[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Thu, 02 Aug 2018 16:53:19 +0300
> From: Gemini Lasswell <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2018 13:04:18 -0700
> If the thread at point is not the current thread, then I'll call the new
> primitive that I'm working on, maybe to be called
> backtrace--get-frames-from-thread, pass it the thread as an argument,
> and it will cons up a list of backtrace frames using that thread's
> specpdl stack, which I can use to fill my backtrace buffer.
I'm saying that this will always show a thread that is blocked, either
on some mutex/condvar, or waiting for the global lock to be released.
You will never be able to see the backtrace of another running thread,
because the only thread that is running is the one which takes the
That question was response to what you said here:
> If a thread is actively working the backtrace will just be a
> snapshot of where it was when you asked for the backtrace.
I'm saying that this is impossible: any thread but the current one is
not "actively working".