Ramon van Handel wrote:
> It's a nice initiative Kevin, but it seems to me there are more urgent
> things that need to be coded right now!! I'm not sure, but it would
> probably be better to save realmode until PM is actually working well
> (ie when you can run linux). After all, realmode support requires a
> substantially different approach than the PM code. What do you think ?
Most everything is the same, only you have to do less since there
is no guest GDT etc to contend with. The dynamic monitor page
mapping is the same as PM with CR0.PG==0 which is done.
I extended the fault handling to accept the extra
data seg selectors which are pushed by an int/exc from
v86 mode already.
I don't think I'll need much time for this, and it will help
enormously for testing the emulation, since I have a bunch
of .com and .exe instruction tests.
> Can't we catch SMSW ?
Intel loves to let user code read system registers. There is no
exception generated. Intel put the '86' in v86 mode. ;^)
> This is no different in PM. Timing is an issue that needs to be solved
> in general, not specifically in RM.
Much agreed.
-Kevin
