On Monday 16 May 2005 20:48, Jeff Dike wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2005 at 07:04:13PM +0200, Blaisorblade wrote: > > I could move maybe move sigsetjmp to kernelspace code; > > How are you going to get a definition of jmp_buf in there? I actually want to include the headers. Not that I would refuse to copy verbatim from headers (binary compatibility allows that to work as long we use the same host OS / libc combination). > > however, another > > possibility would be to use the exception handler tables we've always > > supported without using them (only drawback is that the code *must* be > > inlined, and possibly the need for some assembler code, which however is > > probably avoidable).
> Maybe. That's worth looking in to. I've used the setjmp scheme in > preference to that because it's portable, but maybe we should switch back > in some places. Yes, more portable but slightly slower. Also, if you get the compiler to inline the code anyway, you only write pseudo-ops in assembler, so that's no problem. -- Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade Skype user "PaoloGiarrusso" Linux registered user n. 292729 http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes Want to be the first software developer in space? Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7412&alloc_id=16344&op=click _______________________________________________ User-mode-linux-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/user-mode-linux-devel
