[ros-dev] DOS Subsystem.

[Jerry]

What I was thinking was to emulate the VGA bios/VESA by using DirectX or 
OpenGL calls (or possibly the Allegro Game Library).

I was more or less thinking of how to implement the VDM with security 
and stability in mind with a mininum set of things that the OS has to do.

Have you heard or read about the VIF (bit 19) and VIP (bit 20) flags in 
the EFLAGS register?


x86-64 in Long Mode does not have V86 mode. It probibly would be best to 
emulate the legacy x86 machine in x86-64 Long Mode

(maybe a bit off topic)
Hummm.......  maybe "x86-128" in "full mode" would loose 32 bit support 
and drop 16 bit mode all together. If  this does happen then I see a 
trend comming.

KJKHyperion wrote:

> TwoTailedFox wrote:
>
>> If NTVDM/VDM is neither a service, nor a Subsystem, then what 
>> precisely is it?
>>  
>>
> a hack. A hack we don't have to support, since the VDM concept sucks, 
> it has been used as a backdoor in the past and it remains a backdoor 
> by design (direct hardware access for VGA, standard system calls 
> bypassed in certain cases, own fault handling and other such niceties).
>
> And intelligent emulation has worked much better despite theory would 
> suggest a VDM to perform better - for one, most DOS applications are 
> busy-waiting and when run in a VDM will continuously cause expensive 
> context switches in a tight loop, as they raise interrupts, faulting 
> into the kernel, bounced back to user mode, handled by the emulation 
> layer which finally resumes the DOS code with another call into the 
> kernel which switches back the CPU into V86 mode, give or take a 
> context switch... this usually kills both the DOS application and the 
> host system making both unusable. As opposed to an emulator that can 
> simply recompile the DOS code into native code and execute it 
> directly, with interrupts not being much more expensive than regular 
> function calls, and with the chance to behave a lot more like real 
> hardware, unlike V86 mode.
>
> And this doesn't even take VGA emulation in account - Windows support 
> for full-screen DOS applications is especially gruesome, adding a 
> couple more context switches of the ugliest kind (TSS switching) to 
> call into the real-mode 16-bit VGA BIOS. Again, emulation would be not 
> only simpler, but also much faster, as the VGA BIOS virtually is dead 
> code with performance that cannot even remotely be compared with what 
> today's GPUs can do (more or less easily available through DirectX), 
> and it's real-mode 16-bit code on top of that.
>
> Also, Windows has successfully employed software emulation for DOS 
> support, and the actual implementation of the user-mode VDM doesn't 
> affect Win32 components relying on it, but it has a huge impact on 
> kernel complexity and even security - software emulation is painless, 
> has no special kernel requirements and is perfectly compatible. And 
> makes for a self-contained implementation that can be easily 
> customized, or completely removed from an installation or distribution 
> without the need of a separate kernel build.
>
> Finally, V86 support in the Windows kernel is virtually unused outside 
> of the VDM, and completely inadequate for any kind of serious work if 
> compared with V86 support on other operating systems.
>
> In short, it's just ballast
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: crashfourit.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 55 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.reactos.org/pipermail/ros-dev/attachments/20051129/01a86952/crashfourit.vcf