We added the com.apple.developer.background-tasks.continued-processing.gpu key to the entitlement file and set it to true, but BGTaskScheduler.supportedResources does not include gpu. How can we configure it to obtain permission for GPU access in the background? Test device: iPhone 16 Pro Max, iOS 26 release version.

I'm developing a medication scheduling app similar to Apple Health's Medications feature, and I'd like some input on my current approach to background tasks. In my app, when a user creates a medication, I generate ScheduledDose objects (with corresponding local notifications) for the next 2 weeks and save them to SwiftData. To ensure this 2-week window stays current, I've implemented a BGAppRefreshTask that runs daily to generate new doses as needed. My concern is whether BGAppRefreshTask is the appropriate mechanism for this purpose. Since I'm not making any network requests but rather generating and storing local data, I'm questioning if this is the right approach. I'm also wondering how Apple Health's Medications feature handles this kind of scheduling. Their app seems to maintain future doses regardless of app usage patterns. Has anyone implemented something similar or can suggest the best background execution API for this type of scenario? Thanks for any guidance you can provide.

I am using C APIs for XPC communication. When my XPC server gets a xpc_dictionary as a message, I use xpc_dictionary_get_string to get the string which is of type const char*. Afterwards, when I try to free up the memory for the string, I get an error. I could not find any details on why this happens. Does XPC handle the lifecycle of these C strings ? I did some tests to see the behaviour. The following code snippet prints a string temp before and after releasing the dictionary memory. char* string = "dummy-string"; xpc_object_t dict = xpc_dictionary_create(NULL, NULL, 0); xpc_dictionary_set_string(dict, "str", string); const char* temp = xpc_dictionary_get_string(reply, "str"); printf("temp before release: %s\n", temp); xpc_release(reply); printf("temp after release: %s\n", temp); output: # temp before release: dummy-string # temp after release: I tried to free the variable temp before and after releasing dict . char* string = "dummy-string"; xpc_object_t dict = xpc_dictionary_create(NULL, NULL, 0); xpc_dictionary_set_string(dict, "str", string); const char* temp = xpc_dictionary_get_string(dict, "str"); printf("temp before release: %s\n", temp); free((void *)temp); // case 1 xpc_release(dict); // free((void *)temp); // case 2 printf("temp after release: %s\n", temp); in both the cases i got the output: # temp before release: dummy-string # app(18502,0x1f02fc840) malloc: Double free of object 0x145004a20 # app(18502,0x1f02fc840) malloc: *** set a breakpoint in malloc_error_break to debug # SIGABRT: abort # PC=0x186953720 m=0 sigcode=0 # signal arrived during cgo execution # ... # ...

We have an application that sets a code signing requirement on a XPC connection between a File Provider extension and the main application. Only with a specific Developer ID certificate <DEVELOPER_ID_TEAM_IDENTIFIER> that designated requirement is not accepted and the application crashes with EXC_CRASH (SIGABRT) and the stacktrace Thread 1 Crashed:: Dispatch queue: com.apple.root.default-qos 0 libsystem_kernel.dylib 0x19b556388 __pthread_kill + 8 1 libsystem_pthread.dylib 0x19b58f88c pthread_kill + 296 2 libsystem_c.dylib 0x19b498a3c abort + 124 3 libc++abi.dylib 0x19b545384 abort_message + 132 4 libc++abi.dylib 0x19b533cf4 demangling_terminate_handler() + 344 5 libobjc.A.dylib 0x19b1b8dd4 _objc_terminate() + 156 6 libc++abi.dylib 0x19b544698 std::__terminate(void (*)()) + 16 7 libc++abi.dylib 0x19b547c30 __cxxabiv1::failed_throw(__cxxabiv1::__cxa_exception*) + 88 8 libc++abi.dylib 0x19b547bd8 __cxa_throw + 92 9 libobjc.A.dylib 0x19b1aecf8 objc_exception_throw + 448 10 Foundation 0x19d5c3840 -[NSXPCConnection setCodeSigningRequirement:] + 140 11 libxpcfileprovider.dylib 0x301023048 NSXPCConnection.setCodeSigningRequirementFromTeamIdentifier(_:) + 1796 12 libxpcfileprovider.dylib 0x30101dc94 closure #1 in CallbackFileProviderManager.getFileProviderConnection(_:service:completionHandler:interruptionHandler:exportedObject:) + 1936 13 libxpcfileprovider.dylib 0x30101e110 thunk for @escaping @callee_guaranteed @Sendable (@guaranteed NSXPCConnection?, @guaranteed Error?) -> () + 80 14 Foundation 0x19d46c3a4 __72-[NSFileProviderService getFileProviderConnectionWithCompletionHandler:]_block_invoke_2.687 + 284 15 libdispatch.dylib 0x19b3d7b2c _dispatch_call_block_and_release + 32 16 libdispatch.dylib 0x19b3f185c _dispatch_client_callout + 16 17 libdispatch.dylib 0x19b40e490 + 32 18 libdispatch.dylib 0x19b3e9fa4 _dispatch_root_queue_drain + 736 19 libdispatch.dylib 0x19b3ea5d4 _dispatch_worker_thread2 + 156 20 libsystem_pthread.dylib 0x19b58be28 _pthread_wqthread + 232 21 libsystem_pthread.dylib 0x19b58ab74 start_wqthread + 8 The designated codesign requirement on the XPC connection is set to anchor apple generic and certificate leaf[subject.OU] = <DEVELOPER_ID_TEAM_IDENTIFIER>" We have verified the designated code sign requirement to be valid on both the main bundle and the embedded extension using: codesign --verify -v -R '=anchor apple generic and certificate leaf[subject.OU] = "<DEVELOPER_ID_TEAM_IDENTIFIER>"' *.app codesign --verify -v -R '=anchor apple generic and certificate leaf[subject.OU] = "<DEVELOPER_ID_TEAM_IDENTIFIER>"' *.app/Contents/PlugIns/*

