[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

pl.comp.programming

OS 64b - IA-32e i stronicowanie

Karol \"Zal\" Zalewski

6/12/2007 7:57:00 PM

Witam serdecznie!

Na wstepie chcia3bym zaznaczya, i? pytanie (jest to cel przewodni tej
wiadomo?ci - patrz czwarty akapit) moje kieruje do osób, które maj? ju?
do?wiadczenie w pisaniu systemów operacyjnych w oparciu o architekture
IA-32e.

Zaczne zatem od pocz?tku. Jaki? czas temu rozpocz?3em z grup? kolegów ze
studiów prace nad rozwojem prostego 16b systemu operacyjnego - w ramach
zajea z "Oprogramowania systemowego". System ten pisany w zupe3no?ci w
Asemblerze, przy wykorzystaniu asemblera TASM, a uruchamiany z poziomu
DOS (jako plik .exe) nie by3 trudny do modyfikacji. Posiada3 ju?
segmentacje, zarz?dzanie przerwaniami, przej?cie do trybu chronionego
itp. itd. Wszystko oprócz stronicowania. Niemniej jednak przekszta3cenie
ca3o?ci tak, aby pracowa3a w 32b nie stanowi3o wielkiego problemu.

K3opoty rozpocze3y sie tu? po tym, jak postanowili?my kontynuowaa
projekt w celu uzyskania prostego systemu 64b. Archaiczny asembler by3 i
nadal jest tutaj pewnym utrudnieniem, ale nie to jest najwa?niejsze.
Pos3uguj?c sie dokumentacj? Intela (m.in. IA-32 Intel Architecture
Software Developer's Manual Volume 3A - sekcja 9.8.5) doszli?my ju? do
momentu w którym to posiadamy utworzone struktury wymagane przez
stronicowanie w trybie 64b i jeste?my w trakcie procedury, która
umo?liwi przej?cie do trybu kompatybilno?ci z kodem 32b. Jeste?my
?wiadomi tego, i? u?yta w trybie 32b segmentacja nie jest ju?
obs3ugiwana - na rzecz stronicowania. W ka?dym b?d? razie ka?da próba
implementacji piecioetapowego (wspomniana wy?ej sekcja 9.8.5) procesu
przej?cia do trybu kompatybilno?ci konczy sie restartem tu? po wpisaniu
do CR0.PG jedynki (aktywacja stronicowania).

Po tym d3ugim opisie mam ju? tylko krótkie pytanie. Czy mo?liwym jest,
aby problemem by3o przej?cie z segmentacji w trybie 32b do stronicowania
w trybie kompatybilno?ci? Czy wymagane jest zaimplementowanie
stronicowania w trybie 32b tylko po to, aby móc nastepnie przej?a do
stronicowania w trybie kompatybilno?ci?

Bede wdzieczny za wszelkiego rodzaju sugestie. Jestem ?wiadom tego, i?
to co napisa3em mo?e bya dla wielu zbyt d3ugie, nu??ce i niezrozumia3e.
Niemniej jednak nadal licze na to, i? kto? (korzystaj?c ze swojego
do?wiadczenia) bedzie w stanie mi udzielia odpowiedzi. Nawet je?eli
odpowied? brzmia3aby mniej/wiecej w ten sposób: "nie wiem, o co ci
chodzi, ale zabrali?cie sie od tego od z3ej strony" :D

Pozdrawiam,
Karol "Zal" Zalewski

PS. Przegl?da3em pare grup dyskusyjnych i mam nadzieje, i? *trafi3em* w
t? odpowiedni?. Z góry przepraszam, je?eli nie trafi3em. Mam równie?
nadzieje, i? kodowaniem i d3ugo?ci? linii nikogo nie pora?e ;] Jeszcze
nie przywyk3em do zasad, którymi rz?dzi sie Usenet.
8 Answers

Garry the Island Boy

12/13/2009 9:09:00 AM

0

On Dec 13, 2:15 am, solarbus <solar...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Dec 13, 12:56 am, DG <nos...@nospam.nospammmm> wrote:
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y...
>
> > --
>
> >http://www.flickr.com/photos/ros...
>
> total bullshit
>
> AP analyzed all the emails and concluded there was no "faking" of any
> science.   this is all just another right wing attempt to make
> something out of nothing.
>
> The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored
> private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the
> world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges
> don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming
> because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.
>
> http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gRa5F7Lv_......
>
> anyway just read the emails they're making a shit out of.  it's
> obvious there's nothing there.   these morons making a big shit about
> nothing keep pointing to this one email that says the word "trick" in
> it.  Big fucking deal they said "trick."  Sometimes scientists use the
> word "trick" when they are working with data and numbers.  It doesn't
> mean anyone is faking the information.   it's total bullshit, like
> usual.  i'm sure karl rove is behind it somewhere.
>
> anyway shouldn't you put NDC before your unrelated post?

