Vitaliy Margolen schrieb: > Sunday, December 11, 2005, 11:23:18 AM, Peter Beutner wrote: >>The name suggests it's more about signal handling than a place to throw every >>arch >>dependent code in it ;) >>But that's not the point. >>I just thought it might not be the best solution to duplicate that check in >>every signal >>handler. >>Besides what about somebody changes the Dr* registers in an exception handler >>invoked by >>an exception raised by the application via RaiseException(i.e. not via a >>signal handler >>called by the kernel)? >>*Every* installed exception handler can change the registers in the CONTEXT >>structure, >>thats why I think it would be the easiest way to implement it in >>__regs_RtlRaiseException. > > > Good point but it needs a test. Besides I'm not sure that we will change > any registers in that case at all. (just checked and no, we won't change > any registers). hm what exactly do you need to test?
And afaik the registers will be changed when the CONTEXT structure is restored on return from __regs_RtlRaiseException. see __wine_call_from_32_regs.
