• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: ECX_BAD_ACCESS again
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ECX_BAD_ACCESS again


  • Subject: Re: ECX_BAD_ACCESS again
  • From: Jonas Maebe <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:48:13 +0100


On 05 Jan 2008, at 14:07, Robert Bielik wrote:

Jonas Maebe wrote:
One warning about this: for i386 (Intel 32 bit), passing arguments is not going to work like that in C because the default calling convention there passes everything on the stack (while ours is fastcall, where the first three parameters are passed in registers). You may be able to declare your handler in gcc also as fastcall to work around this, but I don't know by heart how this is done. Or you may simply not pass any parameters at all.
Ok, nice! As I know exactly where and when the exception might be thrown, I don't need to pass any params. As an aside, is there a way to register signal handlers scope-wise? That is, only to intercept a signal within a specific scope? Even though the library call is the only place where this happens, I guess that signal handling is global for the entire process?

Signal handlers are always global for the entire process. You can use pthread_sigmask to mask certain signals in certain threads, but the handler itself and whether or not it's installed is always the same for all threads. Additionally, synchronous signals such as a SIGSEGV should always be sent to the thread in which it was triggered.



Jonas _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-dev mailing list (email@hidden) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: This email sent to email@hidden
References: 
 >ECX_BAD_ACCESS again (From: Robert Bielik <email@hidden>)
 >Re: ECX_BAD_ACCESS again (From: Jonas Maebe <email@hidden>)
 >Re: ECX_BAD_ACCESS again (From: Robert Bielik <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Posix Timers?
  • Next by Date: Re: Posix Timers?
  • Previous by thread: Re: ECX_BAD_ACCESS again
  • Next by thread: fread() bug?
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread