Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 13:12:02 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: Charles Sandmann <sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
cc: dj AT delorie DOT com, Anthony DOT Appleyard AT umist DOT ac DOT uk, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [MCLSSAA2 AT fs2 DOT mt DOT umist DOT ac DOT uk: Hooking interrupt 9 : a DIFF]
In-Reply-To: <9801131503.AA14262@clio.rice.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.980114131138.8730E-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk


On Tue, 13 Jan 1998, Charles Sandmann wrote:

> I didn't have much time to review, but it's not clear to me what the
> limitations on this handler are.  The stack does not seem to be set 
> up properly, which GCC assumes, so there are lots of things to
> consider.

Are you talking about the user-defined callback here, or about the
DJGPP handler which is on exceptn.S?

If the user-defined code is the issue, can we assume that the user
should take care of that?  They will need to do more than that anyway
(like lock their code and data) if they don't want to crash, right?

If our handler is the issue, then I don't think I understand the
problem.  If you are concerned with an extra pushl and the call, then
isn't the stack on which the handler is called big enough to allow for
this?