X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: "Rod Pemberton" <dont_use_email AT xnohavenotit DOT cnm>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: __dpmi_int() or int86() ?
Date: Sat, 15 Feb 2014 05:03:46 -0500
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <op.xbbh8knb5zc71u@localhost>
NNTP-Posting-Host: CNsg4fVcCsvs3UaOgZtQCw.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT aioe DOT org
User-Agent: Opera Mail/12.16 (Linux)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Bytes: 1455
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

I use __dpmi_int() to call RM interrupts with DJGPP.
So far, I haven't had much use for a PM interrupts.

However, I understand that you can use int86() to call
PM interrupt routines, if installed.  The DPMI host
has installed PM ISRs that will reflect the PM interrupt
to RM.  So, both int86() and __dpmi_int() can be used
to call RM interrupts.  I understand that __dpmi_int()
is generally recommended for this.

But, which is _actually_ faster with CWSDPMI for calling
RM interrupts?  PMODEDJ?  Is it faster to use __dpmi_int()
or to use int86()?  Has anyone actually timed this, in the
past perhaps?  I.e., how does the combined overhead of each
DJGPP call and DPMI portion compare for both?


Rod Pemberton