On Sunday 30 July 2006 21:30, Kip Macy wrote:
> > si_addr doesn't contain the faulting pc, it contains the address
> > that
>
> So either the comment is wrong, or that is a technically incorrect
> kludge. However, given that a number of the other fields are not
> filled out at all, the real objecti
si_addr doesn't contain the faulting pc, it contains the address that
So either the comment is wrong, or that is a technically incorrect
kludge. However, given that a number of the other fields are not
filled out at all, the real objective should be to keep applications
working.
--- sys/i386
On Saturday 29 July 2006 21:57, Kip Macy wrote:
> Looking at siginfo it isn't clear that there is a "right way" to
> provide SIGSEGV, eva, and the error code.
>
> _fault._trapno should contain the machine's error code and si_signo
> should contain SIGSEGV, and si_addr contains the faulting pc. Mayb
Looking at siginfo it isn't clear that there is a "right way" to
provide SIGSEGV, eva, and the error code.
_fault._trapno should contain the machine's error code and si_signo
should contain SIGSEGV, and si_addr contains the faulting pc. Maybe
one could abuse si_code to contain eva. Sorry for ask
I'm refering to the following two lines in sys/i386/i386/trap.c
/* kludge to pass faulting virtual address to sendsig */
frame->tf_err = eva;
Isn't there some other way to do this? Wouldn't the address still be
available in %cr2 inside sendsig? Or could there have been other page
faults by then
5 matches
Mail list logo