I'm using Swift 6 and tasks to concurrently process multiple PDF files for rendering, and it's working well. But currently I'm manually limiting the number of simultaneous tasks to 2 out of fear that the system might run many tasks concurrently without having enough RAM to do the PDF processing. Testing on a variety of devices, I've tried increasing the task limit and haven't seen any crashes, but I'm quite concerned about the possibility. Any given device might be using a lot of RAM at any moment, and any given PDF might strain resources more than the average PDF. Is there a recommended technique for handling this kind of scenario? Should I not worry about it and just go ahead and start a high number of tasks, trusting that the system won't run too many concurrently and therefore won't run out of RAM?

Hello, An application I am working on would like to schedule push notifications for a medication reminder app. I am trying to use BGTaskScheduler to wake up periodically and submit the notifications based on the user's medication schedule. I set up the task registration in my AppDelegate's didFinishLaunchingWithOptions method: BGTaskScheduler.shared.register( forTaskWithIdentifier: backgroundTaskIdentifier, using: nil) { task in self.scheduleNotifications() task.setTaskCompleted(success: true) self.scheduleAppRefresh() } scheduleAppRefresh() I then schedule the task using: func scheduleAppRefresh() { let request = BGAppRefreshTaskRequest(identifier: backgroundTaskIdentifier) request.earliestBeginDate = Date(timeIntervalSinceNow: 60 * 1) do { try BGTaskScheduler.shared.submit(request) } catch { } } In my testing, I can see the background task getting called once, but if I do not launch the application during the day. The background task does not get called the next day. Is there something else I need to add to get repeated calls from the BGTaskScheduler? Thank You, JR

Hi, I have some questions regarding the Background Assets Extension and DeviceCheck framework. Goal: Ensure that only users who have purchased the app can access the server's API without any user authentication using for example DeviceCheck framework and within a Background Assets Extension. My app relies on external assets, which I'm loading using the Background Assets Extension. I'm trying to determine if it's possible to obtain a challenge from the server and send a DeviceCheck assertion during this process within the Background Assets Extension. So far, I only receive session-wide authentication challenges—specifically NSURLAuthenticationMethodServerTrust in the Background Assets Extensio. I’ve tested with Basic Auth (NSURLAuthenticationMethodHTTPBasic) just for experimentation, but the delegate func backgroundDownload( _ download: BADownload, didReceive challenge: URLAuthenticationChallenge ) async -> (URLSession.AuthChallengeDisposition, URLCredential?) is never called with that authentication method. It seems task-specific challenges aren't coming through at all. Also, while the DCAppAttestService API appears to be available on macOS, DCAppAttestService.isSupported always returns false (in my testing), which suggests it's not actually supported on macOS. Can anyone confirm if that’s expected behavior?

