Bug 6217 - Disposing a linked CancellationTokenSource
Summary: Disposing a linked CancellationTokenSource
Alias: None
Product: Class Libraries
Classification: Mono
Component: mscorlib ()
Version: master
Hardware: All All
: --- normal
Target Milestone: Untriaged
Assignee: Jérémie Laval
Depends on:
Reported: 2012-07-20 16:17 UTC by Martin Baulig
Modified: 2012-07-23 11:02 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Is this bug a regression?: ---
Last known good build:

Notice (2018-05-24): bugzilla.xamarin.com is now in read-only mode.

Please join us on Visual Studio Developer Community and in the Xamarin and Mono organizations on GitHub to continue tracking issues. Bugzilla will remain available for reference in read-only mode. We will continue to work on open Bugzilla bugs, copy them to the new locations as needed for follow-up, and add the new items under Related Links.

Our sincere thanks to everyone who has contributed on this bug tracker over the years. Thanks also for your understanding as we make these adjustments and improvements for the future.

Please create a new report on GitHub or Developer Community with your current version information, steps to reproduce, and relevant error messages or log files if you are hitting an issue that looks similar to this resolved bug and you do not yet see a matching new report.

Related Links:

Description Martin Baulig 2012-07-20 16:17:49 UTC
When disposing a linked CancellationTokenSource, it should unregister itself from the 
tokens that were linked into it.

		public void CancelLinkedTokenSource ()
			var cts = new CancellationTokenSource ();
			bool canceled = false;
			cts.Token.Register (() => canceled = true);

			using (var linked = CancellationTokenSource.CreateLinkedTokenSource (cts.Token))

			Assert.IsFalse (canceled, "#1");
			Assert.IsFalse (cts.IsCancellationRequested, "#2");

			cts.Cancel ();

			Assert.IsTrue (canceled, "#3");

In this test, cts.Cancel() throws an ObjectDisposedException because it attempts to cancel the disposed 'linked'.

I have a fix for this, but I'm not sure whether it's correct and the best way of doing that:

Could you please have a look ?
Comment 1 Jérémie Laval 2012-07-23 11:02:51 UTC
On master and soon 2-10. Thanks!