Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 10:17:25 -0600 From: jlemon@americantv.com (Jonathan Lemon) To: tri@iki.fi Cc: phk@critter.dk.tfs.com (Poul-Henning Kamp), current@freebsd.org, emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: vm86 in current? Message-ID: <Mutt.19970204101725.jlemon@right.PCS> In-Reply-To: <199702041451.QAA06624@pooh.tky.hut.fi>; from Timo J Rinne on Feb 4, 1997 16:51:46 %2B0200 References: <199702041420.QAA06516@pooh.tky.hut.fi> <1135.855067749@critter.dk.tfs.com> <199702041451.QAA06624@pooh.tky.hut.fi>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Timo J Rinne writes: > Poul-Henning Kamp writes: > > In message <199702041420.QAA06516@pooh.tky.hut.fi>, Timo J Rinne writes: > > >Hi > > > > > >Is the vm86 code going to make its way into the freebsd-current (3.0) > > >code anytime soon? > > > > Yes, If somebody starts working on it. > > As far as I understood the stuff in emulation list, someone has. > It's a bit of the confusion if that stuff lives only in some weird > patch set. Of course it's also bad, if the stability of the overall > system is compromised because of this. Well, I've been re-working the patch set a little but, and now have a working set of vm86 patches against -current, which appear to be stable. I've eliminated a private 'return' to VM86, so now the normal kernel exit point is used. The next step I want to do is move the emulation of a couple instructions (cli/sti) into the kernel, and then add in VME support. When I get the cli/sti stuff working, I'll submit them to someone for integration. Hopefully this week. 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. -- Jonathan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Mutt.19970204101725.jlemon>