On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 10:32:15 +0200, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Still, doing that stuff in APCs is a step in the right direction, you
> just need to make sure you can safely run these APCs from the SIGUSR1
> handler.
How is the thread to interrupt to be selected? I really am not seeing
what's wron
Dan Kegel wrote:
On 8/5/06, Eric Pouech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was talking (at least) about VirtualQueryEx, which should be also
implemented. All the debuggers use it for memory inspection.
FWIW, an implementation for Linux was posted at
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2002
Dan Kegel kegel.com> writes:
>
> On 8/5/06, Eric Pouech wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> > I was talking (at least) about VirtualQueryEx, which should be also
> > implemented. All the debuggers use it for memory inspection.
>
> FWIW, an implementation for Linux was posted at
> http://www.winehq.org/piperm
On 8/5/06, Eric Pouech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was talking (at least) about VirtualQueryEx, which should be also
implemented. All the debuggers use it for memory inspection.
FWIW, an implementation for Linux was posted at
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2002-July/007482.html
Per
Dan Kegel wrote:
On 8/5/06, Eric Pouech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Still, doing that stuff in APCs is a step in the right direction, you
>> just need to make sure you can safely run these APCs from the SIGUSR1
>> handler.
>
> Do we have to verify that now, or can that wait until we want
> t
On 8/5/06, Dan Kegel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 8/5/06, Eric Pouech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Still, doing that stuff in APCs is a step in the right direction, you
> >> just need to make sure you can safely run these APCs from the SIGUSR1
> >> handler.
> >
> > Do we have to verify that n
On 8/5/06, Eric Pouech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Still, doing that stuff in APCs is a step in the right direction, you
>> just need to make sure you can safely run these APCs from the SIGUSR1
>> handler.
>
> Do we have to verify that now, or can that wait until we want
> to add support for de
Dan Kegel wrote:
On 8/5/06, Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Still, doing that stuff in APCs is a step in the right direction, you
just need to make sure you can safely run these APCs from the SIGUSR1
handler.
Do we have to verify that now, or can that wait until we want
to add
On 8/5/06, Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Still, doing that stuff in APCs is a step in the right direction, you
just need to make sure you can safely run these APCs from the SIGUSR1
handler.
Do we have to verify that now, or can that wait until we want
to add support for debugger
"Dan Kegel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So all you have to do is identify all the locks that your APCs
> might need to acquire, and verify that they are always acquired
> in the same order by all possible code paths.
> (Or did I miss something, Alexandre?)
Well, you are right that running APCs
On 8/4/06, Thomas Kho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Tommy's APC version of his
> > VirtualAllocEx / CreateRemoteThread patch
> > seems to be safe (since APCs only run a points where threads
> > in well-written programs are not holding locks),
>
> Unfortunately there's no such guarantee, kernel A
On 8/4/06, Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Dan Kegel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tommy's APC version of his
> VirtualAllocEx / CreateRemoteThread patch
> seems to be safe (since APCs only run a points where threads
> in well-written programs are not holding locks),
Unfortunate
On 8/4/06, Alexandre Julliard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tommy's APC version of his
> VirtualAllocEx / CreateRemoteThread patch
> seems to be safe (since APCs only run a points where threads
> in well-written programs are not holding locks),
Unfortunately there's no such guarantee, kernel APCs
"Dan Kegel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tommy's APC version of his
> VirtualAllocEx / CreateRemoteThread patch
> seems to be safe (since APCs only run a points where threads
> in well-written programs are not holding locks),
Unfortunately there's no such guarantee, kernel APCs will run on every
Tommy's APC version of his
VirtualAllocEx / CreateRemoteThread patch
seems to be safe (since APCs only run a points where threads
in well-written programs are not holding locks),
is complete enough to make many apps happy,
and is probably the best that can be done without
a service thread or a rea
15 matches
Mail list logo
