On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, David Given wrote: [snip] > to call a function in a > driver all you have to know is the driver's segment info (SS/DS and CS) and > the entry point. For the driver to call a function in the kernel it'd have to > know the same; it's probably easier to use an interrupt for that direction. [snip] what if the module had a list of function pointers at the begining of its address space? then a snippit of org 0 asm code (well, actually just data) could be used within each module to set up the pointers properly in a 16 bit link, and the same asm stubs in the kernel would work for any module of a given type. maybe with some cleverness, there could be only one stub and a bunch of macros or wrappers for accessing it, to make porting to other platforms easier. andru
- Re: msdos/umsdos support? ror4
- Re: msdos/umsdos support? Alistair Riddoch
- Re: msdos/umsdos support? Shane Kerr
- RE: msdos/umsdos support? Paul Roberts
- Re: msdos/umsdos support? David Given
- RE: msdos/umsdos support? Paul Roberts
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/umsdos support? Shane Kerr
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/umsdos support? David Given
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/umsdos support... Shane Kerr
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/umsdos sup... David Given
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/umsdos support... Andru Luvisi
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/umsdos sup... ror4
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/umsdo... David Given
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/u... Leo Cyr
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/u... Sven Utcke
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/u... ror4
- Re: kernel fission was: msdos/u... Alistair Riddoch
- RE: msdos/umsdos support? Dan Olson
- RE: msdos/umsdos support? Shane Kerr
