DOS ain't dead

FFK 17.12.2008, 16:25	HimemX v3.32 bug ? (DOSX) Post reply
	I tried to use HimemX 3.32 with my 2 Go RAM laptop but mem command reports for Extended (XMS) : Total ~ 64 MB used ?? Free ~ 2 Go This problem does not occur with JEMMEX 5.72 so i made a comparison between JEMM :: _I15GetMemoryStatus and HimemX :: geti15mem and so far they seem to be equal.

Japheth

Germany (South),
17.12.2008, 16:38

@ FFK

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

Post reply

> I tried to use HimemX 3.32 with my 2 Go RAM laptop but mem command reports
> for Extended (XMS) :
> Total ~ 64 MB
> used ??
> Free ~ 2 Go
>
> This problem does not occur with JEMMEX 5.72 so i made a comparison
> between
> JEMM :: _I15GetMemoryStatus and HimemX :: geti15mem and so far they seem
> to be equal.

what is Go? "Giga octets"? Are you French?

It's unlikely that there is a difference between HimemX and JemmEx.

All the himem's based on FreeDOS Himem have a problem with "holes" in extended memory (mostly the "os/2" hole at F00000h-FFFFFFFh). You can check with tool GETI15EX in HXRT if there is something suspicious with your memory.

---
MS-DOS forever!

FFK

17.12.2008, 19:44

@ Japheth

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

Post reply

> what is Go? "Giga octets"? Are you French?
>
> It's unlikely that there is a difference between HimemX and JemmEx.
>
> All the himem's based on FreeDOS Himem have a problem with "holes" in
> extended memory (mostly the "os/2" hole at F00000h-FFFFFFFh). You can
> check with tool GETI15EX in HXRT if there is something suspicious with
> your memory.

Yes it's "Giga octets" which Giga bytes in english. and i'm francophone but not french.

here the result of Geti15ex.exe :
- In a Desktop PC 1 Gb RAM , HimemX 3.32 reports correctly 1 GB free and available RAM :

Int 15h, ah=88h, extended memory: 0 kB Int 15h, ax=E801h: ext. memory below 16 MB: 15360 (0x3C00) KB ext. memory above 16 MB: 16116 64 KB blocks = 1007 MB [1000000-3FF3FFFF] Int 15h, eax=E820h: addr 000000000, size 00009FC00, type 1 (available) addr 00009FC00, size 000000400, type 2 (reserved) addr 0000E4000, size 00001C000, type 2 (reserved) addr 000100000, size 03FE40000, type 1 (available) addr 03FF40000, size 000010000, type 3 (ACPI) addr 03FF50000, size 0000B0000, type 4 (ACPI) addr 0FED00000, size 000000400, type 2 (reserved) addr 0FEE00000, size 000001000, type 2 (reserved)

- In a laptop 2 Gb RAM , HimemX 3.32 reports 64 MB of free XMS and 2 GB available RAM :

Int 15h, ah=88h, extended memory: 0 kB Int 15h, ax=E801h: ext. memory below 16 MB: 15360 (0x3C00) KB ext. memory above 16 MB: 30458 64 KB blocks = 1903 MB [1000000-77F9FFFF] Int 15h, eax=E820h: addr 000000000, size 00009FC00, type 1 (available) addr 00009FC00, size 000000400, type 2 (reserved) addr 0000E0000, size 000020000, type 2 (reserved) addr 000100000, size 077EA8000, type 1 (available) addr 077FA8000, size 000008000, type 4 (ACPI) addr 077FB0000, size 00000E000, type 3 (ACPI) addr 077FBE000, size 000032000, type 4 (ACPI) addr 077FF0000, size 000010000, type 2 (reserved) addr 0FEE00000, size 000001000, type 2 (reserved)

As you can see no memory holes on my laptop and it's exactly the same order as my desktop PC (except the additional ACPI) where HimemX works.

EDIT by rr: added {code} tag for better readability

Japheth

Germany (South),
17.12.2008, 22:22

@ FFK

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

Post reply

> As you can see no memory holes on my laptop and it's exactly the same
> order as my desktop PC (except the additional ACPI) where HimemX works.

Yes, looks good. Now if you use the XMSSTAT tool supplied with Jemm it might give a hint what's going wrong.

