With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory (Developers)
> abort the operation/process requiring physical memory and inform
> the user that he needs to configure his set-up to include an XMM
That's exactly how things should NOT be - user having to workaround application flaws coming from bad "standards" 
> (Sometimes using memory handled by DOS can solve this, as this should be
> mapped exactly to physical memory if there is no XMM/EMM.)
It works even with XMS host (and maybe even EMM386 ???), but there are only cca 1/2 MiB of low memory available, so it will work with "legacy" LDA sound cards, but not with HHDA (hyper high definition audio: 8 channels, 32 bits per channel sample, 196 KHz, see MPXPLAY forum
) because the 1:1-mapped low memory is not big enough
Another flaw: you can request neither a preferred address nor minimal alignment when hogging low memory. This means, that for a 64-KiB aligned 64 KiB buffer you must hog 128 KiB and "find" the buffer inside, the other 64 KiB are wasted. Not cool at all (consider the low-memory-wars about just a few 100 Byte's with German keyboard "drivers"
).
> Not nice, but it's nothing critical.
> You didn't even mention that physical memory can't be allocated in NTVDM!
> Oh no!

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***
Complete thread:
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Laaca, 13.08.2010, 10:36 (Developers)
![Open in board view [Board]](img/board_d.gif)
![Open in mix view [Mix]](img/mix_d.gif)
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - ecm, 13.08.2010, 14:30
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - DOS386, 26.08.2010, 09:18
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - ecm, 26.08.2010, 14:35
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - DOS386, 27.08.2010, 03:33
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - ecm, 30.08.2010, 21:51
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - DOS386, 06.09.2010, 20:08
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - ecm, 07.09.2010, 17:04
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - DOS386, 08.09.2010, 00:51
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - ecm, 08.09.2010, 20:53
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - DOS386, 11.09.2010, 01:02
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - ecm, 11.09.2010, 01:25
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - DOS386, 11.09.2010, 01:02
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - ecm, 08.09.2010, 20:53
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - DOS386, 08.09.2010, 00:51
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - ecm, 07.09.2010, 17:04
- With DPMI into protect mode and back | physical memory - DOS386, 06.09.2010, 20:08
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - ecm, 30.08.2010, 21:51
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - DOS386, 27.08.2010, 03:33
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - ecm, 26.08.2010, 14:35
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - DOS386, 26.08.2010, 09:18
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Japheth, 18.08.2010, 08:04
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Japheth, 18.10.2010, 11:17
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Rugxulo, 18.10.2010, 23:07
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Japheth, 19.10.2010, 09:58
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Rugxulo, 19.10.2010, 10:09
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Japheth, 19.10.2010, 10:20
- Possible CWSDPMI design flaw - Japheth, 19.10.2010, 17:59
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Rugxulo, 19.10.2010, 10:09
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Japheth, 19.10.2010, 09:58
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Rugxulo, 18.10.2010, 23:07
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - Japheth, 18.10.2010, 11:17
- With DPMI into protect mode and back - EDIT: example - ecm, 13.08.2010, 14:30
Mix view