> I kept the use of a direct call to a dedicated entry point for NMIs > (doubled down really). AFAICT, there are no issues with the direct call > in the current code, and I don't know enough about FRED to know if using > INT $2 would be better or worse, i.e. less churn seemed like the way to > go. And if reverting to INT $2 in the future is desirable, splitting NMI > and IRQ handling makes it quite easy to do so as all the relevant code > that needs to be ripped out is isolated. Thanks for making this change. There is no big difference between "int $2" and calling the NMI handler explicitly. Xin
