flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > OS Construction > Hardware multitasking

Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
BOTOKILLER



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 154
Location: Ukraine
BOTOKILLER
Hi everyone!
I saw that stuf on wikipedia and I have some questions
1. Is it worth of using it?
2. How to code that stuf?
Post 14 Apr 2011, 05:09
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Tyler



Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Posts: 1216
Location: NC, USA
Tyler
I've read it's not the most efficient way to implement multitasking. To code it, you open get a copy of Intel Manual 3A, build a GDT with a TSS descriptor in it, and a TSS.

Also, you need to make friends with chap 7 of the same manual.
Post 14 Apr 2011, 06:05
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BOTOKILLER



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 154
Location: Ukraine
BOTOKILLER
what are the cons and pros of it?
Post 14 Apr 2011, 09:38
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ManOfSteel



Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 1154
ManOfSteel
BOTOKILLER wrote:
Is it worth of using it?

Not really. It's a bit slower than s/w multitasking, has a lot more overhead and provides no real advantages. I don't think there's much support for TSS-based task-switching outside the i386-proper architecture, e.g. x86-64 doesn't support it.
AFAIK, h/w task-switching has never been used in real operating systems.
Post 14 Apr 2011, 10:13
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
BOTOKILLER



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 154
Location: Ukraine
BOTOKILLER
Quote:

AFAIK, h/w task-switching has never been used in real operating systems.

I'm not in real mode))))
Post 14 Apr 2011, 11:15
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ManOfSteel



Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 1154
ManOfSteel
LOL By that I didn't mean real-mode OS, but OS IRL (in real life), such as Windows, the Linux kernel, *BSD, etc. All these use software task-switching and have only one TSS per CPU. That has always been the case AFAIK.
Post 14 Apr 2011, 13:10
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
neville



Joined: 13 Jul 2008
Posts: 507
Location: New Zealand
neville
ManOfSteel wrote:
[H/W multitasking] It's a bit slower than s/w multitasking, has a lot more overhead and provides no real advantages.
With multi-core CPUs we now have the ability to implement truly simultaneous H/W multitasking which must be a lot faster than any time-division S/W multitasking Wink

_________________
FAMOS - the first memory operating system
Post 14 Apr 2011, 20:00
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
BOTOKILLER



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 154
Location: Ukraine
BOTOKILLER
neville wrote:
ManOfSteel wrote:
[H/W multitasking] It's a bit slower than s/w multitasking, has a lot more overhead and provides no real advantages.
With multi-core CPUs we now have the ability to implement truly simultaneous H/W multitasking which must be a lot faster than any time-division S/W multitasking Wink

yeah, you are right)
ManOfSteel wrote:
LOL By that I didn't mean real-mode OS, but OS IRL (in real life), such as Windows, the Linux kernel, *BSD, etc. All these use software task-switching and have only one TSS per CPU. That has always been the case AFAIK.

ouch(, havent read atentively, sorry
Post 15 Apr 2011, 11:20
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  


< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on GitHub, YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.