
}
}
}
This is how scheduleResumeAfterDelay is implemented it creates a DelayedResumeTask with the continuation passed by delay, and then calls schedule(now, task) which calls scheduleImpl(now, delayedTask) which finally calls delayedTask.scheduleTask(now, delayedQueue, this) passing the delayedQueue in the object
#Synchronized
fun scheduleTask(now: Long, delayed: DelayedTaskQueue, eventLoop: EventLoopImplBase): Int {
if (_heap === kotlinx.coroutines.DISPOSED_TASK) return SCHEDULE_DISPOSED // don't add -- was already disposed
delayed.addLastIf(this) { firstTask ->
if (eventLoop.isCompleted) return SCHEDULE_COMPLETED // non-local return from scheduleTask
/**
* We are about to add new task and we have to make sure that [DelayedTaskQueue]
* invariant is maintained. The code in this lambda is additionally executed under
* the lock of [DelayedTaskQueue] and working with [DelayedTaskQueue.timeNow] here is thread-safe.
*/
if (firstTask == null) {
/**
* When adding the first delayed task we simply update queue's [DelayedTaskQueue.timeNow] to
* the current now time even if that means "going backwards in time". This makes the structure
* self-correcting in spite of wild jumps in `nanoTime()` measurements once all delayed tasks
* are removed from the delayed queue for execution.
*/
delayed.timeNow = now
} else {
/**
* Carefully update [DelayedTaskQueue.timeNow] so that it does not sweep past first's tasks time
* and only goes forward in time. We cannot let it go backwards in time or invariant can be
* violated for tasks that were already scheduled.
*/
val firstTime = firstTask.nanoTime
// compute min(now, firstTime) using a wrap-safe check
val minTime = if (firstTime - now >= 0) now else firstTime
// update timeNow only when going forward in time
if (minTime - delayed.timeNow > 0) delayed.timeNow = minTime
}
/**
* Here [DelayedTaskQueue.timeNow] was already modified and we have to double-check that newly added
* task does not violate [DelayedTaskQueue] invariant because of that. Note also that this scheduleTask
* function can be called to reschedule from one queue to another and this might be another reason
* where new task's time might now violate invariant.
* We correct invariant violation (if any) by simply changing this task's time to now.
*/
if (nanoTime - delayed.timeNow < 0) nanoTime = delayed.timeNow
true
}
return SCHEDULE_OK
}
It finally sets the task into the DelayedTaskQueue with the current time.
// Inside DefaultExecutor
override fun run() {
ThreadLocalEventLoop.setEventLoop(this)
registerTimeLoopThread()
try {
var shutdownNanos = Long.MAX_VALUE
if (!DefaultExecutor.notifyStartup()) return
while (true) {
Thread.interrupted() // just reset interruption flag
var parkNanos = DefaultExecutor.processNextEvent() /* Notice here, it calls the processNextEvent */
if (parkNanos == Long.MAX_VALUE) {
// nothing to do, initialize shutdown timeout
if (shutdownNanos == Long.MAX_VALUE) {
val now = nanoTime()
if (shutdownNanos == Long.MAX_VALUE) shutdownNanos = now + DefaultExecutor.KEEP_ALIVE_NANOS
val tillShutdown = shutdownNanos - now
if (tillShutdown <= 0) return // shut thread down
parkNanos = parkNanos.coerceAtMost(tillShutdown)
} else
parkNanos = parkNanos.coerceAtMost(DefaultExecutor.KEEP_ALIVE_NANOS) // limit wait time anyway
}
if (parkNanos > 0) {
// check if shutdown was requested and bail out in this case
if (DefaultExecutor.isShutdownRequested) return
parkNanos(this, parkNanos)
}
}
} finally {
DefaultExecutor._thread = null // this thread is dead
DefaultExecutor.acknowledgeShutdownIfNeeded()
unregisterTimeLoopThread()
// recheck if queues are empty after _thread reference was set to null (!!!)
if (!DefaultExecutor.isEmpty) DefaultExecutor.thread // recreate thread if it is needed
}
}
// Called by run inside the run of DefaultExecutor
override fun processNextEvent(): Long {
// unconfined events take priority
if (processUnconfinedEvent()) return nextTime
// queue all delayed tasks that are due to be executed
val delayed = _delayed.value
if (delayed != null && !delayed.isEmpty) {
val now = nanoTime()
while (true) {
// make sure that moving from delayed to queue removes from delayed only after it is added to queue
// to make sure that 'isEmpty' and `nextTime` that check both of them
// do not transiently report that both delayed and queue are empty during move
delayed.removeFirstIf {
if (it.timeToExecute(now)) {
enqueueImpl(it)
} else
false
} ?: break // quit loop when nothing more to remove or enqueueImpl returns false on "isComplete"
}
}
// then process one event from queue
dequeue()?.run()
return nextTime
}
And then the event loop (run function) of internal actual object DefaultExecutor : EventLoopImplBase(), Runnable {...} finally handles the tasks by dequeuing the tasks and resuming the actual Continuation which was suspended the function by calling delay if the delay time has reached.
All suspending functions work the same way, when compiled it gets converted into a state machine with callbacks.
When you call delay what happens is that a message is posted on a queue with a certain delay, similar to Handler().postDelayed(delay) and, when the delay has lapsed, it calls back to the suspension point and resumes execution.
You can check the source code for the delay function to see how it works:
public suspend fun delay(timeMillis: Long) {
if (timeMillis <= 0) return // don't delay
return suspendCancellableCoroutine sc# { cont: CancellableContinuation<Unit> ->
cont.context.delay.scheduleResumeAfterDelay(timeMillis, cont)
}
}
So if the delay is positive, it schedules the callback in the delay time.

What does a Coroutine Join do?

So for example I have the following code:
scope.launch {
val job = launch {
doSomethingHere()
}
job.join()
callOnlyWhenJobAboveIsDone()
}
Job.join() is state as such in the documentation:
Suspends coroutine until this job is complete. This invocation resumes normally (without exception) when the job is complete for any reason and the Job of the invoking coroutine is still active. This function also starts the corresponding coroutine if the Job was still in new state.
If I understand it correctly, since join() suspends the coroutine until its completed, then my code above will do exactly what it wants. That is, the method callOnlyWhenJobAboveIsDone() will only be called when doSomethingHere() is finished. Is that correct?
Can anyone explain further the use case for job.join()? Thanks in advance.
Explaining further my usecase:
val storeJobs = ArrayList<Job>()
fun callThisFunctionMultipleTimes() {
scope.launch {
val job = launch {
doSomethingHere()
}
storeJobs.add(job)
job.join()
callOnlyWhenJobAboveIsDone()
}
}
fun callOnlyWhenJobAboveIsDone() {
// Check if there is still an active job
// by iterating through the storedJobs
// and checking if any is active
// if no job is active do some other things
}
is this a valid usecase for job.join()?
That is, the method callOnlyWhenJobAboveIsDone() will only be called when doSomethingHere() is finished. Is that correct?
Yes.
Can anyone explain further the use case for job.join()?
In your case there is actually no need for another job, you could just write:
scope.launch {
doSomethingHere()
callOnlyWhenJobAboveIsDone()
}
That will do the exact same thing, so it is not really a usecase for a Job. Now there are other cases when .join() is really useful.
You want to run (launch) multiple asynchronous actions in parallel, and wait for all of them to finish:
someData
.map { Some.asyncAction(it) } // start in parallel
.forEach { it.join() } // wait for all of them
You have to keep track of an asynchronous state, for example an update:
var update = Job()
fun doUpdate() {
update.cancel() // don't update twice at the same time
update = launch {
someAsyncCode()
}
}
Now to make sure that the last update was done, for example if you want to use some updated data, you can just:
update.join()
anywhere, you can also
update.cancel()
if you want to.
Whats really useful about launch {} is that it not only returns a Job, but also attaches the Job to the CoroutineScope. Through that you can keep track of every async action happening inside your application. For example in your UI you could make every Element extend the CoroutineScope, then you can just cancel the scope if the Element leaves the rendered area, and all updates / animations in it will get stopped.
Kotlin's Job.join() is the non-blocking equivalent of Java's Thread.join().
So your assumption is correct: the point of job.join() is to wait for the completion of the receiver job before executing the rest of the current coroutine.
However, instead of blocking the thread that calls join() (like Java's Thread.join() would do) it simply suspends the coroutine calling join(), leaving the current thread free to do whatever it pleases (like executing another coroutine) in the meantime.
val queryProduct = GlobalScope.async {
}
val verification = GlobalScope.async {
}
GlobalScope.launch {
verification.join()
queryProduct.join()
}
This is how I use join(). When two asyncs are completed, another launch starts.

When to use coroutineScope vs supervisorScope?

Can someone explain what exactly is the difference between these two?
When do you use one over the other?
Thanks in advance.
The best way to explain the difference is to explain the mechanism of coroutineScope. Consider this code:
suspend fun main() = println(compute())
suspend fun compute(): String = coroutineScope {
val color = async { delay(60_000); "purple" }
val height = async<Double> { delay(100); throw HttpException() }
"A %s box %.1f inches tall".format(color.await(), height.await())
}
compute() "fetches" two things from the network (imagine the delays are actually network operations) and combines them into a string description. In this case the first fetch is taking a long time, but succeeds in the end; the second one fails almost right away, after 100 milliseconds.
