From owner-freebsd-emulation  Tue Feb  4 18:54:59 1997
Return-Path: <owner-emulation>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id SAA22337
          for emulation-outgoing; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 18:54:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA22317;
          Tue, 4 Feb 1997 18:54:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id TAA13988; Tue, 4 Feb 1997 19:50:43 -0700
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Message-Id: <199702050250.TAA13988@phaeton.artisoft.com>
Subject: Re: vm86 in current?
To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans)
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 1997 19:50:42 -0700 (MST)
Cc: jlemon@americantv.com, tri@iki.fi, current@FreeBSD.ORG,
        emulation@FreeBSD.ORG, phk@critter.dk.tfs.com
In-Reply-To: <199702041847.FAA32304@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Feb 5, 97 05:47:58 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> >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.