home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: usenet.ufl.edu!usenet
- From: Michael Ellis <michael@anest4.anest.ufl.edu>
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm,comp.os.misc,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,comp.sys.apple2,comp.sys.apple2.programmer,comp.sys.atari.8bit
- Subject: Re: 6502 Multitasking OS announce
- Date: 20 Mar 1996 14:29:32 GMT
- Organization: University Of Florida
- Message-ID: <4ip4oc$kji@no-names.nerdc.ufl.edu>
- References: <4i94fs$stj@narses.hrz.tu-chemnitz.de> <holger.948.00030EE6@deep.hb.provi.de> <4ijtbe$7ca@no-names.nerdc.ufl.edu> <4ijuic$iiq@gatekeeper.liffe.com> <4ik00v$9r@fishlab7.fsh.mtu.edu> <4im0u2$2vd@news.xs4all.nl>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: greenwolf.anest.ufl.edu
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1N (Windows; I; 16bit)
-
- falstaff@xs4all.nl (Falstaff) wrote:
- >jponge@mtu.edu (Joshua P. Onge) writes:
- >
- >>> The way to get around this is to pass all parameters on the stack, and use separate
- >>> stacks for the separate tasks.
- >
- >> All well & good BUT the 6502 does not have a relocatable stack pointer
- >> so your kinda left with a bit of a problem when it commes to
- >> multitasking, ie you cant give each process it's own stack without
- >> copying the whole stack ( maybe just to the current sp value? )during
- >> each context switch.
- >
- >>I believe that, from reading Andre's webpage on his OS, the operating
- >>system saves registers, to keep each program in it's own little world. You
- >>should read his description, it's quite ineresting.
- >
- >Yes, but Joshua is right. Each process will need some amount of stackspace
-
-
-
- Maybe I'm nit-picking, but I wrote:
-
- >>> The way to get around this is to pass all parameters on the stack, and use separate
- >>> stacks for the separate tasks.
-
-
- -Michael Ellis
-
-
-