flat assembler - 512b - Operating System Contest

Index > OS Construction > 512b - Operating System Contest

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

Author

Thread

rhyno_dagreat

Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 487
Location: Maryland, Unol Daleithiau

rhyno_dagreat

I would, but I'm still too much of a newbie at ASM programming (And I've been here for God knows how long and trying to get good at this...)

15 Mar 2007, 22:54

adefeo

Joined: 12 Jan 2004
Posts: 46
Location: Bellmore, Long Island, New York

adefeo

Hmm, it looks like "NanoOS" is multitasking, yet it runs in Real mode? How is this possible?

-512

22 Mar 2007, 01:53

Chewy509

Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 297
Location: Bris-vegas, Australia

Chewy509

adefeo wrote:

Hmm, it looks like "NanoOS" is multitasking, yet it runs in Real mode? How is this possible?

Protected mode isn't required for multi-tasking, just for task isolation and protection.

22 Mar 2007, 02:00

Dex4u

Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 1601
Location: web

Dex4u

Yes, multi-tasking at it's simplest is just saving the state of one program, setting the state of another program, running it till you get the next timer int and keep looping. this can be done in realmode, as well as pmode.
Things to note: with a singal core there is no such thing as real multi-tasking, its really just time sharing, in about 10 years time we will laugh at so called multi-tasking, and just give every program a core or two, Multi-tasking was a good work around, when processors were expensive, but as they get cheaper and multi cores, there will be no need, so you will get multi low end cores.

Also note: Dos TSR is a simple form of multi-tasking Wink

22 Mar 2007, 17:57

hckr83

Joined: 12 Nov 2006
Posts: 86
Location: usa

hckr83

I am going to do this a bit with or without the compo, it just sounds fun, no worrying about linking or anything...that's what I love about ASM, it's just so simple, of course this fact can get in the way of big projects but for my size projects, it just seems perfect...now, I just need to polish up on my assembly, as right now I only know 8086 opcodes, and only know them because I have to emulate them in my emulator..

edit:
my idea for fitting things is maybe to use something like vector programming, like dynamic creation of your code or something...I also enjoy doing this so...

22 Mar 2007, 22:35

Dex4u

Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 1601
Location: web

Dex4u

I think there should be two classer's, one a 512byte as before and also a 2k .com file, that will be booted from a com file boot loader, that you can get when entering the compo Smile

23 Mar 2007, 16:21

hckr83

Joined: 12 Nov 2006
Posts: 86
Location: usa

hckr83

I think it should have one with
1. kernel is boot sector
2. you have 2 "extension" sectors

the ext. sectors can be used for anything

meh on my PSP so...

24 Mar 2007, 00:39

hckr83

Joined: 12 Nov 2006
Posts: 86
Location: usa

hckr83

mine so far is svn://brynet.biz.tm/secos

24 Mar 2007, 02:53

rugxulo

Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)

rugxulo

Dex4u wrote:

Yes, multi-tasking at it's simplest is just saving the state of one program, setting the state of another program, running it till you get the next timer int and keep looping. this can be done in realmode, as well as pmode.
Things to note: with a singal core there is no such thing as real multi-tasking, its really just time sharing, in about 10 years time we will laugh at so called multi-tasking, and just give every program a core or two, Multi-tasking was a good work around, when processors were expensive, but as they get cheaper and multi cores, there will be no need, so you will get multi low end cores.

Also note: Dos TSR is a simple form of multi-tasking .

Just tried NanoOS in DOSBox 0.70 (heh), works! Cool beans.

Anyways, 286s were supposedly meant for multitasking, but I can only guess they mean "task switching" (pause, start something else, pause that, resume ... maybe manually a la MS-DOS' DOSSHELL ??). And the AmigaOS was/is supposedly real-mode but multitasks, right?

P.S. The rumor is that programming for multiple cores gets exponentially harder with every extra core, so if that's true, I doubt we'll really get code optimized into too many for the near future.

29 Mar 2007, 01:48

Dex4u

Joined: 08 Feb 2005
Posts: 1601
Location: web

Dex4u

rugxulo wrote:

P.S. The rumor is that programming for multiple cores gets exponentially harder with every extra core, so if that's true, I doubt we'll really get code optimized into too many for the near future.

I would say, that the numbers of cores makes little differance, once the code is set up, but i could be wrong.

29 Mar 2007, 16:42

tom tobias

Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa

tom tobias

rugxulo wrote:

programming for multiple cores gets exponentially harder with every extra core,...

perhaps due to intracore interrupt handling to ensure fresh data manipulation: assume 4 cores, each performing one fourth of an arithmetic computation, something like an FFT, for example--maybe a split radix with one core computing radix 2 and a second core radix 4, then a third core to compute the power spectrum, from the previous data, while the fourth core shuttles new data into successive cache memory locations. Overhead from the 4 cores will consume a significant amount of "cpu" time, so that an FFT of fewer than 1024 points may be more efficiently handled with a single core, performing each aspect successively, as a single task.

29 Mar 2007, 21:10

Adam Kachwalla

Joined: 01 Apr 2006
Posts: 150

Adam Kachwalla

Hey decard! What happened to your website (http://decard.net/)?

18 May 2007, 07:13

hckr83

Joined: 12 Nov 2006
Posts: 86
Location: usa

hckr83

PM's are there for a reason...

19 May 2007, 02:19

LocoDelAssembly
Your code has a bug

Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4633
Location: Argentina

LocoDelAssembly

Quote:

PM's are there for a reason...

However Adam will not get any answer because Decard is "dead".

If you need to take a look try [url] http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://decard.net/ [/url]

19 May 2007, 02:51

hckr83

Joined: 12 Nov 2006
Posts: 86
Location: usa

hckr83

do you mean decard the person or website?

and I mean PM on this(fasm) forum

19 May 2007, 03:39

LocoDelAssembly
Your code has a bug

Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4633
Location: Argentina

LocoDelAssembly

Both, his last post was http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?p=50475#50475 (note that there is a big gap of 8 months between that post and the before last post).

I hope that those changes are nothing serious and that he can come back here like old times.

19 May 2007, 04:23

pelaillo
Missing in inaction

Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 878
Location: Colombia

pelaillo

I PMd him a couple of months ago and I didn't get any answer. He was getting a new job so I hope the work absorbed him and that nothing bad had happened to him.

19 May 2007, 14:40

Coddy41

Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 384
Location: Ohio, USA

Coddy41

Hey, Cool! Can I Join? I'm just starting but I like this idea.

18 Jan 2009, 23:26

bitRAKE

Joined: 21 Jul 2003
Posts: 2887
Location: [RSP+8*5]

bitRAKE

[Warning: this thread has been dormant for ~18+ months!]

19 Jan 2009, 00:24

Coddy41

Joined: 18 Jan 2009
Posts: 384
Location: Ohio, USA

Coddy41

Well could we bring it back?

19 Jan 2009, 16:46

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

< 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