It is possible to get stacktrace using System.Diagnostics.StackTrace, but thread has to be suspended. Suspend and Resume function are obsolete, so I expect that better way e
This is an old Thread, but just wanted to warn about the proposed solution: The Suspend and Resume solution does not work - I just experienced a deadlock in my code trying the sequence Suspend/StackTrace/Resume.
The Problem is that StackTrace constructor does RuntimeMethodHandle -> MethodBase conversions, and this changes a internal MethodInfoCache, which takes a lock. The deadlock occurred because the thread I was examining also was doing reflection, and was holding that lock.
It is a pity that the suspend/resume stuff is not done inside the StackTrace constructor -then this problem could easily have been circumvented.
I think that if you want to do this without the cooperation of the target thread (such as by having it call a method that blocks it on a Semaphore or something while your thread does the stacktrace) you'll need to use the deprecated APIs.
A possible alternative is the use the COM-based ICorDebug interface that the .NET debuggers use. The MDbg codebase might give you a start:
As mentioned in my comment, the proposed solution above does still have a tiny probability for a deadlock. Please find my version below.
private static StackTrace GetStackTrace(Thread targetThread) {
using (ManualResetEvent fallbackThreadReady = new ManualResetEvent(false), exitedSafely = new ManualResetEvent(false)) {
Thread fallbackThread = new Thread(delegate() {
fallbackThreadReady.Set();
while (!exitedSafely.WaitOne(200)) {
try {
targetThread.Resume();
} catch (Exception) {/*Whatever happens, do never stop to resume the target-thread regularly until the main-thread has exited safely.*/}
}
});
fallbackThread.Name = "GetStackFallbackThread";
try {
fallbackThread.Start();
fallbackThreadReady.WaitOne();
//From here, you have about 200ms to get the stack-trace.
targetThread.Suspend();
StackTrace trace = null;
try {
trace = new StackTrace(targetThread, true);
} catch (ThreadStateException) {
//failed to get stack trace, since the fallback-thread resumed the thread
//possible reasons:
//1.) This thread was just too slow (not very likely)
//2.) The deadlock ocurred and the fallbackThread rescued the situation.
//In both cases just return null.
}
try {
targetThread.Resume();
} catch (ThreadStateException) {/*Thread is running again already*/}
return trace;
} finally {
//Just signal the backup-thread to stop.
exitedSafely.Set();
//Join the thread to avoid disposing "exited safely" too early. And also make sure that no leftover threads are cluttering iis by accident.
fallbackThread.Join();
}
}
}
I think, the ManualResetEventSlim "fallbackThreadReady" is not really necessary, but why risk anything in this delicate case?
It looks like this was a supported operation in the past, but unfortunately, Microsoft made this obsolete: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/t2k35tat(v=vs.110).aspx
According to C# 3.0 in a Nutshell, this is one of the few situations where it is okay to call Suspend/Resume.
Here's what's worked for me so far:
StackTrace GetStackTrace (Thread targetThread)
{
StackTrace stackTrace = null;
var ready = new ManualResetEventSlim();
new Thread (() =>
{
// Backstop to release thread in case of deadlock:
ready.Set();
Thread.Sleep (200);
try { targetThread.Resume(); } catch { }
}).Start();
ready.Wait();
targetThread.Suspend();
try { stackTrace = new StackTrace (targetThread, true); }
catch { /* Deadlock */ }
finally
{
try { targetThread.Resume(); }
catch { stackTrace = null; /* Deadlock */ }
}
return stackTrace;
}
If it deadlocks, the deadlock is automatically freed and you get back a null trace. (You can then call it again.)
I should add that after a few days of testing, I've only once been able to create a deadlock on my Core i7 machine. Deadlocks are common, though, on single-core VM when the CPU runs at 100%.