Hi! On Fri, Aug 27, 1999 at 01:06:00AM +0200, Jörg Westheide wrote: > Let me have a guess: > Your version is not reentrant. > (May I have a diff?) Well, it's just as reentrant as your special workaround code, i.e. it uses additional fields in the context struct. I can send you a diff, of course, but not at the moment (the Milan is switched off). > The reentrancy (which is needed for background DMA) is the reason why I > sacrified preserving a0 and a1 (and that's also the reason why the > workarounds are the way they are) Sure, but reentrancy will only be possible at kernel level, anyway (i.e. no GEMDOS call of the same process may be made within a GEMDOS call), because the context concept doesn't allow that, unless I'm missing something. But for background DMA, that wouldn't be a problem (again, unless I'm missing something ...) Ciao Thomas -- Thomas Binder (Gryf @ IRCNet) gryf@hrzpub.tu-darmstadt.de PGP-key available on request! binder@rbg.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/
Attachment:
pgpYfmCCXRVAK.pgp
Description: PGP signature