What behavior would you like for the above code?
Would you like to color.await() for a minute, only to realize that the other network call has long failed?
Or perhaps you'd like the compute() function to realize after 100 ms that one of its network calls has failed and immediately fail itself?
With supervisorScope you're getting 1., with coroutineScope you're getting 2.
The behavior of 2. means that, even though async doesn't itself throw the exception (it just completes the Deferred you got from it), the failure immediately cancels its coroutine, which cancels the parent, which then cancels all the other children.
This behavior can be weird when you're unaware of it. If you go and catch the exception from await(), you'll think you've recovered from it, but you haven't. The entire coroutine scope is still being cancelled. In some cases there's a legitimate reason you don't want it: that's when you'll use supervisorScope.
A Few More Points
Let's make two changes to our program: use supervisorScope as discussed, but also swap the order of awaiting on child coroutines:
suspend fun main() = println(compute())
suspend fun compute(): String = supervisorScope {
val color = async { delay(60_000); "purple" }
val height = async<Double> { delay(100); throw HttpException() }
"The box is %.1f inches tall and it's %s".format(height.await(), color.await())
}
Now we first await on the short-lived, failing height coroutine. When run, this program produces an exception after 100 ms and doesn't seem to await on color at all, even though we are using supervisorScope. This seems to contradict the contract of supervisorScope.
What is actually happening is that height.await() throws the exception as well, an event distinct from the underlying coroutine throwing it.
Since we aren't handling the exception, it escapes from the top-level block of supervisorScope and makes it complete abruptly. This condition — distinct from a child coroutine completing abruptly — makes supervisorScope cancel all its child coroutines, but it still awaits on all of them to complete.
So let's add exception handling around the awaits:
suspend fun compute(): String = supervisorScope {
val color = async { delay(60_000); "purple" }
val height = async<Double> { delay(100); throw Exception() }
try {
"The box is %.1f inches tall and it's %s".format(height.await(), color.await())
} catch (e: Exception) {
"there was an error"
}
}
Now the program does nothing for 60 seconds, awaiting the completion of color, just as described.
Or, in another variation, let's remove exception handling around awaits, but make the color coroutine handle the CancellationException, wait for 2 seconds, and then complete:
suspend fun compute(): String = coroutineScope {
val color = async {
try {
delay(60_000); "purple"
} catch (e: CancellationException) {
withContext(NonCancellable) { delay(2_000) }
println("color got cancelled")
"got error"
}
}
val height = async<Double> { delay(100); throw Exception() }
"The box is %.1f inches tall and it's %s".format(height.await(), color.await())
}
This does nothing for 2.1 seconds, then prints "color got cancelled", and then completes with a top-level exception — proving that the child coroutines are indeed awaited on even when the top-level block crashes.
I think Roman Elizarov explain it quite in details, but to make it short:
Coroutines create the following kind of hierarchy:
Parent Coroutine
Child coroutine 1
Child coroutine 2
...
Child coroutine N
Assume that "Coroutine i" fails. What do you want to happen with its parent?
If you want for its parent to also fail, use coroutineScope. That's what structured concurrency is all about.
But if you don't want it to fail, for example child was some kind of background task which can be started again, then use supervisorScope.
coroutineScope -> The scope and all its children fail whenever any of the children fails
supervisorScope -> The scope and all its children do NOT fail whenever any of the children fails
As #N1hk mentioned, if you use async the order of calling await matters. And if you're depending on a result from both asynch..await blocks, then it makes sense to cancel as early as possible so that's not an ideal example for supervisorScope
The difference is more apparent when using launch and join:
fun main() = runBlocking {
supervisorScope {
val task1 = launch {
println("Task 1 started")
delay(100)
if (true) throw Exception("Oops!")
println("Task 1 completed!")
}
val task2 = launch {
println("Task 2 started")
delay(1000)
println("Task 2 completed!")
}
listOf(task1, task2).joinAll()
println("Finished waiting for both tasks")
}
print("Done!")
}
With supervisorScope, the output would be:
Task 1 started
Task 2 started
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.Exception: Oops!
...
Task 2 completed!
Finished waiting for both tasks
Done!
With coroutineScope the output would be just:
Task 1 started
Task 2 started
CoroutineScope -> Cancel whenever any of its children fail.
SupervisorScope -> If we want to continue with the other tasks even when one fails, we go with the supervisorScope. A supervisorScope won’t cancel other children when one of them fails.
Here is a useful link for understanding of coroutine in details:
https://blog.mindorks.com/mastering-kotlin-coroutines-in-android-step-by-step-guide

What does the suspend function mean in a Kotlin Coroutine?

