Subject: Re: what is the status of the ktrace-lwp branch?
To: Christos Zoulas <email@example.com>
From: Chuck Silvers <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 10/30/2005 14:58:08
On Sun, Oct 30, 2005 at 02:30:14PM -0800, Chuck Silvers wrote:
> oh... looking further I see that someone added an optional siginfo_t to the
> KTR_PSIG data, which is of course completely hardware-specific. sigh.
> that does make this a bit more complicated. ideally, these SIG records
> would contain both something to indicate the format of the siginfo_t
> (ie. some unique ID for the MACHINE_ARCH) and a length so that it can
> be skipped over even if the ID isn't know.
er, nevermind. siginfo_t is constant-size, I was thinking of ucontext_t,
which came in around the same time and I mentally associate with the
siginfo stuff for some reason.