Farid Zaripov wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 6:36 PM
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: negative exit status in Windows builds
Farid Zaripov wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 11:23 PM
To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: negative exit status in Windows builds
STATUS_STACK_OVERFLOW can be mapped to SIGSTKFLT (used for this
purpose on Linux).
But SIGSTKFLT is signals when the coprocessor experiences a stack
fault
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIGSTKFLT) and we have program stack
overflow.
What's the difference?
The coprocessor stack is the memory inside coprocessor (set of the
registers)
and program stack is the part of the common RAM.
I see. You're right, it probably wouldn't be appropriate to map
STATUS_STACK_OVERFLOW on the main processor to a coprocessor error,
even if it's not used anymore. Although by mapping to SIGSEGV we
are losing a valuable piece of information about the failure. It
would be nice if we could find a way to preserve it.
FWIW, I haven't found much information on SIGSTKFLT on the net.
The most informative description I came across is this one:
SIGSTKFLT
This signal is defined only by Linux. This signal showed up in
the earliest versions of Linux, intended to be used for stack
faults taken by the math coprocessor. This signal is not
generated by the kernel, but remains for backward compatibility.
http://book.chinaunix.net/special/ebook/addisonWesley/APUE2/0201433079/ch10lev1sec2.html
Martin
