Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 12:21:12 +1030 (CST) From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Cc: msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au, terry@lambert.org, erich@lodgenet.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DOS emulation (was Re: Networking in PCEMU (1/2)) Message-ID: <199610280151.MAA27654@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <199610262151.OAA17662@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Oct 26, 96 02:51:46 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Terry Lambert stands accused of saying: > > > > ... until someone takes one of the freely-available CPU emulators > > (from PCEmu, Bochs, Willows TWIN etc), makes it an LKM and teaches the > > kernel to run processes with the synthetic PSL_VM bit set using it. > > > > Geez Terry, I even took this idea from your old postings on the topic 8) > > Actually, I think I suggested making the execution class loader for > the magic number for foreign binaries load a CPU emulation module > and pass the arguments from 0 on unadulterated. > > The emulation module then mmap's the program as if it were a native > loader, and manages system call traps by calling the native system > calls for the OS. Regardless of whether you put the fins on the front or the back, you can still hang your shirt to dry on them. Still, at least we agree in principle. > more than a year ago -- fuzzy memory). Shortly afterward Jordan posted > that he and Justin and I-don't-remember-who had talked about it > extensively at Usenix, and VM86() support was a priority. Well, it's still a priority; it's just not getting anywhere right now 8( > The current topic is actually different than just VM86() support; I'm > more concerned with being able to use commercial (ie: Intel) binaries > on non-Intel platforms. I think processor emulation wins over direct > VM86() support for that reason (also for DOS emulation on non-Intel > platforms). The current development direction has the processor emulation and the 'machine' (DOS/BIOS) emulation neatly segregated. Come the time for its reuse in a non-intel environment, I expect it to be ready. > hardware DOS can run on. But if I were given a choice about which of > the technologies to exclusively pursue, I'd pick processor emulation: > it's the more general one, and it's more important in the long run; IMO, > x86 processor dependence, like ISA and IDE, is a fad not long for this > world. Processor emulation is useless without emulation for the environment around it; the two are mutually dependant. > Terry Lambert -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610280151.MAA27654>