VOGONS

Search

Common searches

Search results

Display options

Display options

Re: i430fx/i440fx APM?

Posted on 2024-03-28, 17:52

Just added an extra mapping of the i82347 mapping to address base+2 and base+3 of the PCS chipset. Then I also added mapping writes at the PCS base address +0 to write C0 to address +2 and the value written to address +3(thus the F0h write writes to the first register of the i82347). It also adjusts …

Re: i430fx/i440fx APM?

Posted on 2024-03-28, 13:12

Added an extra 'green button' option to the settings to trigger EXTSMI# on the chipset (both i82347 and PIIX/PIIX3 chipsets). i82347 will only take effect if 'activated' by writing it's registers after a hard reset (which is a PCI reset and during poweron). So both ways can work in harmony with each …

Re: i430fx/i440fx APM?

Posted on 2024-03-17, 20:04

Shutting down Windows 95 also writes F0h to said port. Other issued states locks up the machine with a black screen (suspend I think), or resume from a black screen with a key press. This is what I get on said PCS ports when Windows 95 (and BIOS) boots up and shuts down the machine: 00:00:01:16. …

Re: More extended CPU testsuites like test386.asm?

Posted on 2024-03-17, 19:14

57:15:11:45.08304: >>> Done! It's finally finished. So 2 days 9 hours and 15:11:45.08304 minutes to complete. So roughly 2.3 days to complete. Results: porte9_baresifter_20240314_0939.zip The command for the analyzer is almost correct: It's supposed to be: cargo run -- --bits 32 Edit: Nonetheless, …

Re: i430fx/i440fx APM?

Posted on 2024-03-17, 16:10

But looking at what the BIOS does doesn't match anything sane with what the program is requesting and what the BIOS writes to register address 0 on said device? The port written by the request is at 13F0 (configured to 13F0) with value F0 written to that address. Looking at the address x0 on said …

Re: i430fx/i440fx APM?

Posted on 2024-03-17, 12:26

I added some logging, I see the following before the i440fx memory testing: Read from 21h, base address 20h, 16-bytes size. Write to 21h, value FFh x2. ... Write to 21h, value FEh. Write to 29h, value 20h x2. Write to 21h, value FFh. Write to 21h, value 00h. Read from 21h. Write to 21h, value B8h. - …

Re: i430fx/i440fx APM?

Posted on 2024-03-16, 21:17

So the function call 5307h is interesting. It sets PIIX Programmable Chip-Select Control register to I/O port 13F0 (selected by register 78h/79h), then writes 13F0 to it, using byte operations? That's supposed to be the powerdown sequence? What chip is it using on PIIX programmable chip-select? …

Re: i430fx/i440fx APM?

Posted on 2024-03-16, 19:18

OK. I've implemented the chip according to the found documentation fully (minus some CPU and outputs being handled by hardware (they're calculated though). I don't see SMM using it though (using a test program from https://github.com/crgimenes/shutdown using quit.com) I look at https://bochs. …

i430fx/i440fx APM?

Posted on 2024-03-15, 08:04

Does i430fx/i440fx chipsets have APM for powering the device off? If so, how does this work on real hardware (inside SMM)? Edit: Some more searching... https://github.com/cirosantilli/ralf-brown-interrupt-list/blob/master/inter61d/PORTS.A ----------P00260027-------------------------- PORT 0026-0027 …

Re: More extended CPU testsuites like test386.asm?

Posted on 2024-03-14, 15:39

Anyone knows if it's possible to get the search engine's filtered prefix detection with skipping to work with the Baresifter analyzer program? Right now it would give a lot of issues with the skipped and undetected prefixes I think (results are still running inside UniPCemu for a few days at least)? …

Re: More extended CPU testsuites like test386.asm?

Posted on 2024-03-13, 17:18

Improved the Baresifter program a bit. Added 2 bitmask parameters: detect_prefixes and used_prefixes. Both default to 0xFF (use all available) for compatibility. Now the two settings work as follows: - The bit in the variable represents the prefix group (bit 0=LOCK/REPNE/REP, bit 1=segment overrides …

x86 UD1 parameters?

Posted on 2024-03-12, 20:31

What are the actual parameters of an UD1 instruction? https://www.felixcloutier.com/x86/ud It says it's "0F B9 UD1 r32, r/m32". But is it really only r32,r/m32 or also r16/rm16? So basically full modr/m decoding and fetching in 16/32-bit mode, but no actual use of it (due to throwing #UD for the EU …

Re: More extended CPU testsuites like test386.asm?

Posted on 2024-03-12, 16:03

Just have been thinking. About the #UD opcodes, what happens on the paging fetching of the following opcodes on 386 till Pentium 2? 0F FF: does this have a modr/m? UniPCemu doesn't have any. 0F B9: does this have a 16-bit modr/m? the documentation I can find on it only mentions 32-bit modr/m. …

Re: More extended CPU testsuites like test386.asm?

Posted on 2024-03-12, 14:37

Yeah seems legit, the double dash is used to signify the arguments that belong to the target executable. cargo run has the side-effect that it will try to recompile the target if it deems it necessary. If you don't like that, you can use the exe directly (it resides somewhere in the target …

Re: More extended CPU testsuites like test386.asm?

Posted on 2024-03-12, 12:52

I've been thinking a bit. The analyze program that's included with Baresifter uses some kind of command line parameters: #[derive(Clap, Debug)] #[clap(version = crate_version!(), author = "Julian Stecklina ")] struct Opts { /// The address width to use. #[clap(long, default_value = "64")] bits: u8, …

Re: More extended CPU testsuites like test386.asm?

Posted on 2024-03-11, 19:09

Just quickly looked at the current dump of instructions measured so far. I don't see the 66h and 67h prefixes in there? So the testsuite is actively skipping those! So baresifter is only testing the 32-bit halves of the 16/32-bit instructions! Edit: Also, on x86, 40-4F is counted as a prefix, which …

Re: More extended CPU testsuites like test386.asm?

Posted on 2024-03-10, 17:56

Hi, that's great to hear. Unfortunately I have no recollection about how exactly I originally generated the floppy. Must have been with syslinux I guess? The executable can be updated with mcopy (part of mtools) as described here . The problem on 80386/80486/Pentium isn't the ELF executable (it's …

Re: More extended CPU testsuites like test386.asm?

Posted on 2024-03-10, 13:39

OK that's good to know. Dev tools can be compiled from scratch, but that can be a real hassle (especially starting from 1997!) The booting issue could perhaps be resolved by trying out those older ones. OTOH baresifter sidesteps these issues altogether, so perhaps it'd be a better fit. Here's a …

Page 3 of 274

Go to top of page Go to top of page
Close window
Close window