Mail Archives: djgpp/1999/06/28/04:36:02
X-Envelope-To: | <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
|
From: | "Javier Calleja" <dismuntel AT apdo DOT com>
|
To: | "djgpp" <djgpp AT delorie DOT com>
|
Subject: | Does the 'go32_dpmi_allocate_iret_wrapper' do the 'STI' instruction?
|
Date: | Mon, 28 Jun 1999 10:07:05 +0200
|
Message-ID: | <01bec13d$366afe60$0720a8c0@salmon.ctv.es>
|
MIME-Version: | 1.0
|
X-Priority: | 3
|
X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal
|
X-Mailer: | Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
|
X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
|
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com
|
Hi world:
I have wrote a C hardware interrupt handler and I have used the
'go32_dpmi_allocate_iret_wrapper'. I have read that
"... where the CPU's interrupt is virtualizad, IRET may not restore the
interrupt flag. Therefore clients should execute a STI instruction or else
interrupts remain disabled."
Before I exit, of course, I execute the 'EOI', but I don't make the 'STI'
instruction. Sometimes, the handler is called but the interrupt flag is not
restore.
Is correctI if I put a STI instruction before the EOI instruction or the
go32 wrapper does this for me?
If I put a STI, could I have problems if another interrupt is called?
I'm looking forward to hearing from you. Thanks world.
Javier Calleja
- Raw text -