---
MS-DOS forever!

FFK

18.12.2008, 01:56

@ Japheth

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

Post reply

> Yes, looks good. Now if you use the XMSSTAT tool supplied with Jemm it
> might give a hint what's going wrong.

Rectification HimemX was not reporting correct value with mem in my desktop
with 1GB RAM and this doesn't happen with Himem.sys or XMGR.sys

Type of Memory-----Total--------Used------Free ------------------------------------------------ Conventional------655 360------84 416----570 944 Upper ------------0------------0----------0 Reserved ---------393 216------393 216 ---0 Extended (XMS)----15 728 640---?----------1 071 837 1 ------------------------------------------------ Total memory------16 777 216---?----------1 072 408 1 Total under 1 MB--655 360------84 416-----570 944 Largest executable program size 570 816 (557K) Largest free upper memory block 0 (0K) MS-DOS is resident in the high memory area.

Here the output of XMSSTAT with HimemX on a 2GB RAM laptop:

XMS call address: 024C:061E XMS version: 3.0 HMA handled by XMS host, HMA is allocated largest free memory block (v2) in kB: 65535, total free: 65535 largest free memory block (v3) in kB: 1964636, total free: 1964636 XMS handle table at 024C:0030, handle cnt/size=48/10 XMS handle array at 024C:0660 no handle region size(kB) locks flags -------------------------------------------------------- 1 0660 00110000-00110FFF 4 1 02 used 2 066A 00111000-77FA7FFF 1964636 0 01 free -------------------------------------------------------- 1964640 free handles: 46 no UMB handler installed

and the output of XMSSTAT with Himem.sys on a 2GB RAM laptop :

XMS call address: 024C:00CF XMS version: 3.0 HMA handled by XMS host, HMA is allocated largest free memory block (v2) in kB: 65535, total free: 65535 largest free memory block (v3) in kB: 1964636, total free: 1964636 XMS handle table at FFF8:CC90, handle cnt/size=48/10 XMS handle array at FFF8:D58E no handle region size(kB) locks flags -------------------------------------------------------- 1 D58E 00110000-00110FFF 4 1 02 used 2 D598 00111000-77FA7FFF 1964636 0 01 free -------------------------------------------------------- 1964640 free handles: 46 no UMB handler installed

EDIT by rr: added {code} tag for better readability

Japheth

Germany (South),
18.12.2008, 21:16

@ FFK

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

Post reply

Ok, but XMSSTAT reveals that there is no problem with HimemX. It's a MEM problem.

---
MS-DOS forever!

FFK 19.12.2008, 10:44 @ Japheth	HimemX v3.32 bug ? Post reply
	> Ok, but XMSSTAT reveals that there is no problem with HimemX. It's a MEM > problem. I agree that it's not a critical bug. But on all JEMMEX, Ms HIMEM.SYS and XMGR : MEM reports correct values. So it's a HimemX minor bug i guess.

Japheth

Germany (South),
19.12.2008, 13:16

@ FFK

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

Post reply

> I agree that it's not a critical bug. But on all JEMMEX, Ms HIMEM.SYS and
> XMGR : MEM reports correct values. So it's a HimemX minor bug i guess.

I just noticed that in the tests with XMSSTAT you tested the 2GB machine only but not the 1GB desktop machine which is the interesting one. Why?

---
MS-DOS forever!

FFK

23.12.2008, 21:23

@ Japheth

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

Post reply

> > I agree that it's not a critical bug. But on all JEMMEX, Ms HIMEM.SYS
> and
> > XMGR : MEM reports correct values. So it's a HimemX minor bug i guess.
>
> I just noticed that in the tests with XMSSTAT you tested the 2GB machine
> only but not the 1GB desktop machine which is the interesting one. Why?

but in both 1Gb and 2Gb machines "MEM" report bad amount of memory

here the XMSSTAT of the 1gb machine :

