Re: x86 real mode

From	Don Y <this@is.not.me.com>
Newsgroups	comp.arch.embedded
Subject	Re: x86 real mode
Date	2014-10-18 09:34 -0700
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<m1u4qi$3b2$1@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<m1r8pj$che$1@speranza.aioe.org> <pcn24a9869skgfal4rqrpn32mgu8dk5201@4ax.com> <m1s1tc$fim$1@speranza.aioe.org> <s8a44a52tb09u48j7maveh6cbgvlfjvept@4ax.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/18/2014 1:53 AM, upsidedown@downunder.com wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 14:32:20 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi George,
>>
>> On 10/17/2014 12:29 PM, George Neuner wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 07:23:40 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What are the most conservative, *practical* expectations I can
>>>> make living in x86 real mode:  TEXT of 64K and DATA of (disjoint)
>>>> 64K?  BSS in it's own segment?  Or, shared with DATA?
>>>
>>> If you use the tiny (64K code+data) or small (64K code, 64K data)
>>> model, .bss and stack share space with your data.  If you choose a
>>> model with multiple data segments, .bss and stack can be separate (but
>>> tool dependent you may have to ask for it explicitly).
>>
>> It seems the "safest" (most conservative) assumption is to figure
>> a single 64KB address space.  If, instead, the x86 ALWAYS prepared
>> a separate data space (etc), then I could assume a larger model.
>>
>> Or, if the tiny model was IMPRACTICAL for any use (and was just
>> included as an homage to the 8085).
>>
>> Or, if ints were always 32b, etc.
>>
>> I.e., it seems safe to assume the tiny model was intended to be
>> *usable* and not just "an engineering/marketing exercise".
>
> What is the problem with 64 KiB program address space with much larger
> total system memory ?

Given a CLEAN SLATE, there's no problem with *anything*!  :>
The "problem" lies in living within existing constraints AND
writing portable code.  E.g., no "near"/"far" nonsense.  Take the
machine the way it existed when your code was invoked, "do your
thing" -- and leave the machine in the state that you found it
(or, explore ALL of the consequences of ANY changes you may
have introduced to its state)

> In a previous company, my department used machines with 64 KiB or 128
> KiB (I+D) and we never had problems with the program address space
> limits. Just split the functionality into a sufficient number of
> tasks.

Sure, and I've written UNIX-like OS's to run on Z80's (bankswitching
instead of swapping).  No reason the terminal handler needs to
co-reside in the same address space as the OS; no reason for the
OS to share an address space with the application, either!

But, that sort of code is anything BUT "portable".  The next
host architecture may have an entirely different set of
constraints imposed by its hardware.

> Of course if you need to access a huge data base, this was
> problematic.

Thread

x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-17 07:23 -0700
  Re: x86 real mode Arlet Ottens <usenet+5@c-scape.nl> - 2014-10-17 16:31 +0200
    Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-17 07:45 -0700
      Re: x86 real mode Arlet Ottens <usenet+5@c-scape.nl> - 2014-10-17 16:53 +0200
        Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-17 08:28 -0700
          Re: x86 real mode Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2014-10-17 18:35 +0300
          Re: x86 real mode Arlet Ottens <usenet+5@c-scape.nl> - 2014-10-17 17:36 +0200
            Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-17 13:54 -0700
              Re: x86 real mode Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-10-17 21:02 +0000
                Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-17 14:54 -0700
              Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-18 10:09 +0300
          Re: x86 real mode Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-10-17 16:11 +0000
      Re: x86 real mode Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2014-10-17 18:37 +0200
      Re: x86 real mode Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2014-10-17 12:58 -0500
  Re: x86 real mode David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-10-17 16:52 +0200
    Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-17 16:45 +0000
  Re: x86 real mode Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-10-17 10:03 -0500
  Re: x86 real mode Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2014-10-17 16:07 +0000
  Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-17 19:57 +0300
  Re: x86 real mode Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2014-10-17 12:57 -0500
  Re: x86 real mode Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2014-10-17 21:18 +0300
    Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-17 21:48 +0000
      Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-17 15:06 -0700
        Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-17 22:25 +0000
          Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-17 15:39 -0700
            Re: x86 real mode George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2014-10-17 22:47 -0400
              Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-17 21:10 -0700
                Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-18 11:32 +0300
            Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-18 11:10 +0300
              Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-18 08:20 -0700
                Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-18 20:34 +0300
                Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-18 12:53 -0700
          Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-18 10:30 +0300
          Re: x86 real mode David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2014-10-18 20:22 +0200
      Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-18 10:22 +0300
        Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-18 09:06 +0000
          Re: x86 real mode Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-10-18 08:43 -0500
          Re: x86 real mode Gerd Brix <gbrix@gmx.eu> - 2014-10-18 16:39 +0200
          Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-18 17:52 -0700
            Re: x86 real mode George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2014-10-20 01:35 -0400
              Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-20 10:14 +0300
                Re: x86 real mode George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2014-10-20 14:12 -0400
              Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-20 08:15 -0700
    Re: x86 real mode Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2014-10-17 18:39 -0500
      Re: x86 real mode Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2014-10-18 10:46 +0300
  Re: x86 real mode George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2014-10-17 15:29 -0400
    Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-17 14:32 -0700
      Re: x86 real mode Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2014-10-18 00:09 +0200
        Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-17 22:31 +0000
          Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-18 12:04 +0300
            Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-18 23:22 +0000
            Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-18 20:59 -0700
      Re: x86 real mode upsidedown@downunder.com - 2014-10-18 11:53 +0300
        Re: x86 real mode Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> - 2014-10-18 09:34 -0700
    Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-17 22:00 +0000
      Re: x86 real mode Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2014-10-18 00:26 +0200
        Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-17 22:36 +0000
      Re: x86 real mode George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2014-10-17 21:45 -0400
        Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-18 03:26 +0000
          Re: x86 real mode Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-10-17 23:26 -0500
            Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-18 05:42 +0000
          Re: x86 real mode Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2014-10-18 10:53 +0300
            Re: x86 real mode glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-10-18 09:12 +0000
        Re: x86 real mode Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-10-17 22:40 -0500
      Re: x86 real mode George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2014-10-17 22:07 -0400

csiph-web