Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 00:38:23 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> To: Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org> Cc: Dan Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: getsetcontext system call Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10202110028440.25166-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <20020207063613.C1C9839F1@overcee.wemm.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 6 Feb 2002, Peter Wemm wrote: > Daniel Eischen wrote: [ ... ] > > > > Is it OK to leave struct fpreg unchanged for now? > > To be quite honest, I think that's the right thing to do for now, until it > is clear what the "right" thing to do is. ptrace(2) isn't going to survive > KSE unscathed, so perhaps we need an enhanced ptrace interface at some point > that doesn't suffer from this kind of interface fragility. OK, done. Can I consider this reviewed and OK to be committed? Diffs with your comments incorporated are at the same place: http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/ucontext/uc-sys.diffs http://people.freebsd.org/~deischen/ucontext/uc-libc.diffs One last question, I added a new file, kern/kern_context.c, that only has about 90 or so lines in it (including copyright and includes). I wasn't sure where it fit in, kern_proc.c or kern_sig.c perhaps(?). Let me know if it should be moved to one of these files or another existing file. Otherwise, I'll just leave it in kern_context.c. -- Dan Eischen To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10202110028440.25166-100000>