Wow, what are the chances that right wing nit-wits misinterpret data
to promote their narrow minded agenda?

G.

PS DG, I kinda like you, but get off the opposition for oppositions
sake.

G.

Garry the Island Boy

12/13/2009 12:27:00 PM

0

On Dec 13, 2:26 am, DG <nos...@nospam.nospammmm> wrote:
> solarbus wrote:
>
> >On Dec 13, 12:56 am, DG wrote:
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y...
>
> >total bullshit
>
> >AP analyzed all the emails and concluded there was no "faking" of any
> >science.   this is all just another right wing attempt to make
> >something out of nothing.
>
> You might want to listen to scientists instead of reporters.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a...
>
> >The 1,073 e-mails examined by the AP show that scientists harbored
> >private doubts, however slight and fleeting, even as they told the
> >world they were certain about climate change. However, the exchanges
> >don't undercut the vast body of evidence showing the world is warming
> >because of man-made greenhouse gas emissions.
>
> >http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gRa5F7Lv_......
>
> I make up my own mind.  You can take what the "AP" says.  
>
> The wheels are coming off of anthropogenic global warming theory.
>
> >anyway just read the emails they're making a shit out of.  it's
> >obvious there's nothing there.   these morons making a big shit about
> >nothing keep pointing to this one email that says the word "trick" in
> >it.  Big fucking deal they said "trick."  Sometimes scientists use the
> >word "trick" when they are working with data and numbers.  It doesn't
> >mean anyone is faking the information.   it's total bullshit, like
> >usual.  i'm sure karl rove is behind it somewhere.
>
> Here is what the "trick" is:http://climateaudit.org/2009/11/29/replicating-the-tric...
>
> >anyway shouldn't you put NDC before your unrelated post?
>
> No...
>
> --
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ros...

Here is the definition of "trick". It is not the first one they are
referring to but the fifth one.
http://www.thefreedictionary...

trick (trk)
n.
1. An act or procedure intended to achieve an end by deceptive or
fraudulent means. See Synonyms at wile.
2. A mischievous action; a prank.
3. A stupid, disgraceful, or childish act or performance.
4.
a. A peculiar trait or characteristic; a mannerism: "Mimicry is the
trick by which a moth or other defenseless insect comes to look like a
wasp" (Marston Bates).
b. A peculiar event with unexpected, often deceptive results: "One of
history's cruelest tricks is to take words that sounded good at the
time and make them sound pretty stupid" (David Owen).
c. A deceptive or illusive appearance; an illusion: a trick of
sunlight.
5.
a. A special skill; a knack: Is there a trick to getting this window
to stay up?
b. A convention or specialized skill peculiar to a particular field of
activity: learned the tricks of the winemaking trade.
6. A feat of magic or legerdemain.
7. A difficult, dexterous, or clever act designed to amuse.
8. Games
a. All the cards played in a single round, one from each player.
b. One such round.
9.
a. A period or turn of duty, as at the helm of a ship.
b. Slang A prison term.
10. Slang
a. An act of prostitution.
b. A prostitute's customer.
c. A session carried out by a prostitute with a client.
11. Slang A robbery or theft.

Thought you might want to be straightened out instead of parroting
idiocy.

G.

DG

12/13/2009 3:35:00 PM

0

Garry the Island Boy wrote:
>
>Wow, what are the chances that right wing nit-wits misinterpret data
>to promote their narrow minded agenda?



Lindzen, Watts and McIntyre aren't exactly nit-wits... They are top
scientists with valid questions and criticisms.


>PS DG, I kinda like you, but get off the opposition for oppositions
>sake.


It's not opposition for oppositions sake. It's truth...

We have been spoon fed bullshit for so long that you find it
comfortable. Open your mind and try to learn...

http://climate...
http://www.climate-sk...

Rex Murphy on Climategate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l...



--

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ros...

Garry the Island Boy

12/13/2009 6:10:00 PM

0

On Dec 13, 11:34 am, DG <nos...@nospam.nospammmm> wrote:
> Garry the Island Boy wrote:
>
>
>
> >Wow, what are the chances that right wing nit-wits misinterpret data
> >to promote their narrow minded agenda?
>
> Lindzen, Watts and McIntyre aren't exactly nit-wits...  They are top
> scientists with valid questions and criticisms.
>
> >PS DG, I kinda like you, but get off the opposition for oppositions
> >sake.
>
> It's not opposition for oppositions sake.  It's truth...  
>
> We have been spoon fed bullshit for so long that you find it
> comfortable.  Open your mind and try to learn...
>
> http://climateaudit.org/http://www.climate-sk...
>
> Rex Murphy on Climategatehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l...
>
> --
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ros...

