home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!inesc.inesc.pt!dec4pt.puug.pt!unl!antares.fct.unl.pt!jpl
- From: jpl@antares.fct.unl.pt (Joao Prospero Luis [ps])
- Subject: Re: LOADALL and the 486
- Message-ID: <1992Nov9.115520.5893@fct.unl.pt>
- Sender: news@fct.unl.pt (USENET News System)
- Organization: Universidade Nova de Lisboa, PORTUGAL
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
- References: <1992Nov04.155003.25751@apricot.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 11:55:20 GMT
- Lines: 27
-
- Marcus Jenkins (marcusj@apricot.co.uk) wrote:
- : I know this may be an FAQ, but I am just a little confused. Is
- : LOADALL implemented in the 486? PC Magazine said that it is
- : in all processors from 2-486. It also said that Microsoft use
- : the instruction in HIMEM.SYS, SMARTDRV.SYS and RAMDRIVE.SYS in
- : MS-DOS. On the other hand, an instructor from Intel (while lecturing
- : on an i386/486 programming and architecture course) alleged that
- : LOADALL is only there on 286 and earlier steps of the 386. Does
- : anybody know the REAL answer? Is there commercial software out
- : there that does use this reserved instruction. This enquiry is
- : out of curiosity only - I have no intention of putting LOADALL
- : into any of my programs!
-
- As far as I know (it isnt that much) LOADALL isnt implemented in
- the 386, but is simulated by some BIOSes. When it traps an invalid opcode
- it goes to check if it is a LOADALL, if it is it is simulated otherwise
- it does something else (in fact I think it tests some other invalid opcode
- first but I dont remember which). This was confirmed with my AMI BIOS.
-
- JPL
-
- --
- Joao Prospero Luis |
- Universidade Nova de Lisboa | Internet: jpl@fct.unl.pt
- Faculdade de Ciencias e Tecnologia |
- Departamento de Informatica | Fax: (+351) (1) 295-5641
- 2825 Monte Caparica, PORTUGAL | Phone: (+351) (1) 295-4464
-