Date: Sun, 8 Aug 1999 14:35:03 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Józsa Péter <p_jozsa AT freemail DOT c3 DOT hu>
cc: DJGPP mailing list <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
Subject: Re: Code and data locking
In-Reply-To: <001901bedf95$7533c200$f36026c2@default>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990808143442.23423l-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by delorie.com id HAA18570
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Fri, 6 Aug 1999, Józsa Péter wrote:

> int _crt0_startup_flags = _CRT0_FLAG_NONMOVE_SBRK | _CRT0_FLAG_LOCK_MEMORY;
> 
> int main(void)
> {
>     _crt0_startup_flags &= ~_CRT0_LOCK_MEMORY;

This might work, but to be sure, you will have to look through the
library functions called by your interrupt handlers and make sure none
of them allocates memory.  Otherwise, your handler will wind up using
unlocked memory and will crash.

Also note that the entire stack of your program will be locked in the
above setup, because the stack is sbrk'ed (and locked) by the startup
code.