This is the mail archive of the java-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [JVMTI] RFA: JVMTI Stack Tracing

From: Hans Boehm <Hans dot Boehm at hp dot com>
To: Kyle Galloway <kgallowa at redhat dot com>
Cc: java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:00:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [JVMTI] RFA: JVMTI Stack Tracing
References: <4538D434.90208@redhat.com> <4538E40A.7060602@avtrex.com> <4538EB84.5040306@redhat.com>


On Fri, 20 Oct 2006, Kyle Galloway wrote:

> I should have set, SA_RESTART, I'll change that.  As for SIGTRAP, there
> was no real reason, I could use any of a bunch of different signals,
> maybe SIGPWR would be a better choice?
>
I'm missing context here.  But won't this conflict with the GC's use of
SIGPWR?

Hans

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [JVMTI] RFA: JVMTI Stack Tracing
  - From: David Daney

References:
- [JVMTI] RFA: JVMTI Stack Tracing
  - From: Kyle Galloway
- Re: [JVMTI] RFA: JVMTI Stack Tracing
  - From: David Daney
- Re: [JVMTI] RFA: JVMTI Stack Tracing
  - From: Kyle Galloway

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]