Hi,
tom ehlert escribi�:
Hello Aitor,
(1) There is a /TEST option (not present in MS-HIMEM), and at the same
time, MS-HIMEM implements a /TESTMEM:ON|OFF option to do this (defaults
to ON). /TEST does a nice test by allocating, filling, testing,
resizing,..... to determine the reliability of the extended memory.
I just wanted to ask if there's something I missing about something
which is obvious (?)
differences:
the MS HIMEM test (done always, unless disabled) is probably a much
better memory tester.
FD HIMEM is a VERY dull memory tester. I wrote it more to test HIMEM
correct internal working, then as an attempt do do a serious memory
tester.
But much better than nothing.
(4) Finally, I am unable to understand the whole process behind making a
mixed SYS/EXE driver, can someone clarify about this?
- HIMEM64 starts with a device driver header
- HIMEM.EXE actually starts with "MZ", so it can be open as an
executable. How is that the kernel can open it as a driver, if it
doesn't start with the device driver header?
- Who calls ASMSTART_EXE?
if the kernel loads a device= , it uses the device driver header.
if the kernel loads an executable, it looks into the MZ-header to find
the start address (which happens to be ASMSTART_EXE)
Yes, but my question is how does kernel know where the device header
starts? "MZ" doesn't look like a correct pointer to the next device
driver inside the file...
Aitor
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
_______________________________________________
Freedos-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