Hello, I'm running into an issue with a complex macOS application (non-AppStore) structure involving an unsandboxed system daemon and a sandboxed SSO Extension attempting to communicate via XPC Mach service. The macOS app is composed of three main components: Main App: unsandboxed, standard macOS application. System Daemon: unsandboxed executable installed with a .plist to /Library/LaunchDaemons/ and loaded by launchd. It exposes an XPC Mach Service. SSO Extension: a sandboxed Authentication Services Extension (ASAuthorizationProviderExtension). Main App to System Daemon communication works perfectly. The unsandboxed main app can successfully create and use an XPC connection to the System Daemon's Mach service. But SSO Extension cannot establish an XPC connection to the System Daemon's Mach service, despite using the recommended temporary exception entitlement. I have added the following entitlement to the SSO Extension's entitlements file: <key>com.apple.security.temporary-exception.mach-lookup.global-name</key> <array> <string>my.xpc.service.system.daemon</string> </array> (The name my.xpc.service.system.daemon is the exact name registered by the System Daemon in its Launch Daemon plist's MachServices dictionary.) When the SSO Extension attempts to create the connection, the following log output is generated: default 08:11:58.531567-0700 SSOExtension [0x13f19b090] activating connection: mach=true listener=false peer=false name=my.xpc.service.system.daemon default 08:11:58.532150-0700 smd [0xb100d8140] activating connection: mach=false listener=false peer=true name=com.apple.xpc.smd.peer[1575].0xb100d8140 error 08:11:58.532613-0700 smd Item real path failed. Maybe the item has been deleted? error 08:11:58.532711-0700 SSOExtension Unable to find service status () error: 22 The error Unable to find service status () error: 22. Error code 22 typically translates to EINVAL (Invalid argument), but in this context, it seems related to the system's ability to find and activate the service for the sandboxed process. Questions: Is the com.apple.security.temporary-exception.mach-lookup.global-name entitlement sufficient for a sandboxed SSO Extension to look up a system-wide Launch Daemon Mach service, or are there additional restrictions or required entitlements for extensions? The smd log output Item real path failed. Maybe the item has been deleted? seems concerning. Since the unsandboxed main app can connect, this suggests the service is running and registered. Could this error indicate a sandbox permission issue preventing smd from verifying the path for the sandboxed process? Are there specific sandboxing requirements for Mach service names when communicating from an Extension versus a main application? Any guidance on how a sandboxed SSO Extension can reliably connect to an unsandboxed, non-app-group-related system daemon via XPC Mach service would be greatly appreciated!

Hello! I'm writing a System Extension that is an Endpoint Security client. And I want to Deny/Allow executing some XPC Service processes (using the ES_EVENT_TYPE_AUTH_EXEC event) depending on characteristics of a process that starts the XPC Service. For this purpose, I need an API that could allow me to obtain an execution context of the XPC Service process. I can obtain this information using the "sudo launchctl procinfo <pid>" command (e.g. I can use the "domain = pid/3428" part of the output for this purpose). Also, I know that when the xpcproxy process is started, it gets as the arguments a service name and a pid of the process that requests the service so I can grasp the execution context from xpcproxy launching. But are these ways to obtain this info legitimate?

Hi, I am programming in C and would like to use Grand Central Dispatch for parallel computing (I mostly do physics based simulations). I remember there used to be example codes provided by Apple, but can't find those now. Instead I get the plain documentation. May anyone point me to the correct resources? It will be greatly appreciated. Thanks ☺.

When I use BGContinuedProcessingTask to submit a task, my iPhone 12 immediately shows a notification banner displaying the task’s progress. However, on my iPhone 15 Pro Max, there’s no response — the progress UI only appears in the Dynamic Island after I background the app. Why is there a difference in behavior between these two devices? Is it possible to control the UI so that the progress indicator only appears when the app moves to the background?

Hello, In a launched agent, I need to call into a third‑party library that may occasionally hang. At present, these calls are made from a separate thread, but if the thread hangs it cannot be terminated (pthread_cancel/pthread_kill are ineffective). Would Apple recommend isolating this functionality in a separate process that can be force‑terminated if it becomes unresponsive, or is there a preferred approach for handling such cases in launched agents? Can I use the system call fork() in launched agent? Thank you in advance!

Hi! Could you please point me to the official documentation or recommended approach for launching the host app from a Share Extension? The scenario is: The user is sharing some text to my app. I need launch App and show this text. At the moment, I'm using the following hack: let selector = NSSelectorFromString("sharedApplication") if let app = UIApplication.perform(selector)?.takeUnretainedValue() as? UIApplication, app.responds(to: #selector(UIApplication.open(_:options:completionHandler:))) { app.open(url, options: [:], completionHandler: nil) } This does work, but it's terrible. So, the question: What is the official way to open the host app from within a Share Extension? Thanks!

I have followed this post for creating a Launch Agent that provides an XPC service on macOS using Swift- post link - https://rderik.com/blog/creating-a-launch-agent-that-provides-an-xpc-service-on-macos/ In the swift code the interface of the XPC service is defined by protocols which makes the code nice and neat. I want to implement the XPC service using C APIs for XPC, and C APIs send and receive messages using dictionaries, which need manual handling with conditional statements. I want to know if its possible to go with the protocol based approach with C APIs.

