On Sun, Aug 17, 2003 at 12:30:49PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > Looking at the various specifications there is an additional route > we can take. We can have the 16bit trampoline detect if it is running > in v86 mode, and if so use the appropriate DPMI/VCPI/XMS functions to > switch to protected mode instead of our hand crafted code. > > That should allow us to run under Win9x, freedos, and djgpp. For > Freebsd we will probably need a couple of the very most common calls > implemented in the 16bit trampoline as well. And of course we can > still implement the legacy entry points.
Very interesting. > - It is not clear what an Option ROM will care about so being as > backward compatible as possible is a real plus. > > - Going with a solution that can (at least in theory) handle > all of the legacy backwards compatibility cases will allow us > to concentrate on a single implementation. > > - Going with a solution that is primarily 32bit C code will allow us > to reuse the code in appropriate ways. > > - Not using v86 mode by default will allow a high degree of > compatibility anyway. > > Does a version of ADLO that runs as 32bit C code sound reasonable? What do you think about non-x86? -- Takeshi _______________________________________________ Linuxbios mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.clustermatic.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios