DOS ain't dead

IRQ ISR IDT [4] Missed the point (DOSX)

posted by DOS386, 17.08.2007, 00:58

> You are very rigid today.

NO

You missed the point - this was no offense at all

The target of my criticism "desperately slow and unusable" was "the idea of using INT $31 to install a high frequency ISR under DPMI, slow because of CPU and DPMI design" , and NOT your implementation of IRQ's in HDPMI32 The HDPMI implementation is very good (probably, no exact tests) ... and, BTW, my ISR works well under it (via IDT)

Please look at my yesterday's posts again

Complete thread:

• IRQ ISR IDT - DOS386, 13.08.2007, 07:05 (DOSX)
  • IRQ ISR IDT - Japheth, 13.08.2007, 08:18
    • IRQ ISR IDT [2] - DOS386, 13.08.2007, 08:34
      • IRQ ISR IDT [2] - Japheth, 14.08.2007, 22:24
        • IRQ ISR IDT [3] Very weeeird results - DOS386, 16.08.2007, 10:28
          • IRQ ISR IDT [3] Very weeeird results - Japheth, 16.08.2007, 14:24
            • IRQ ISR IDT [4] Missed the point - DOS386, 17.08.2007, 00:58
              • IRQ ISR IDT [4] Missed the point - Japheth, 17.08.2007, 10:50
                • IRQ ISR IDT [5] RM ISR vs PM ISR - DOS386, 19.08.2007, 07:46
                  • IRQ ISR IDT [5] RM ISR vs PM ISR - Rugxulo, 21.08.2007, 03:16
                    • IRQ ISR IDT [5] RM ISR vs PM ISR - Japheth, 21.08.2007, 08:28
                      • IRQ ISR IDT [5] RM ISR vs PM ISR - Rugxulo, 22.08.2007, 00:13
                        • IRQ ISR IDT [5] RM ISR vs PM ISR - Steve, 23.08.2007, 13:42
                          • IRQ ISR IDT [5] RM ISR vs PM ISR - rr, 23.08.2007, 15:25
                            • IRQ ISR IDT [5] RM ISR vs PM ISR - Steve, 24.08.2007, 01:11