I'm reading Kotlin Coroutine and know that it is based on suspend function. But what does suspend mean?
Coroutine or function gets suspended?
From https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/coroutines.html
Basically, coroutines are computations that can be suspended without blocking a thread
I heard people often say "suspend function". But I think it is the coroutine who gets suspended because it is waiting for the function to finished? "suspend" usually means "cease operation", in this case the coroutine is idle.
Should we say the coroutine is suspended ?
Which coroutine gets suspended?
From https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/coroutines.html
To continue the analogy, await() can be a suspending function (hence also callable from within an async {} block) that suspends a coroutine until some computation is done and returns its result:
async { // Here I call it the outer async coroutine
...
// Here I call computation the inner coroutine
val result = computation.await()
...
}
It says "that suspends a coroutine until some computation is done", but coroutine is like a lightweight thread. So if the coroutine is suspended, how can the computation is done ?
We see await is called on computation, so it might be async that returns Deferred, which means it can start another coroutine
fun computation(): Deferred<Boolean> {
return async {
true
}
}
The quote say that suspends a coroutine. Does it mean suspend the outer async coroutine, or suspend the inner computation coroutine?
Does suspend mean that while outer async coroutine is waiting (await) for the inner computation coroutine to finish, it (the outer async coroutine) idles (hence the name suspend) and returns thread to the thread pool, and when the child computation coroutine finishes, it (the outer async coroutine) wakes up, takes another thread from the pool and continues?
The reason I mention the thread is because of https://kotlinlang.org/docs/tutorials/coroutines-basic-jvm.html
The thread is returned to the pool while the coroutine is waiting, and when the waiting is done, the coroutine resumes on a free thread in the pool
Suspending functions are at the center of everything coroutines.
A suspending function is simply a function that can be paused and resumed at a later time. They can execute a long running operation and wait for it to complete without blocking.
The syntax of a suspending function is similar to that of a regular function except for the addition of the suspend keyword. It can take a parameter and have a return type. However, suspending functions can only be invoked by another suspending function or within a coroutine.
suspend fun backgroundTask(param: Int): Int {
// long running operation
}
Under the hood, suspend functions are converted by the compiler to another function without the suspend keyword, that takes an addition parameter of type Continuation<T>. The function above for example, will be converted by the compiler to this:
fun backgroundTask(param: Int, callback: Continuation<Int>): Int {
// long running operation
}
Continuation<T> is an interface that contains two functions that are invoked to resume the coroutine with a return value or with an exception if an error had occurred while the function was suspended.
interface Continuation<in T> {
val context: CoroutineContext
fun resume(value: T)
fun resumeWithException(exception: Throwable)
}
But what does suspend mean?
Functions marked with the suspend keyword are transformed at compile time to be made asynchronous under the hood (in bytecode), even though they appear synchronous in the source code.
The best source to understand this transformation IMO is the talk "Deep Dive into Coroutines" by Roman Elizarov.
For example, the following function:
class MyClass {
suspend fun myFunction(arg: Int): String {
delay(100)
return "bob"
}
}
Is turned into the following (expressed in Java instead of actual JVM bytecode for simplicity):
public final class MyClass {
public final Object myFunction(int arg, #NotNull Continuation<? super String> $completion) {
// ...
}
}
This includes the following changes to the function:
The return type is changed to Java's Object (the equivalent of Kotlin's Any? - a type containing all values), to allow returning a special COROUTINE_SUSPENDED token to represent when the coroutine is actually suspended
It gets an additional Continuation<X> argument (where X is the former return type of the function that was declared in the code - in the example it's String). This continuation acts like a callback when resuming the suspend function.
Its body is turned into a state machine (instead of literally using callbacks, for efficiency). This is done by breaking down the body of the function into parts around so called suspension points, and turning those parts into the branches of a big switch. The state about the local variables and where we are in the switch is stored inside the Continuation object.
This is a very quick way to describe it, but you can see it happen with more details and with examples in the talk. This whole transformation is basically how the "suspend/resume" mechanism is implemented under the hood.
Coroutine or function gets suspended?
At a high level, we say that calling a suspending function suspends the coroutine, meaning the current thread can start executing another coroutine. So, the coroutine is said to be suspended rather than the function.
In fact, call sites of suspending functions are called "suspension points" for this reason.
Which coroutine gets suspended?
Let's look at your code and break down what happens (the numbering follows the execution timeline):
// 1. this call starts a new coroutine (let's call it C1).
// If there were code after it, it would be executed concurrently with
// the body of this async
async {
...
// 2. this is a regular function call, so we go to computation()'s body
val deferred = computation()
// 4. because await() is suspendING, it suspends coroutine C1.
