Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 7 Nov 1997 00:52:27 +0000 (GMT)
From:      Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>
To:        tony@dell.com (Tony Overfield)
Cc:        gurney_j@resnet.uoregon.edu, chuckr@glue.umd.edu, mike@smith.net.au, tlambert@primenet.com, jamil@trojanhorse.ml.org, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, j_mini@efn.org
Subject:   Re: >64MB
Message-ID:  <199711070052.RAA19368@usr01.primenet.com>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971106150448.006d5438@bugs.us.dell.com> from "Tony Overfield" at Nov 6, 97 03:04:48 pm

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> My ambiguous question reworded would say...
> 
> Once you are in the kernel startup code and running in protected mode, 
> why not simply switch back to real mode for BIOS calls and etc. instead 
> of trying to set up a VM86() facility?  I think it's easier and much 
> better for compatibility while booting.

I don't understand how it's a compatability win.

Plus there's still the issue of "what INT 13 disk maps to what controller
and target", that's the reason we can't know the BIOS geometry to make
up good fdisk data in the first place...

Plus we need a VM86() in general in any case, since we may need to call
the BIOS mode setting code for standard PCI/EISA/ISA video cards that
are plugged into non-Intel hardware, etc., because card vendors don't
know how to write data dependencies in a seperate area of their BIOS
so a non-Intel OS could figure out how to program the card without
needing information obtained under non-disclosure.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199711070052.RAA19368>