Hi Rinat, I think you are placing far too much importance on these pools. They are just an internal 'malloc' implementation for allocman, and it does so by reserving a portion of your virtual address range. If you want to do shared memory then you should allocate a frame cap, mint a duplicate of it, then map each cap into a free portion of both processes address spaces. The only relation the pools have here is you shouldn't place your shared memory (or anything else) in the virtual region used by them. Adrian On Thu 02-Jun-2016 10:36 PM, Rinat Dobrokhotov wrote: Hi Adrian, thank you for reply. Yes, you are right, I assumed another thing. I don't understand how the pool size is related to thread's available workspace. You wrote, that pools are needed for allocating of book keeping info. In this case is book keeping info a page table (PT) or a page directory (PD)? If the pool is needed for PD/PT what is the method to count the size of the memory the process is capable to use. If the pool is not for PT/PD how does it influence on memory size the process is allowed to use. Could you please comment on dependency between the pool size and available memory of the second thread. In general, I want to share memory between threads, and I believe, that knowledge about pools, can help me. ________________________________ The information in this e-mail may be confidential and subject to legal professional privilege and/or copyright. National ICT Australia Limited accepts no liability for any damage caused by this email or its attachments.