// This means that if we had a single thread in our dispatcher,
// it would now be free to go execute C2
// 7. once C2 completes, C1 is resumed with the result `true` of C2's async
val result = deferred.await()
...
// 8. C1 can now keep going in the current thread until it gets
// suspended again (or not)
}
fun computation(): Deferred<Boolean> {
// 3. this async call starts a second coroutine (C2). Depending on the
// dispatcher you're using, you may have one or more threads.
// 3.a. If you have multiple threads, the block of this async could be
// executed in parallel of C1 in another thread
// 3.b. If you have only one thread, the block is sort of "queued" but
// not executed right away (as in an event loop)
//
// In both cases, we say that this block executes "concurrently"
// with C1, and computation() immediately returns the Deferred
// instance to its caller (unless a special dispatcher or
// coroutine start argument is used, but let's keep it simple).
return async {
// 5. this may now be executed
true
// 6. C2 is now completed, so the thread can go back to executing
// another coroutine (e.g. C1 here)
}
}
The outer async starts a coroutine. When it calls computation(), the inner async starts a second coroutine. Then, the call to await() suspends the execution of the outer async coroutine, until the execution of the inner async's coroutine is over.
You can even see that with a single thread: the thread will execute the outer async's beginning, then call computation() and reach the inner async. At this point, the body of the inner async is skipped, and the thread continues executing the outer async until it reaches await().
await() is a "suspension point", because await is a suspending function.
This means that the outer coroutine is suspended, and thus the thread starts executing the inner one. When it is done, it comes back to execute the end of the outer async.
Does suspend mean that while outer async coroutine is waiting (await) for the inner computation coroutine to finish, it (the outer async coroutine) idles (hence the name suspend) and returns thread to the thread pool, and when the child computation coroutine finishes, it (the outer async coroutine) wakes up, takes another thread from the pool and continues?
Yes, precisely.
The way this is actually achieved is by turning every suspending function into a state machine, where each "state" corresponds to a suspension point inside this suspend function. Under the hood, the function can be called multiple times, with the information about which suspension point it should start executing from (you should really watch the video I linked for more info about that).
To understand what exactly it means to suspend a coroutine, I suggest you go through this code:
import kotlinx.coroutines.Dispatchers.Unconfined
import kotlinx.coroutines.GlobalScope
import kotlinx.coroutines.launch
import kotlin.coroutines.Continuation
import kotlin.coroutines.resume
import kotlin.coroutines.suspendCoroutine
var continuation: Continuation<Int>? = null
fun main() {
GlobalScope.launch(Unconfined) {
val a = a()
println("Result is $a")
}
10.downTo(0).forEach {
continuation!!.resume(it)
}
}
suspend fun a(): Int {
return b()
}
suspend fun b(): Int {
while (true) {
val i = suspendCoroutine<Int> { cont -> continuation = cont }
if (i == 0) {
return 0
}
}
}
The Unconfined coroutine dispatcher eliminates the magic of coroutine dispatching and allows us to focus directly on bare coroutines.
The code inside the launch block starts executing right away on the current thread, as a part of the launch call. What happens is as follows:
Evaluate val a = a()
This chains to b(), reaching suspendCoroutine.
Function b() executes the block passed to suspendCoroutine and then returns a special COROUTINE_SUSPENDED value. This value is not observable through the Kotlin programming model, but that's what the compiled Java method does.
Function a(), seeing this return value, itself also returns it.
The launch block does the same and control now returns to the line after the launch invocation: 10.downTo(0)...
Note that, at this point, you have the same effect as if the code inside the launch block and your fun main code are executing concurrently. It just happens that all this is happening on a single native thread so the launch block is "suspended".
Now, inside the forEach looping code, the program reads the continuation that the b() function wrote and resumes it with the value of 10. resume() is implemented in such a way that it will be as if the suspendCoroutine call returned with the value you passed in. So you suddenly find yourself in the middle of executing b(). The value you passed to resume() gets assigned to i and checked against 0. If it's not zero, the while (true) loop goes on inside b(), again reaching suspendCoroutine, at which point your resume() call returns, and now you go through another looping step in forEach(). This goes on until finally you resume with 0, then the println statement runs and the program completes.
The above analysis should give you the important intuition that "suspending a coroutine" means returning the control back to the innermost launch invocation (or, more generally, coroutine builder). If a coroutine suspends again after resuming, the resume() call ends and control returns to the caller of resume().
The presence of a coroutine dispatcher makes this reasoning less clear-cut because most of them immediately submit your code to another thread. In that case the above story happens in that other thread, and the coroutine dispatcher also manages the continuation object so it can resume it when the return value is available.