The reason tree ring data was excluded I would like to see. Perhaps
there are too many variables affecting tree rings that it is
considered inaccurate. I choose to go with the Greenland Ice Core
study, which clearly shows an increse in CO2 and temperature.

G.

Garry the Island Boy

12/14/2009 1:48:00 AM

0

On Dec 13, 2:18 pm, DG <nos...@nospam.nospammmm> wrote:
> Garry the Island Boy wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Dec 13, 11:34 am, DG <nos...@nospam.nospammmm> wrote:
> >> Garry the Island Boy wrote:
>
> >> >Wow, what are the chances that right wing nit-wits misinterpret data
> >> >to promote their narrow minded agenda?
>
> >> Lindzen, Watts and McIntyre aren't exactly nit-wits...  They are top
> >> scientists with valid questions and criticisms.
>
> >> >PS DG, I kinda like you, but get off the opposition for oppositions
> >> >sake.
>
> >> It's not opposition for oppositions sake.  It's truth...  
>
> >> We have been spoon fed bullshit for so long that you find it
> >> comfortable.  Open your mind and try to learn...
>
> >>http://climateaudit.org/http://www.climate-sk...
>
> >> Rex Murphy on Climategate
>
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l...
>
> >> --
>
> >The reason tree ring data was excluded I would like to see.
>
> This is very important.  Excluding data is a big problem for the CRU.
> They have done this.  Why?  "hide the deline" is one possible reason.
>
> >Perhaps
> >there are too many variables affecting tree rings that it is
> >considered inaccurate. I choose to go with the Greenland Ice Core
> >study, which clearly shows an increse in CO2 and temperature.
>
> Problem is the correlation doesn't match the global warming zealots
> theory.
>
> --
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/rose... Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Have you READ the Greenland Ice Core data? Pretty fucking convincing
that CO2 has risen dramtically. Now, if that is not causing a
distribution of weather and heat and etc. . .then what is?

G.

Garry the Island Boy

12/14/2009 4:04:00 AM

0

On Dec 13, 2:18 pm, DG <nos...@nospam.nospammmm> wrote:
> Garry the Island Boy wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Dec 13, 11:34 am, DG <nos...@nospam.nospammmm> wrote:
> >> Garry the Island Boy wrote:
>
> >> >Wow, what are the chances that right wing nit-wits misinterpret data
> >> >to promote their narrow minded agenda?
>
> >> Lindzen, Watts and McIntyre aren't exactly nit-wits...  They are top
> >> scientists with valid questions and criticisms.
>
> >> >PS DG, I kinda like you, but get off the opposition for oppositions
> >> >sake.
>
> >> It's not opposition for oppositions sake.  It's truth...  
>
> >> We have been spoon fed bullshit for so long that you find it
> >> comfortable.  Open your mind and try to learn...
>
> >>http://climateaudit.org/http://www.climate-sk...
>
> >> Rex Murphy on Climategate
>
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l...
>
> >> --
>
> >The reason tree ring data was excluded I would like to see.
>
> This is very important.  Excluding data is a big problem for the CRU.
> They have done this.  Why?  "hide the deline" is one possible reason.
>
> >Perhaps
> >there are too many variables affecting tree rings that it is
> >considered inaccurate. I choose to go with the Greenland Ice Core
> >study, which clearly shows an increse in CO2 and temperature.
>
> Problem is the correlation doesn't match the global warming zealots
> theory.
>
> --
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/ros...

So one piece of complex data disavows the entire work? Where did the
baby go when you threw out the bath water?

G.

frndthdevl@aol.com

12/14/2009 5:03:00 AM

0

dude, it's Sunday night!

Ray

12/14/2009 5:05:00 AM

0

On Dec 13, 8:57 pm, DG <nos...@nospam.nospammmm> wrote:
>
> If the climate models can't predict next year then why should we make
> policy based upon their 90 year projection?  

Once again you are confusing weather with climate

In related news:
-----------------------------------------
Sea Level Is Rising Along US Atlantic Coast, Say Environmental
Scientists

ScienceDaily (Dec. 11, 2009) — An international team of environmental
scientists led by the University of Pennsylvania has shown that sea-
level rise along the Atlantic Coast of the United States was 2
millimeters faster in the 20th century than at any time in the past
4,000 years...

Researchers believe this may be related to the melting of the
Greenland Ice Sheet and ocean thermal expansion.
-----------------------------------------
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091210111156.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:%20sciencedaily%20%28ScienceDaily:%20Latest%20Science...