Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 15:00:17 -0800 From: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> To: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 21417 for review Message-ID: <20021123230017.GB8744@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net> In-Reply-To: <200211232250.38412.dfr@nlsystems.com> References: <200211232017.gANKHAAk090869@repoman.freebsd.org> <200211232250.38412.dfr@nlsystems.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 23, 2002 at 10:50:38PM +0000, Doug Rabson wrote: > On Saturday 23 November 2002 8:17 pm, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=21417 > > > > Change 21417 by marcel@marcel_nfs on 2002/11/23 12:17:09 > > > > Raw, untested implementation of EPC syscalls. > > This seems to be missing the bit after calling syscall() which checks > for a full exception_restore, e.g. after an execve and also the check > for calling ast(), e.g. after a signal. Yes. [snip] > > One other thing after re-familiarising myself with exception.s. You have > added unwind records to all the kernel IVT entry points. This is quite > unhelpful when trying to debug kernel faults. The previous version > which manually unwound past the exception to the code which faulted was > extremely useful and saved me a lot of time in debugging. Can we have > it back please :-). If we want to use unwinding to get to the register state of the process, we can never unwind over the exception code. It's probably much easier to restart unwinding after it stopped at the exception entry point. This would also hold for signal handlers. Would a DDB command to resume unwinding work? -- Marcel Moolenaar USPA: A-39004 marcel@xcllnt.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe p4-projects" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021123230017.GB8744>