As many good answers are already there, I would like to post a simpler example for others.
runBlocking use case :
myMethod() is suspend function
runBlocking { } starts a Coroutine in blocking way. It is similar to how we were blocking normal threads with Thread class and notifying blocked threads after certain events.
runBlocking { } does block the current executing thread, until the coroutine (body between {}) gets completed
override fun onCreate(savedInstanceState: Bundle?) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState)
setContentView(R.layout.main_activity)
Log.i(TAG,"Outer code started on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
runBlocking {
Log.d(TAG,"Inner code started on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name + " making outer code suspend");
myMethod();
}
Log.i(TAG,"Outer code resumed on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
}
private suspend fun myMethod() {
withContext(Dispatchers.Default) {
for(i in 1..5) {
Log.d(TAG,"Inner code i : $i on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
}
}
This outputs :
I/TAG: Outer code started on Thread : main
D/TAG: Inner code started on Thread : main making outer code suspend
// ---- main thread blocked here, it will wait until coroutine gets completed ----
D/TAG: Inner code i : 1 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
D/TAG: Inner code i : 2 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
D/TAG: Inner code i : 3 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
D/TAG: Inner code i : 4 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
D/TAG: Inner code i : 5 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
// ---- main thread resumes as coroutine is completed ----
I/TAG: Outer code resumed on Thread : main
launch use case :
launch { } starts a coroutine concurrently.
This means that when we specify launch, a coroutine starts execution on worker thread.
The worker thread and outer thread (from which we called launch { }) both runs concurrently. Internally, JVM may perform Preemptive Threading
When we require multiple tasks to run in parallel, we can use this. There are scopes which specify lifetime of coroutine. If we specify GlobalScope, the coroutine will work until application lifetime ends.
override fun onCreate(savedInstanceState: Bundle?) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState)
setContentView(R.layout.main_activity)
Log.i(TAG,"Outer code started on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
GlobalScope.launch(Dispatchers.Default) {
Log.d(TAG,"Inner code started on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name + " making outer code suspend");
myMethod();
}
Log.i(TAG,"Outer code resumed on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
}
private suspend fun myMethod() {
withContext(Dispatchers.Default) {
for(i in 1..5) {
Log.d(TAG,"Inner code i : $i on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
}
}
}
This Outputs :
10806-10806/com.example.viewmodelapp I/TAG: Outer code started on Thread : main
10806-10806/com.example.viewmodelapp I/TAG: Outer code resumed on Thread : main
// ---- In this example, main had only 2 lines to execute. So, worker thread logs start only after main thread logs complete
// ---- In some cases, where main has more work to do, the worker thread logs get overlap with main thread logs
10806-10858/com.example.viewmodelapp D/TAG: Inner code started on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-1 making outer code suspend
10806-10858/com.example.viewmodelapp D/TAG: Inner code i : 1 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-1
10806-10858/com.example.viewmodelapp D/TAG: Inner code i : 2 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-1
10806-10858/com.example.viewmodelapp D/TAG: Inner code i : 3 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-1
10806-10858/com.example.viewmodelapp D/TAG: Inner code i : 4 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-1
10806-10858/com.example.viewmodelapp D/TAG: Inner code i : 5 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-1
async and await use case :
When we have multiple tasks to do and they depend on other's completion, async and await would help.
For example, in below code, there are 2 suspend functions myMethod() and myMethod2(). myMethod2() should get executed only after full completion of myMethod() OR myMethod2() depends on result of myMethod(), we can use async and await
async starts a coroutine in parallel similar to launch. But, it provides a way to wait for one coroutine before starting another coroutine in parallel.
