Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.msdos.programmer > #422

Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK

Show all headers | View raw

> "Rugxulo" <rugxulo@gmail.com> wrote in message
>  news:2602b511-55a8-4cb9-8f62-68acd0436f4f@t8g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
> > On Oct 31, 5:07 pm, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...@noavailemail.cmm>
> > news:j8a3d6$q2h$1@speranza.aioe.org...
>
> > [HIMEMX] works with /X. It should work without /X though.
>
> > The E820h map seems correct to me, so I'm not sure why HIMEMX
> > needs to use E801h.
>
> > [e820h map]
>
> (quoting verbatim from Japheth):
> [link]
> "HIMEMX and old FD Himem stop scanning extended memory once a block
> starting at 0x100000 has been found. See lines marked with !!! below":
> [code]
>
> "I agree this is dumb, but that's exactly why the /X switch exists."
>
> "Would be interesting what XMGR does with that configuration."
>
> "It's also slightly interesting if the /X switch does really 'work'.
> Using Int 15h, ax=E801h, the memory used by ACPI at 0x40FD800
> is overwritten once an application uses more that 64 MB. RBIL tells
> about types 03 and 04":
> [RBIL values]
>

1) I have no answers for you on the reclaim of type 3 or 4 memory or the
"Does /X switch really work?" issue.  I would hope that if that region was
used as memory, that the hardware would map in memory there, e.g., with DOS.
Someday, I may get a chance to check, but no promises ...

2) I attempted to disable ACPI in order to change the e820h memory map,
i.e., to remove the two reserved blocks.  Disabling and enabling various
BIOS options does not change e820h map.  ACPI 3 and 4 memory seems to be for
an AGP video controller.  Win98SE maps it at those addresses, even if those
addresses are virtual.  I've got no idea what happens if a DOS application
writes there.

3) Jwasm compiles himemx.asm using the params from the updated make.bat.
I'm not sure if the .bat or makefile works.

4) You didn't update other bugs I mentioned or Ninho's patch for himemx.asm.
I hope you noted them for the future.

5) Martin Strömberg (Stroemberg) said XMSDSK has a handles issue.  I don't
see that.  XMSDSK seems to have an 'allocate all XMS above 2GB bug' when
used with the /T option.  I'm not sure of anyone modding XMSDSK to fix this.

6) I posted some e820 memory maps to alt.os.development and code to test.
We're still working out the bugs in the code.  One machine doesn't mention a
100000h block in the e820 map even though it has one ...  Data from another
person's machine has e820 but no e801.  Other odd stuff ...


Rod Pemberton

Back to comp.os.msdos.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

HIMEMX and XMSDSK "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-10-24 20:25 -0400
  Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-10-25 12:57 -0400
    Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK Martin Strömberg <ams@dexter.ludd.luth.se> - 2011-11-02 12:43 +0000
      Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-11-04 04:19 -0400
        Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK 98 Guy <98@Guy.com> - 2011-11-04 21:02 -0400
          Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-11-06 02:48 -0500
  Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK Rugxulo <rugxulo@gmail.com> - 2011-10-26 14:04 -0700
    Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-10-26 19:00 -0400
      Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-10-31 18:07 -0400
        Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK Rugxulo <rugxulo@gmail.com> - 2011-11-01 15:07 -0700
          Re: HIMEMX and XMSDSK "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have@noavailemail.cmm> - 2011-11-06 04:08 -0500

csiph-web