#include "interrupt.h"
#include "interr.h"
#include "breakpoint.h"
+#include "monitor.h"
#define BREAKPOINT_INST 0xcc /* INT3 */
break;
case trap_Breakpoint: /* not tested */
- case trap_FunctionEndBreakpoint: /* not tested */
+ case trap_FunEndBreakpoint: /* not tested */
break;
case trap_PendingInterrupt:
handle_breakpoint(signal, info, context);
break;
- case trap_FunctionEndBreakpoint:
+ case trap_FunEndBreakpoint:
(char*)(*os_context_pc_addr(context)) -= 1;
*os_context_pc_addr(context) =
- (int)handle_function_end_breakpoint(signal, info, context);
+ (int)handle_fun_end_breakpoint(signal, info, context);
break;
default:
}
}
+static void
+sigill_handler(int signal, siginfo_t *siginfo, void *void_context) {
+ os_context_t *context = (os_context_t*)void_context;
+ fake_foreign_function_call(context);
+ monitor_or_something();
+}
+
void
arch_install_interrupt_handlers()
{
SHOW("entering arch_install_interrupt_handlers()");
- interrupt_install_low_level_handler(SIGILL , sigtrap_handler);
- interrupt_install_low_level_handler(SIGTRAP, sigtrap_handler);
+
+ /* Note: The old CMU CL code here used sigtrap_handler() to handle
+ * SIGILL as well as SIGTRAP. I couldn't see any reason to do
+ * things that way. So, I changed to separate handlers when
+ * debugging a problem on OpenBSD, where SBCL wasn't catching
+ * SIGILL properly, but was instead letting the process be
+ * terminated with an "Illegal instruction" output. If this change
+ * turns out to break something (maybe breakpoint handling on some
+ * OS I haven't tested on?) and we have to go back to the old CMU
+ * CL way, I hope there will at least be a comment to explain
+ * why.. -- WHN 2001-06-07 */
+ undoably_install_low_level_interrupt_handler(SIGILL , sigill_handler);
+ undoably_install_low_level_interrupt_handler(SIGTRAP, sigtrap_handler);
+
SHOW("returning from arch_install_interrupt_handlers()");
}
\f