That way is await(). async returns an instance of Deffered<T>. T would be Unit for default. When we need to wait for any async's completion, we need to call .await() on Deffered<T> instance of that async. Like in below example, we called innerAsync.await() which implies that the execution would get suspended until innerAsync gets completed. We can observe the same in output. The innerAsync gets completed first, which calls myMethod(). And then next async innerAsync2 starts, which calls myMethod2()
override fun onCreate(savedInstanceState: Bundle?) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState)
setContentView(R.layout.main_activity)
Log.i(TAG,"Outer code started on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
job = GlobalScope.launch(Dispatchers.Default) {
innerAsync = async {
Log.d(TAG, "Inner code started on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name + " making outer code suspend");
myMethod();
}
innerAsync.await()
innerAsync2 = async {
Log.w(TAG, "Inner code started on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name + " making outer code suspend");
myMethod2();
}
}
Log.i(TAG,"Outer code resumed on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
}
private suspend fun myMethod() {
withContext(Dispatchers.Default) {
for(i in 1..5) {
Log.d(TAG,"Inner code i : $i on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
}
}
}
private suspend fun myMethod2() {
withContext(Dispatchers.Default) {
for(i in 1..10) {
Log.w(TAG,"Inner code i : $i on Thread : " + Thread.currentThread().name);
}
}
}
This outputs :
11814-11814/? I/TAG: Outer code started on Thread : main
11814-11814/? I/TAG: Outer code resumed on Thread : main
11814-11845/? D/TAG: Inner code started on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2 making outer code suspend
11814-11845/? D/TAG: Inner code i : 1 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
11814-11845/? D/TAG: Inner code i : 2 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
11814-11845/? D/TAG: Inner code i : 3 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
11814-11845/? D/TAG: Inner code i : 4 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
11814-11845/? D/TAG: Inner code i : 5 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-2
// ---- Due to await() call, innerAsync2 will start only after innerAsync gets completed
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code started on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4 making outer code suspend
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 1 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 2 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 3 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 4 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 5 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 6 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 7 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 8 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 9 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
11814-11848/? W/TAG: Inner code i : 10 on Thread : DefaultDispatcher-worker-4
I've found that the best way to understand suspend is to make an analogy between this keyword and coroutineContext property.
Kotlin functions can be declared as local or global. Local functions magically have access to this keyword while global don't.
Kotlin functions can be declared as suspend or blocking. suspend functions magically have access to coroutineContext property while blocking functions don't.
The thing is: coroutineContext property
is declared like a "normal" property in Kotlin stdlib but this declaration is just a stub for documentation/navigation purposes. In fact coroutineContext is builtin intrinsic property that means under the hood compiler magic aware of this property like it aware of language keywords.
What this keyword does for local functions is what coroutineContext property does for suspend functions: it gives access to current context of execution.
So, you need suspend to get an access to coroutineContext property - the instance of currently executed coroutine context
I wanted to give you a simple example of the concept of continuation. This is what a suspend function does, it can freeze/suspend and then it continues/resumes. Stop thinking of coroutine in terms of threads and Semaphore. Think of it in terms of continuation and even callback hooks.
To be clear, a coroutine can be paused by using a suspend function. lets investigate this:
In android we could do this for example :
var TAG = "myTAG:"
fun myMethod() { // function A in image
viewModelScope.launch(Dispatchers.Default) {
for (i in 10..15) {
if (i == 10) { //on first iteration, we will completely FREEZE this coroutine (just for loop here gets 'suspended`)
println("$TAG im a tired coroutine - let someone else print the numbers async. i'll suspend until your done")
freezePleaseIAmDoingHeavyWork()
} else
println("$TAG $i")
}
}
//this area is not suspended, you can continue doing work
}
suspend fun freezePleaseIAmDoingHeavyWork() { // function B in image
withContext(Dispatchers.Default) {
async {
//pretend this is a big network call
for (i in 1..10) {
println("$TAG $i")
delay(1_000)//delay pauses coroutine, NOT the thread. use Thread.sleep if you want to pause a thread.
}
println("$TAG phwww finished printing those numbers async now im tired, thank you for freezing, you may resume")
}
}
}
Above code prints the following :
I: myTAG: my coroutine is frozen but i can carry on to do other things
I: myTAG: im a tired coroutine - let someone else print the numbers async. i'll suspend until your done
I: myTAG: 1
I: myTAG: 2
I: myTAG: 3
I: myTAG: 4
I: myTAG: 5
I: myTAG: 6
I: myTAG: 7
I: myTAG: 8
I: myTAG: 9
I: myTAG: 10
I: myTAG: phwww finished printing those numbers async now im tired, thank you for freezing, you may resume
I: myTAG: 11
I: myTAG: 12
I: myTAG: 13
I: myTAG: 14
I: myTAG: 15
imagine it working like this:
So the current function you launched from does not stop, just a coroutine would suspend while it continues. The thread is not paused by running a suspend function.
I think this site can help you straight things out and is my reference.
Let's do something cool and freeze our suspend function in the middle of an iteration. We will resume it later in onResume
Store a variable called continuation and we'll load it with the coroutines continuation object for us :
var continuation: CancellableContinuation<String>? = null
suspend fun freezeHere() = suspendCancellableCoroutine<String> {
continuation = it
}
fun unFreeze() {
continuation?.resume("im resuming") {}
}
Now, let's return to our suspended function and make it freeze in middle of iteration :
suspend fun freezePleaseIAmDoingHeavyWork() {
withContext(Dispatchers.Default) {
async {
//pretend this is a big network call
for (i in 1..10) {
println("$TAG $i")
delay(1_000)
if(i == 3)
freezeHere() //dead pause, do not go any further
}
}
}
}
Then somewhere else like in onResume (for example):
override fun onResume() {
super.onResume()
unFreeze()
}
And the loop will continue. Its pretty neat to know we can freeze a suspend function at any point and resume it after some time has beeb passed. You can also look into channels
There are a lot of great answers here, but I think there are two additional things that are important to note.
launch / withContext / runBlocking and a lot of other things in the examples are from the coroutines library. which actually have nothing to do with suspend. you don't need the coroutines library to use coroutines. Coroutines are a compiler "trick". Yes, the library sure makes things easier, but the compiler is doing the magic of suspending & resuming things.
