Use Task.Run() in synchronous method to avoid deadlock waiting on async method?

Question

UPDATE The purpose of this question is to get a simple answer about Task.Run() and deadlocking. I very much understand the theoretical reasoning for not mixing async and sync, and I take them to heart. I'm not above learning new things from others; I seek to do that whenever I can. There's just times when all a guy needs is a technical answer...

I have a Dispose() method that needs to call an async method. Since 95% of my code is async, refactoring isn't the best choice. Having an IAsyncDisposable (among other features) that's supported by the framework would be ideal, but we're not there yet. So in the mean time, I need to find a reliable way to call async methods from a synchronous method without deadlocking.

I'd prefer not to use ConfigureAwait(false) because that leaves the responsibility scattered all throughout my code for the callee to behave a certain way just in case the caller is synchronous. I'd prefer to do something in the synchronous method since it's the deviant bugger.

After reading Stephen Cleary's comment in another question that Task.Run() always schedules on the thread pool even async methods, it made me think.

In .NET 4.5 in ASP.NET or any other synchronization context that schedules tasks to the current thread / same thread, if I have an asynchronous method:

private async Task MyAsyncMethod()
{
    ...
}

And I want to call it from a synchronous method, can I just use Task.Run() with Wait() to avoid deadlocks since it queues the async method the the thread pool?

private void MySynchronousMethodLikeDisposeForExample()
{
    // MyAsyncMethod will get queued to the thread pool 
    // so it shouldn't deadlock with the Wait() ??
    Task.Run((Func<Task>)MyAsyncMethod).Wait();
}

Answer 1

If you absolutely must call the async method from an synchronous one, make sure to use ConfigureAwait(false) inside your async method calls to avoid the capturing of the synchronization context.

This should hold but is shaky at best. I would advise to think of refactoring. instead.

Answer 2

This is my way of avoiding deadlock when I have to call async method synchronously and the thread can be UI thread:

    public static T GetResultSafe<T>(this Task<T> task)
    {
        if (SynchronizationContext.Current == null)
            return task.Result;

        if (task.IsCompleted)
            return task.Result;

        var tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<T>();
        task.ContinueWith(t =>
        {
            var ex = t.Exception;
            if (ex != null)
                tcs.SetException(ex);
            else
                tcs.SetResult(t.Result);
        }, TaskScheduler.Default);

        return tcs.Task.Result;
    }

Answer 3

It seems you understand the risks involved in your question so I'll skip the lecture.

To answer your actual question: Yes, you can just use Task.Run to offload that work to a ThreadPool thread which doesn't have a SynchronizationContext and so there's no real risk for a deadlock.

However, using another thread just because it has no SC is somewhat of a hack and could be an expensive one since scheduling that work to be done on the ThreadPool has its costs.

A better and clearer solution IMO would be to simply remove the SC for the time being using SynchronizationContext.SetSynchronizationContext and restoring it afterwards. This can easily be encapsulated into an IDisposable so you can use it in a using scope:

public static class NoSynchronizationContextScope
{
    public static Disposable Enter()
    {
        var context = SynchronizationContext.Current;
        SynchronizationContext.SetSynchronizationContext(null);
        return new Disposable(context);
    }

    public struct Disposable : IDisposable
    {
        private readonly SynchronizationContext _synchronizationContext;

        public Disposable(SynchronizationContext synchronizationContext)
        {
            _synchronizationContext = synchronizationContext;
        }

        public void Dispose() =>
            SynchronizationContext.SetSynchronizationContext(_synchronizationContext);
    }
}

Usage:

private void MySynchronousMethodLikeDisposeForExample()
{
    using (NoSynchronizationContextScope.Enter())
    {
        MyAsyncMethod().Wait();
    }
}

Answer 4

With small custom synchronization context, sync function can wait for completion of async function, without creating deadlock. Original thread is preserved, so sync method use the same thread before and after call to async function. Here is small example for WinForms app.

Imports System.Threading
Imports System.Runtime.CompilerServices

Public Class Form1

    Private Sub Form1_Load(sender As Object, e As EventArgs) Handles MyBase.Load
        SyncMethod()
    End Sub

    ' waiting inside Sync method for finishing async method
    Public Sub SyncMethod()
        Dim sc As New SC
        sc.WaitForTask(AsyncMethod())
        sc.Release()
    End Sub

    Public Async Function AsyncMethod() As Task(Of Boolean)
        Await Task.Delay(1000)
        Return True
    End Function

End Class

Public Class SC
    Inherits SynchronizationContext

    Dim OldContext As SynchronizationContext
    Dim ContextThread As Thread

    Sub New()
        OldContext = SynchronizationContext.Current
        ContextThread = Thread.CurrentThread
        SynchronizationContext.SetSynchronizationContext(Me)
    End Sub

    Dim DataAcquired As New Object
    Dim WorkWaitingCount As Long = 0
    Dim ExtProc As SendOrPostCallback
    Dim ExtProcArg As Object

    <MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.Synchronized)>
    Public Overrides Sub Post(d As SendOrPostCallback, state As Object)
        Interlocked.Increment(WorkWaitingCount)
        Monitor.Enter(DataAcquired)
        ExtProc = d
        ExtProcArg = state
        AwakeThread()
        Monitor.Wait(DataAcquired)
        Monitor.Exit(DataAcquired)
    End Sub

    Dim ThreadSleep As Long = 0

    Private Sub AwakeThread()
        If Interlocked.Read(ThreadSleep) > 0 Then ContextThread.Resume()
    End Sub

    Public Sub WaitForTask(Tsk As Task)
        Dim aw = Tsk.GetAwaiter

        If aw.IsCompleted Then Exit Sub

        While Interlocked.Read(WorkWaitingCount) > 0 Or aw.IsCompleted = False
            If Interlocked.Read(WorkWaitingCount) = 0 Then
                Interlocked.Increment(ThreadSleep)
                ContextThread.Suspend()
                Interlocked.Decrement(ThreadSleep)
            Else
                Interlocked.Decrement(WorkWaitingCount)
                Monitor.Enter(DataAcquired)
                Dim Proc = ExtProc
                Dim ProcArg = ExtProcArg
                Monitor.Pulse(DataAcquired)
                Monitor.Exit(DataAcquired)
                Proc(ProcArg)
            End If
        End While

    End Sub

     Public Sub Release()
         SynchronizationContext.SetSynchronizationContext(OldContext)
     End Sub

End Class

Answer 5

This code will not deadlock for exactly the reasons you highlighted in the question - code always runs with no synchronization context (since using thread pool) and Wait will simply block the thread till/if method returns.