Bart Oldeman <bartolde...@users.sourceforge.net> writes: > On 16 April 2012 17:30, Stas Sergeevwrote: >> Ah, that explains most of everything... :(( >> Have you considered the $_cpu_emu mode that will >> emulate v86 and 32bit prot mode with 16bit stack, and >> nothing more? My guess is that the app does'n work >> too much with such a setup, so maybe the slowdown >> will not be big? And 99% of apps will remain completely >> unaffected. > > It's certainly a possibility though not super easy. > >>> When I brought it up several years ago Andi Kleen wasn't very keen to >>> accept these kind of kernel adjustments... >> >> Did you put them to >> http://v86-64.sourceforge.net/ >> ? > > No, I just knew they existed for x86-32 and was enquiring whether they > would be accepted in the first place. The discussion was here: > > http://www.x86-64.org/pipermail/discuss/2007-May/009913.html > http://www.x86-64.org/pipermail/discuss/2007-May/009923.html > http://www.x86-64.org/pipermail/discuss/2007-May/009925.html > > I put up a git repository that is a mirror of the svn: > git clone git://dosemu.git.sourceforge.net/gitroot/dosemu/dosemu
So let me point out that Andi is no longer the x86_64 maintainer, and one of the big policy changes that happened with the turn over in maintainership is that workarounds for weird cpus bugs (if the can be implemented cleanly) are now considered. So it might be worth revisiting this issue. I don't expect a 64k aligned stack would be a very easy perhaps the convoluted segment thing if it doesn't slow down kernel fast paths. Eric ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Developers, A Lot Can Happen In A Second. Boundary is the first to Know...and Tell You. Monitor Your Applications in Ultra-Fine Resolution. Try it FREE! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-d2dvs2 _______________________________________________ Dosemu-devel mailing list Dosemu-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dosemu-devel
