Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!yoyo.aarnet.edu.au!myall.awadi.com.au!myall!blymn From: blymn@awadi.com.au (Brett Lymn) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: V86 mode Date: 08 Aug 1993 09:01:14 GMT Organization: AWA Defence Industries Pty. Ltd. Lines: 25 Distribution: world Message-ID: <BLYMN.93Aug8183114@siren.awadi.com.au> References: <107725@hydra.gatech.EDU> <23tqbk$3tt@europa.eng.gtefsd.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: siren.awadi.com.au In-reply-to: niemidc@oasis.gtefsd.com's message of 6 Aug 1993 14:37:40 GMT >>>>> On 6 Aug 1993 14:37:40 GMT, niemidc@oasis.gtefsd.com (David C. Niemi) said: David> NNTP-Posting-Host: hengist.lab.oasis.gtegsc.com David> The V86-mode emulators I have seen tend to suck about 10% of the CPU each (on a 386). David> Is this inherent in V86 mode, or is it a deficiency of the implementation? David> In other words, have you gotten around this problem? The problem with DOS (and/or the applications thereunder) is that it expects to have the entire machine to itself and hence does dumb cycle wasting things like polling. From my understanding of dos-under-unix programs they try and restrain this behaviour by lowering the priority of the task if they detect a polling loop. I am attempting to port the Linux dosemu (actually xdos), my main stumbling block at the moment is lack of kernel services such as shm, sem and msg and of course v86. I am, at the moment, trying to work out how to get these services into the kernel with the least amount of effort. I have looked at the sources for Linux but I will need to get the authors permission to use them. I have also mailed Bill Jolitz regarding this. If anyone has any suggestions/help to get the stuff I need it will be most welcome. -- Brett Lymn