XMS call address: 025C:061E XMS version: 3.0 HMA handled by XMS host, HMA is allocated largest free memory block (v2) in kB: 65535, total free: 65535 largest free memory block (v3) in kB: 1046716, total free: 1046716 XMS handle table at 025C:0030, handle cnt/size=48/10 XMS handle array at 025C:0660 no handle region size(kB) locks flags -------------------------------------------------------- 1 0660 00110000-00110FFF 4 1 02 used 2 066A 00111000-3FF3FFFF 1046716 0 01 free -------------------------------------------------------- 1046720 free handles: 46 no UMB handler installed

with mem i get :
Total memory: Total=16 384K Used=? Free=943 422K

EDIT by rr: added {code} tag for better readability

DOS386

29.12.2008, 01:59

@ FFK

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

Post reply

FFK wrote:

> use HimemX 3.32 with my 2 Go RAM laptop but mem command reports

Missed something ? http://dugl.50webs.com/ :-)

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

Rugxulo Usono, 29.12.2008, 23:01 @ DOS386	HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL Post reply
	> FFK wrote: > > > use HimemX 3.32 with my 2 Go RAM laptop but mem command reports > > Missed something ? http://dugl.50webs.com/ You mean the new DUGL 1.13? (No mention of new DuglPlus, though.) P.S. DuglPlayer really should be recompiled with latest libMPEG2 since the latter now has optional SSE2 support, which latest CWSDPMI allows (unless it's compile-time only, ugh).

DOS386

30.12.2008, 22:53

@ Rugxulo

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

Post reply

> You mean the new DUGL 1.13?

YES.

> DuglPlayer really should be recompiled with latest libMPEG2 since the
> latter now has optional SSE2 support, which latest CWSDPMI allows

HDPMI32 used to for years ... and there is the great D3X Ring0 extender :-)

---
This is a LOGITECH mouse driver, but some software expect here
the following string:*** This is Copyright 1983 Microsoft ***

FFK 08.01.2009, 15:50 @ DOS386	HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL Post reply
	> > DuglPlayer really should be recompiled with latest libMPEG2 since the > > latter now has optional SSE2 support, which latest CWSDPMI allows > > HDPMI32 used to for years ... and there is the great D3X Ring0 extender > Does D3X Ring0 extender enable SSE ?

Rugxulo

Usono,
09.01.2009, 00:48

@ FFK

D3X extender + SSE

Post reply

> Does D3X Ring0 extender enable SSE ?

No, but at ring 0 you can do it yourself. (Or run some other app first, it only needs to be done once each session.) I meant to eventually write a patch for D3X but haven't done it yet.

---
Know your limits.h

FFK

31.12.2008, 09:34

@ Rugxulo

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

Post reply

> You mean the new DUGL 1.13? (No mention of new DuglPlus, though.)

Yes DUGL 1.13 is out with a little introduced bug an 8bpp Poly on the double sided flag, but who care ?
for DuglPlus except a new Sbpro driver and 16bpp port of the GUI there will be no additional functionnality

> P.S. DuglPlayer really should be recompiled with latest libMPEG2 since the
> latter now has optional SSE2 support, which latest CWSDPMI allows (unless
> it's compile-time only, ugh).

For DuglPlayer i do wished to get rid of the MpgSplit step before playing any mpeg but I don't have enough knowledge and time to learn how to demux and no one want to contribute :(
Any way if you have the djgpp port of the new libMPEG2 i will recompile DuglPlayer and provide a newer version.

Rugxulo Usono, 02.01.2009, 05:01 @ FFK	HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL Post reply
	> For DuglPlayer i do wished to get rid of the MpgSplit step before playing > any mpeg but I don't have enough knowledge and time to learn how to demux > and no one want to contribute :( No idea, sorry. > Any way if you have the djgpp port of the new libMPEG2 i will recompile > DuglPlayer and provide a newer version. I haven't looked at it yet, was just thinking outloud.

FFK

08.01.2009, 15:49

@ Rugxulo

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

Post reply

> > Any way if you have the djgpp port of the new libMPEG2 i will recompile
> > DuglPlayer and provide a newer version.
>
> I haven't looked at it yet, was just thinking outloud. :-P

It seems that libmpeg2 isn't hard to compile for DJGPP but i do prefer waiting that some one compile it for us :-) Until i finish porting the DUGL-Plus GUI to 16bpp so then DUGL Player will be faster and source code easier to understand.

HimemX v3.32 bug ? (DOSX)

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

HimemX v3.32 bug ?

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

D3X extender + SSE

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL

HimemX v3.32 bug ? DUGL