Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 4 Feb 1997 19:50:42 -0700 (MST)
From:      Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
To:        bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans)
Cc:        jlemon@americantv.com, tri@iki.fi, current@FreeBSD.ORG, emulation@FreeBSD.ORG, phk@critter.dk.tfs.com
Subject:   Re: vm86 in current?
Message-ID:  <199702050250.TAA13988@phaeton.artisoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <199702041847.FAA32304@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Feb 5, 97 05:47:58 am

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >BTW, are there any objections if I grow the trapframe/intrframe/clockframe
> >structures by 4 more words?  It would only affect things that do sizeof(),
> >and perhaps the kernel debugger.  Otherwise, a new vm86frame structure will
> >be needed, with a little bit of typecasting back and forth.
> 
> It would be bogus because the standard trapframe doesn't actually have
> the extra words.  However, perhaps you can fudge the extra words by
> setting tss_esp0 16 lower.

This will impact the SMP per CPU segment.  Please advise of the changes
to the smp@freebsd.org list so that they can be incorporated there
as well.


					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?199702050250.TAA13988>