From:	Martin Stromberg <Martin DOT Stromberg AT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
Message-Id:	<200001131607.RAA14568@spica-144.lu.erisoft.se>
Subject:	Re: Problems with protected_mode_int
To:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii)
Date:	Thu, 13 Jan 100 17:07:47 +0100 (MET)
Cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com (DJGPP)
In-Reply-To:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000113175705.12754K-100000@is> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Jan 13, 0 06:00:16 pm
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

Eli said:
> On Thu, 13 Jan 100, Martin Stromberg wrote:
> > Are you saying the base and offsets of CS is different than those of DS?
> > If yes, then it won't work. 
> 
> The base and limit are the same, but not the access rights.  If you 
> pass _my_ss() to the functions which installes the handler, it will
> use the SS (actually, the DS) selector, and trigger a GPF due to access
> rights.

Yeah! But of course I'm passing CS not SS! Where did I say I passed SS?

> In addition, in this specific case, the user reported he was using DJGPP 
> v1.x, where SS was loaded with a different selector (which was the reason 
> why -fomit-frame-pointer didn't work).

Yes, but now we are discussing running code on the stack.


This Mortal Coil, Blood,

							MartinS

- Raw text -