I am a hardware/test engineer currently writing a C# application for a device that does not have any event/interrupt mechanisms. Because of this I am forced to poll the device's internal control registers using their provided API for any change in state. I realize that a dedicated thread will be needed in order to take care of the polling.

The conceptual question that I have is, would the following design pattern (where the object representing the piece of hardware starts/ends it's own Task) be an acceptable practice for what I am trying to do?

The specific reason that I am asking this question because normally the overall control would be done at the highest level, but in this case I have to monitor an unmanaged resource and know that I have to do it at the lower level. As an alternative, I guess we could have a method called Monitor that would be responsible for doing what TaskMethod currently does, and just do the Task/Token from the scope that instantiates the MyConstructor.

private readonly CancellationTokenSource myTokenSource = new CancellationTokenSource();
private CancellationToken myToken = CancellationToken.None;
private Task eventLogTask;

// default constructor
public MyConstructor

// method that starts a task
public void StartTask()
    // start the event logger
    this.eventLogTask = Task.Factory.StartNew(() =>
    }, this.myToken, TaskCreationOptions.LongRunning, TaskScheduler.Default);

// cancel/wait the polling/monitoring event
public void StopTask()

// method performed on the new task
private void TaskMethod()
    // assign a cancellation token source
    this.myToken = myTokenSource.Token;

    // start monitoring the event log
    while (!this.myToken.IsCancellationRequested)
        // TODO: control monitoring code


Note: The term event log doesn't have anything to do with .NET events, but instead refers to something that behaves loosely like a micro-controller's register that needs to be polled in order to get the status of the hardware.

1 Answer 1


It's not unacceptable, but it might be surprising to the caller. I think this can only be answered in the context of the system as a whole. Is this the only thread doing polling? Does it have time requirements? If you end up with several of these in the same system, would you be better off having one thread that calls each of them in turn?

If that is the case, I'd prefer to define a Pollable interface and have a single thread keep track of the Pollable objects and call their Poll() methods.

  • Yes, this will definitely be the only thread doing the polling. Thank you for your response this is exactly the kind of feedback I am looking for. I was debating whether to call the "Poll" externally or make it transparent to the scope where the object is instantiated.
    – Snoop
    Commented Mar 8, 2016 at 14:56

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.