Subject: Re: SIGTRAP for traced processes and COMPAT_MACH
To: Emmanuel Dreyfus <email@example.com>
From: Matthew Orgass <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/30/2003 15:19:07
On 2003-11-30 email@example.com wrote:
> Matthew Orgass <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Since kpsignal2 is static this is better there, but I don't see how it
> > would benefit trapsignal.
> signals sent by traps for illegal instruction, memory fault and many
> others are sent through trapsignal. trapsignal can call do
> kpsignal/kpsignal1/kpsignal2 chain, or it can directly call kpsendsig
> for an immediate signal delivery.
> If we interecept the signal in kpsignal2, we need to intercept it in
> trapsignal too.
No, I mean why not use the existing e_trapsignal for this?
> > Also, should kevents be sent if a Mach exception is raised?
> I see no need for this now... Only compatibility code is interested into
> Mach exceptions.
Apple has a kqueue manpage, so it looks like they either use it already
or intend to do so in the future. If it is there already it is worth a
quick check to make sure the emulation is right.