Re: Bug in Mint

[Ulrich Kuehn <kuehn@GOEDEL.UNI-MUENSTER.DE>]

Hello there!

|>Ulrich Kuehn writes:
|>
|>> I think, there should be something similar done in the kernel as for
|>> Setexc(), which set also the protection mode of the memory region the
|>> pointer points into to supervisor.
|>
|>There's absolutely no way for the kernel to guess the length of the region
|>pointed to by Setexc(). If you really want to install an interrupt handler,
|>why would you want to use another protection mode than "global" anyway ?
|>
Well, there is something like an upper bound of the size: the whole
process :)

|>A more serious concern would be: should MiNT reinstall the old exception
|>vectors if a program using Setexc() crashes inadvertantly? Or should the
|>programmer be responsible for unlinking them, using the old and well-known
|>trick of using the etv_term vector?  Same problem for keyboard tables,
|>user-provided iorec buffers, Dosound(), Setscreen(), and probably many,
|>many other Xbios functions...
|>
Well, it should, but it would be some work to implement it, and also,
it would decrease performance. But then we want that also for some
internal stuff like bios device drivers and file systems, that must
also be deleted from the internal list if the corresponding process
dies.

Ciao,
Ulirch