Re: [PATCH v3] ucrtbase: Implement _seh_filter_exe and _seh_filter_dll

[Piotr Caban]

On 11/05/15 13:52, Martin Storsjo wrote:
> +int CDECL _seh_filter_dll(MSVCRT_ulong ex, PEXCEPTION_POINTERS ptr)
> +{
> - TRACE("(%08x,%p)\n", ex, ptr);
> - /* I assume ptr->ExceptionRecord->ExceptionCode is the same as ex */
> - return msvcrt_exception_filter(ptr);
>
> +}

This function should behave like __CppXcptFilter.

Thanks,
Piotr

[PATCH v3] ucrtbase: Implement _seh_filter_exe and _seh_filter_dll

[Martin Storsjö]

On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Piotr Caban wrote:
> On 11/05/15 13:52, Martin Storsjo wrote:
> > +int CDECL _seh_filter_dll(MSVCRT_ulong ex, PEXCEPTION_POINTERS ptr)
> > +{
> > - TRACE("(%08x,%p)\n", ex, ptr);
> > - /* I assume ptr->ExceptionRecord->ExceptionCode is the same as ex */
> > - return msvcrt_exception_filter(ptr);
> >
> > +}
>
> This function should behave like __CppXcptFilter.

Hmm, ok, so the difference is that it should return immediately unless ex 
== CXX_EXCEPTION?

Anyway, since CXX_EXCEPTION only is defined in cppexcept.h (and except.c 
doesn't include it), I could move it to cpp.c or to 
except_{arm,i386,x86_64}.c - why is __CppXcptFilter defined (identically) 
in these files btw, and why do they have -arch=i386,x86_64,arm in the spec 
file - doesn't that amount to pretty much all current targets?

// Martin

[PATCH v3] ucrtbase: Implement _seh_filter_exe and _seh_filter_dll

[Piotr Caban]

On 11/06/15 21:59, Martin Storsjö wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Piotr Caban wrote:
> > On 11/05/15 13:52, Martin Storsjo wrote:
> > > +int CDECL _seh_filter_dll(MSVCRT_ulong ex, PEXCEPTION_POINTERS ptr)
> > > +{
> > > - TRACE("(%08x,%p)\n", ex, ptr);
> > > - /* I assume ptr->ExceptionRecord->ExceptionCode is the same as
> > >
> > > ex */
> > > - return msvcrt_exception_filter(ptr);
> > >
> > > +}
> >
> > This function should behave like __CppXcptFilter.
>
> Hmm, ok, so the difference is that it should return immediately unless
> ex == CXX_EXCEPTION?

Yes.
> Anyway, since CXX_EXCEPTION only is defined in cppexcept.h (and except.c
> doesn't include it), I could move it to cpp.c or to
> except_{arm,i386,x86_64}.c - why is __CppXcptFilter defined
> (identically) in these files btw, and why do they have
> -arch=i386,x86_64,arm in the spec file - doesn't that amount to pretty
> much all current targets?

In theory you can build wine on other platforms. I don't know why it was 
done this way.

Instead of adding new functions you can use _XcptFilter and 
__CppXcptFilter in spec file.

Thanks,
Piotr