Re: [MiNT] FPU question

[Konrad Kokoszkiewicz <draco@mi.com.pl>]

> No. Mint should only those exception vectors which it knows how to handle.
> You don't want to get signals for interrupts and other stuff, the same way
> that you don't want to get signals for unimplemented LineF traps (which are
> usually emulated by the OS).

Well blame me for a shortcut. I meant "exceptions in question", not "all
exceptions", because f.e. VBL doesn't obviously send signals. Though it
can be foced to send anyways, but this is off topic.
 
> > 1) softload FPU emulation after MiNT
> 
> Not possible in this case - and not very useful, since the emulation will be
> in memory twice.

Yes.
 
> > 2) add FPU emulation to MiNT itself.
> 
> possible. Anyone willing to do that?
> The emulation code is available from Motorola - however, it is still a bit
> of work to get it running flawless (FPU_nnn from Hades does *not* pass the
> runtime tests provided by Motorola).

However, if MiNT would provide own emulation code, the situation would 
be similar to above (FPU emulator loaded twice).
 
> > Eventually, MiNT could try to detect, if TOS already installed an FPU
> > emulation, and "reinstall" it upon own initialization. Now question: does
> > TOS (Milan TOS) mark the installed FPU emulation somehow? Perhaps a _FPU
> > cookie value or what?
> 
> I guess the emulator should do that - the low word of the _FPU cookie is
> used to announce emulation support:

Okay.

--
Konrad M.Kokoszkiewicz
|mail: draco@mi.com.pl                  | Atari Falcon030/TT030/65XE |
|http://www.obta.uw.edu.pl/~draco/
|http://draco.atari.org

** Ea natura multitudinis est,
** aut servit humiliter, aut superbe dominatur (Liv. XXIV,25)
*************************************************************
** U pospolstwa normalne jest, ze albo sluzy ono unizenie,
** albo bezczelnie sie panoszy.