From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <403EEAEE.9080907@acm.org> From: Donald Brownlee User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: Threads: Sewing badges of honor onto a Kernel References: <0d7bea785d989cd275b7ca67cfa6cdeb@yourdomain.dom> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 22:59:58 -0800 Topicbox-Message-UUID: fd6b3c62-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > (1) There are valid reasons to pass pointers between threads, and yes, > they can be pointers to thread stack areas. > OK. If one of the threads is a "debugger" thread and another is a "thread to be debugged," then it would be helpful if the "debugger" thread can access the stack of the "thread to be debugged." Why? So it can muck with the stack, say, to alter a return address. Whatever! But to inspect or modify the stack of another thread requires some knowledge of that other thread's state. Like, is it stopped? D.