From: Martin Stromberg <Martin DOT Stromberg AT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
Message-Id: <200001141108.MAA15298@spica-144.lu.erisoft.se>
Subject: Re: Problems with protected_mode_int
To: prashant_tr AT yahoo DOT com (Prashant TR)
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 100 12:08:28 +0100 (MET)
Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com (DJGPP)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10001140746070.522-100000@yahoo.com> from "Prashant TR" at Jan 14, 0 07:52:45 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: dj-admin AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

Prachant said:
> > If no, it should work (note that at entry to the interrupt hander CS
> > _is_ valid and that is what counts). Please explain more clearly why
> > not.
> 
> I guess you're thinking that it's only the offset of the handler which
> matters. This is not true. Both the selector and the offset combination is
> necessary.

Of course. But I didn't think anything other than CS would work (so I
didn't bother saying that explicitly). I thought the part about CS
above made that clear.


Right,

							MartinS