From:	"Alexei A. Frounze" <see_below AT the_messasge_body DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: far pointers
Date:	Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:14:40 +0400
Organization:	None
Lines:	36
Message-ID:	<39450C70.2C270302@the_messasge_body.com>
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000612153402 DOT 5082E-100000 AT is>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	ppp101-53.dialup.mtu-net.ru
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-Trace:	gavrilo.mtu.ru 960827030 21469 212.188.101.53 (12 Jun 2000 16:23:50 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:	usenet-abuse AT mtu DOT ru
NNTP-Posting-Date:	12 Jun 2000 16:23:50 GMT
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en,ru
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 11 Jun 2000, Alexei A. Frounze wrote:
> 
> > Do you wanna say __dpmi_int has nothing about V86???
> 
> Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.  __dpmi_int works with or without
> V86.  All it needs is a DPMI server that catches Int 31h.  CWSDPMI is
> one such server, and CWSDPMI *can* run without V86.
> 
> > If host OS is DOS, DOS extender/ DPMI host switches to V86 to handle
> > that request.
> 
> Not true.  CWSDPMI does NOT switch the CPU into V86.  If it finds the
> CPU in V86, that's what it will use.  If not, it will switch it to
> real mode when it needs to issue a DOS call.  The CWSDPMI sources show
> this very clearly.

1. Somewhere I've already agreed it doesn't switch to V86. After I've taken
a more closer look at the sources.

2. I don't really agree with this: "If it finds the CPU in V86, that's what
it will use.  If not, it will switch it to real mode when it needs to issue
a DOS call."
Just beacuse under Windows most of interrupts (especially DPMI services) are
handled by Windows.


bye.
Alexei A. Frounze
-----------------------------------------
E-mail:   alexfru [AT] chat [DOT] ru
Homepage: http://alexfru.chat.ru
Mirror:   http://members.xoom.com/alexfru

- Raw text -