Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!chris From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards Subject: Re: Solved 4.2BSD panic trap 9 problem on VAX 11/785 Message-ID: <1246@umcp-cs.UUCP> Date: Thu, 15-Aug-85 01:47:04 EDT Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1246 Posted: Thu Aug 15 01:47:04 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 18-Aug-85 03:02:18 EDT References: <578@brl-tgr.ARPA> <1041@ulysses.UUCP> <1202@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1046@ulysses.UUCP> Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD Lines: 30 >>>No! The fix is to insert a ".space n" directive immediately before >>>the function in locore.s that is causing the problem. >> Yes, this is better, but is also more difficult to apply. It's > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^? >There is nothing difficult about this. References to probes in C code >are another problem; you probably WILL need to pad with nop's. So what? >Nothing says you have to use the same solution in both languages. That is what I meant. I considered different phrasing, but thought that was the shortest that conveyed what I meant. I guess it did, but just barely. So here's the long version: Yes, it's better in this case to use a .space directive to push the probe down, as that saves CPU time (as you pointed out). However, if you encounter the same problem later with one of the probe instructions which is embedded within the C code, it will be much more difficult (though not impossible) to use .space or other magic to move the probe instruction. Using nop's may be inefficient, but it is easy to implement in every case in which a solution to the probe bug must be applied, therefore I present it as the general solution. How's that? :-) -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 4251) UUCP: seismo!umcp-cs!chris CSNet: chris@umcp-cs ARPA: chris@maryland