From: Clemens Valens <c DOT valensNOozSPAM AT mindless DOT com>
Subject: Re: a VERY difficult problem
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Message-ID: <136f266c.bebfc4f7@usw-ex0103-020.remarq.com>
Lines: 11
Bytes: 423
X-Originating-Host: 195.154.148.69
Organization: http://www.remarq.com: The World's Usenet/Discussions Start Here
References: <937519527 DOT 589 DOT 0 DOT pluto DOT d4ee0fa5 AT news DOT demon DOT nl>
X-Wren-Trace: eJ67k5KLzIbN3cSAmtKamZ+tg5KVntKNiIHfnpiHx4/IzZDOxYrFwcbH1M3J
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 06:46:38 -0700
NNTP-Posting-Host: 10.0.2.20
X-Complaints-To: wrenabuse AT remarq DOT com
X-Trace: WReNphoon3 937576025 10.0.2.20 (Fri, 17 Sep 1999 06:47:05 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 Sep 1999 06:47:05 PDT
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

I think you have a stack problem. I don't know how you 
hooked the timer interrupt, but remember that the original 
timer handler does many things. If you call your handler 
directly you might skip all that. Do you keep a seperate 
stack for every thread?

Clemens


* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!