From:	"Duncan Coutts" <Duncan DOT Coutts AT dial DOT pipex DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: a VERY difficult problem
Date:	Sat, 18 Sep 1999 03:05:28 +0100
Organization:	UUNET WorldCom server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNET WorldCom
Message-ID:	<7s04n5$nsi$1@lure.pipex.net>
References:	<937519527 DOT 589 DOT 0 DOT pluto DOT d4ee0fa5 AT news DOT demon DOT nl>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	userl565.uk.uudial.com
X-Trace:	lure.pipex.net 937661989 24466 193.149.75.124 (18 Sep 1999 13:39:49 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT uk DOT uu DOT net
NNTP-Posting-Date:	18 Sep 1999 13:39:49 GMT
X-Newsreader:	Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Lines:	14
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Did you know that the 386 and up can do pre-emptive multi-tasking
automatically with no intervention? Check out some (advanced)
protected mode information. Most pc os's don't do this though, they
handle the task switching manually in their own code but still use
protected mode CPU features to do this.

This might be rather better than using a timer interrupt. BTW, if you
use the timer interrupt to do the switching, shouldn't you get
infinite recursion? You are returning from the timer interrupt
function?

Duncan

- Raw text -