Hello Apple Developer Community, I am developing a medical app that is classified as Class B according to FDA regulations. The app connects to a medical device using Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) to collect critical medical data such as ECG readings. To ensure accurate data collection and maintain the quality of the medical readings, the app needs to wake up every five minutes in the background and perform tasks for approximately 30 seconds. I understand that iOS has strict limitations on background execution to preserve battery and system performance. However, due to the medical nature of the app and the need for periodic data collection, I am seeking guidance on the following: If I can provide documentation that the app is associated with an FDA-approved Class B medical device, would Apple allow more lenient background task execution policies? Are there specific APIs, such as BackgroundTasks, CoreBluetooth, or other recommended strategies, that could help me achieve this behavior reliably? Is there a process to apply for an exception or special consideration for medical apps that require periodic background activity? Any insights or recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

Hi All, I'm working on an app that needs to connect to BLE device and on defined schedules download data from the device. the amount of data is segnificant and might take around a minute to download. we tought about utilizing both state restoration and preservation for app waking and scheduling (triggered by the ble peripheral) and BGTaskScheduler to schedule a task that will handle a long running task to manage the full data download. now, will this solution in general valid? isnt it a "hack" that goes around the 10s limit that state restoration enforces? i know there are limitations for BGTask (like when it runs, it might be terminated by the system etc) but considering that, can we proceed with this approach without breaching apple guidelines? thank you in advance!

I'm specifically focused on Live Activity, but I think this is somewhat a general question. The app could get a few callbacks when: There's a new payload (start, update, end) There's a new token (start, update) There's some other lifecycle event (stale, dismissed) Assuming that the user didn't force kill the app, would the app get launched in all these scenarios? When OS launches the app for a reason, should we wrap our tasks with beginBackgroundTask or that's unnecessary if we're expecting our tasks to finish within 30 seconds? Or the OS may sometimes be under stress and give you far less time (example 3 seconds) and if you're in slow internet, then adding beginBackgroundTask may actually come in handy?

I’m currently porting a Chrome Extension to Safari and integrating it with native messaging in a Safari Web Extension. As part of this, I’m building a proxy to forward messages between the web extension and a socket in another application, both ways. Additionally, the socket occasionally broadcasts messages that also need to be sent to the web extension. The issue I’m facing is that the app extension terminates whenever I call context.completeRequest(returningItems: nil), which prevents me from listening for incoming messages from the socket (I'm using the Network Framework). To work around this, I’ve tried not calling context.completeRequest(returningItems: nil), which keeps the app extension running. However, I’m unsure if this is the right approach—currently, I’m simply ignoring the response and relying entirely on SFSafariApplication.dispatchMessage. According to the documentation, the app extension lifecycle ends when the system terminates it, but I need to keep the socket listener active. Has anyone encountered a similar issue, or does anyone have suggestions for maintaining the socket connection while adhering to the app extension lifecycle? Any insights would be greatly appreciated!

Is the title possible ? I tried [[thread valueForKey:@"_private"] valueForKey:@"tid"] but the tid was not kvc compliant. private apis are alright because this is just for testing remote process thread creation. I already have a working method but it has hardcoded assembly so you can't do anything else. this question is mainly for Quinn (figured he may know something about this)

Desired Behavior I want the app to be able to handle multiple Push-to-Start notifications even when it is completely terminated. Each Live Activity should: Be successfully displayed upon receiving a Push-to-Start notification. Trigger background tasks to send its update token to the server, regardless of the time interval between notifications. Problem I am facing an issue with iOS Live Activities when using Push-to-Start notifications to trigger Live Activities in an app that has been completely terminated. Here’s the detailed scenario: When the app is completely terminated and I send the first Push-to-Start notification: The Live Activity is successfully displayed. didFinishLaunchingWithOptions` is triggered, and background tasks execute correctly, including sending the update token to the server. When I send consecutive Push-to-Start notifications in quick succession (e.g., within a few seconds or minutes): Both notifications successfully display their respective Live Activities. Background tasks are executed correctly for both notifications. However, when there is a longer interval (e.g., 10 minutes) between two Push-to-Start notifications: The first notification works perfectly—it displays the Live Activity, triggers didFinishLaunchingWithOptions, and executes background tasks. The second notification successfully displays the Live Activity but fails to execute any background tasks, such as sending the update token to the server. My HypothesisI suspect that iOS might impose a restriction where background runtime for Push-to-Start notifications can only be granted once within a certain time frame after the app has been terminated. Any insights into why this issue might be occurring or how to ensure consistent background task execution for multiple Push-to-Start notifications would be greatly appreciated!