From:	"Martin Czamai" <M DOT Czamai AT peak-system DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Does CWSDPMI block jumps to 0xFFFF0 ??
Date:	Sat, 20 Oct 2001 15:45:40 +0200
Organization:	[neXgo] the next generation online
Lines:	36
Message-ID:	<9qrvcp$a15$1@newsread4.nexgo.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	d21173-gw.netzdienste.de
X-Trace:	newsread4.nexgo.de 10277 FR
X-Complaints-To:	abuse AT germany DOT net
NNTP-Posting-Date:	Sat, 20 Oct 2001 13:49:13 +0000 (UTC)
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
X-Priority:	3
X-Newsreader:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hi,

can anybody tell me whether cwsdpmi blocks jumps to 0xFFFF0 (0xFFFF :
0x0000) to reboot the computer??
If not, what's wrong at this few lines of code??

#include <sys/farptr.h>
#include <go32.h>

void (*pRstFunction)(void);                                     // simple
function pointer

int main(void)
{
     _farpokew(_dos_ds, 0x40*16+0x72, 0x1234);  // seg*16 +offset ; warm
boot
//   _farpokew(_dos_ds, 0x40*16+0x72, 0x0000);  // cold boot
//   jmp to Adr. 0xFFFF:0000

//   __asm__(" jmp 0xFFFF0 ");           // direct jump to adress causes
segment violation (but a jmp to 0xFFFF works fine..)

     pRstFunction = 0xFFFF0;                // correct pointer
     (*pRstFunction)();                            // perform jump; causes
just a segement violation instead of a reboot
     return(0);                                          // should never run
this line of code, just to make the compiler happy
}

Thanks in advance for any help

Martin
M DOT Czamai AT PEAK-System DOT com

- Raw text -