[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ramon van Handel) wrote:
> Yes, I am aware of that. However, the idea was that the
> interface to the plugins should be consistant... the actual
> implementation differs quite a bit.
My point was that we'll need *two* interfaces; one to raise
an IRQ, and one to announce an intercept handler for a software
interrupt or exception ...
> A debugger may want to intercept an arbitrary interrupt...
> GDB cannot do this, but a specialised system-software debugger,
> which will undoubtedly still be coded, can. I seem to remember
> that that excellent DOS debugger, SoftICE, had this feature.
OK, I can see that this could be useful. To implement this we'd
probably need a bitmap of interrupts to be intercepted, and
check this map in the monitor ...
> Moreover, another idea would be to reimplement an operating
> system *outside* the VM, and only run the application code
> inside it. For instance, one could hack up WINE to be a
> plugin, which catches the windows system call from the VM.
There is no 'windows system call' as such. (NT does have a
int 2E call, but this is undocumented and Wine doesn't implement
it; 95 doesn't have any standard system call at all ...).
The only (partially) documented Windows interface (which Wine
implements) is about comparable to the libc interface in Linux:
the KERNEL32, USER32, GDI32, ... entry points.
Bye,
Ulrich
