X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mailnull set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
Message-ID: <3C729854.7EBE42E4@yahoo.com>
From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com>
Organization: Ched Research
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: DS and ESP
References: <a4rfgu$sbg$1 AT news DOT tpi DOT pl> <a4t25g$nn0$1 AT antares DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se> <3c727c49 DOT sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 22
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:53:56 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.90.170.65
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT worldnet DOT att DOT net
X-Trace: bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 1014144836 12.90.170.65 (Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:53:56 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:53:56 GMT
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Charles Sandmann wrote:
> 
> > That is correct. Unless interrupts are disabled when [code using
> > values below ESP] executes it's extremely broken. And it might be
> > broken even if interrupts are disabled (page fault e. g.).
> 
> If the DPMI provider is done correctly either hardware interrupts or
> even page faults work fine even when the user ESP is invalid.  All of
> these should be handled on the locked 4Kb DPMI internal stack and
> never touch the user stack.  So, it turns out that code isn't broken :-)

Doesn't the interrupt itself to the stack switching code have to
store a return address on the user stack? and maybe the flags
too.  Or is that all in the hardware?

-- 
Chuck F (cbfalconer AT yahoo DOT com) (cbfalconer AT XXXXworldnet DOT att DOT net)
   Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
   (Remove "XXXX" from reply address. yahoo works unmodified)
   mailto:uce AT ftc DOT gov  (for spambots to harvest)