The second thing, is the compiler is just taking code that looks procedural and turning it into callbacks under the hood.
Take the following minimal coroutine that suspends that does not use the coroutine library :
lateinit var context: Continuation<Unit>
suspend {
val extra="extra"
println("before suspend $extra")
suspendCoroutine<Unit> { context = it }
println("after suspend $extra")
}.startCoroutine(
object : Continuation<Unit> {
override val context: CoroutineContext = EmptyCoroutineContext
// called when a coroutine ends. do nothing.
override fun resumeWith(result: Result<Unit>) {
result.onFailure { ex : Throwable -> throw ex }
}
}
)
println("kick it")
context.resume(Unit)
I think an important way to understand it is to look at what the compiler does with this code. effectively it creates a class for the lambda. it creates a property in the class for the "extra" string, then it creates two function, one that prints the "before" and another the prints the "after".
Effectively the compiler took what looks like procedural code and turned it into callbacks.
So what does the suspend keyword do? It tell the compiler how far back to look for context that the generated callbacks will need. The compiler needs to know which variables are used in which "callbacks", and the suspend keyword helps it. In this example the "extra" variable is used both before and after the suspend. So it needs to be pulled out to a property of the class containing the callbacks the compiler makes.
It also tells the compiler that this is the "beginning" of state and to prepare to split up the following code into callbacks. The startCoroutine only exists on suspend lambda.
The actual Java code generated by the Kotlin compiler is here. It's a switch statement instead of callbacks, but it's effectively the same thing. Called first w/ case 0, then w/ case 1 after the resume.
#Nullable
public final Object invokeSuspend(#NotNull Object $result) {
var10_2 = IntrinsicsKt.getCOROUTINE_SUSPENDED();
switch (this.label) {
case 0: {
ResultKt.throwOnFailure((Object)$result);
extra = "extra";
var3_4 = "before delay " + extra;
var4_9 = false;
System.out.println((Object)var3_4);
var3_5 = this;
var4_9 = false;
var5_10 = false;
this.L$0 = extra;
this.L$1 = var3_5;
this.label = 1;
var5_11 = var3_5;
var6_12 = false;
var7_13 = new SafeContinuation(IntrinsicsKt.intercepted((Continuation)var5_11));
it = (Continuation)var7_13;
$i$a$-suspendCoroutine-AppKt$main$1$1 = false;
this.$context.element = it;
v0 = var7_13.getOrThrow();
if (v0 == IntrinsicsKt.getCOROUTINE_SUSPENDED()) {
DebugProbesKt.probeCoroutineSuspended((Continuation)var3_5);
}
v1 = v0;
if (v0 == var10_2) {
return var10_2;
}
** GOTO lbl33
}
case 1: {
var3_6 = this.L$1;
extra = (String)this.L$0;
ResultKt.throwOnFailure((Object)$result);
v1 = $result;
lbl33:
// 2 sources
var3_8 = "after suspend " + extra;
var4_9 = false;
System.out.println((Object)var3_8);
return Unit.INSTANCE;
}
}
throw new IllegalStateException("call to 'resume' before 'invoke' with coroutine");
}
Let's say we have a function named myFunction.
fun myFunction(){
Code block 1
Code block 2 //this one has a long running operation
Code block 3
Code block 4
}
Usually these code blocks execute like block1, block2, block3, block4 . So code block 3 and 4 might execute while code block 2 is still running. Because of that reason there can be problems. (screen might freeze, app might crash)
But if we make this function suspend
suspend fun MyFunction(){
Code block 1
Code block 2 //this one has a long running operation
Code block 3
Code block 4
}
Now, this function can get paused when code block 2(long running operation) starts executing and get resumed when it is done. Code block 3 and 4 will execute after that. So there will be no unexpected thread sharing issues.
For anyone still wondering how do we actually suspend a suspend function, we use the suspendCoroutine function in the body of the suspend function .
suspend fun foo() :Int
{
Log.d(TAG,"Starting suspension")
return suspendCoroutine<Int> { num->
val result = bar()
Log.d(TAG,"Starting resumption")
num.resumeWith(Result.success(result))
}
}
fun bar():Int //this is a long runnning task