Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/06/29/01:45:12
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 0:29:57, "Charles Sandmann"
<sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> sat on a tribble, which squeaked:
>> A serious limitation of debugging capabilities under DPMI was under
>> discussion.
>
>I'll admit I didn't read the entire thread, but I'll guess this is about
>previous note on crashes to the CWSDPMI error message with no traceback.
>The fix to this is not to hack up CWSDPMI. We could make it more
>bullet proof using a DPMI 1.0 extension in CWSDPMI. Mainly, we would
>need to strictly clean up the DJGPP code to make the exception code
>be broken into read-only sections and read/write. Use DPMI 1.0 functions
>to write-protect the executable code and exception jump table. We would
>also set some amount of the bottom of the stack (64K?) to be null-page
>not mapped also. This would catch stack underruns. It would catch
>trashing the executable code that implements the exception handlers and
>tracebacks...
The DJGPP code that sets some of this stuff up wounld, of course, need
to detect DPMI 1.0 feature availability and act accordingly.
What about stack overruns?
--
Bill Gates: "No computer will ever need more than 640K of RAM." -- 1980
"There's nobody getting rich writing software that I know of." -- 1980
"This antitrust thing will blow over." -- 1998
Combine neo, an underscore, and one thousand sixty-one to make my hotmail addy.
- Raw text -