On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:50 PM, Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2017-01-25 at 13:58 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Ricardo Neri >> <ricardo.neri-calderon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Tasks running in virtual-8086 mode will use 16-bit addressing form >> > encodings as described in the Intel 64 and IA-32 Architecture Software >> > Developer's Manual Volume 2A Section 2.1.5. 16-bit addressing encodings >> > differ in several ways from the 32-bit/64-bit addressing form encodings: >> > the r/m part of the ModRM byte points to different registers and, in some >> > cases, addresses can be indicated by the addition of the value of two >> > registers. Also, there is no support for SiB bytes. Thus, a separate >> > function is needed to parse this form of addressing. >> > >> > Furthermore, virtual-8086 mode tasks will use real-mode addressing. This >> > implies that the segment selectors do not point to a segment descriptor >> > but are used to compute logical addresses. Hence, there is a need to >> > add support to compute addresses using the segment selectors. If segment- >> > override prefixes are present in the instructions, they take precedence. >> > >> > Lastly, it is important to note that when a tasks is running in virtual- >> > 8086 mode and an interrupt/exception occurs, the CPU pushes to the stack >> > the segment selectors for ds, es, fs and gs. These are accesible via the >> > struct kernel_vm86_regs rather than pt_regs. >> > >> > Code for 16-bit addressing encodings is likely to be used only by virtual- >> > 8086 mode tasks. Thus, this code is wrapped to be built only if the >> > option CONFIG_VM86 is selected. >> >> That's not true. It's used in 16-bit protected mode, too. And there >> are (ugh!) six possibilities: > > Thanks for the clarification. I will enable the decoding of addresses > for 16-bit as well... and test the emulation code. >> >> - Normal 32-bit protected mode. This should already work. >> - Normal 64-bit protected mode. This should also already work. (I >> forget whether a 16-bit SS is either illegal or has no effect in this >> case.) > > For these two cases I am just taking the effective address that the user > space application provides, given that the segment selectors were set > beforehand (and with a base of 0). What do you mean by the base being zero? User code can set a nonzero DS base if it wants. In 64-bit mode (user_64bit_mode(regs)), the base is ignored unless there's an fs or gs prefix, and in 32-bit mode the base is never ignored. > >> - Virtual 8086 mode > > In this case I calculate the linear address as: > (segment_select << 4) + effective address. > >> - Normal 16-bit protected mode, used by DOSEMU and Wine. (16-bit CS, >> 16-bit address segment) >> - 16-bit CS, 32-bit address segment. IIRC this might be used by some >> 32-bit DOS programs to call BIOS. >> - 32-bit CS, 16-bit address segment. I don't know whether anything uses this. > > In all these protected modes, are you referring to the size in bits of > the base address of in the descriptor selected in the CS register? In > such a case I would need to get the base address and add it to the > effective address given in the operands of the instructions, right? No, I'm referring to the D/B bit. I'm a bit fuzzy on exactly how the instruction encoding works, but I think that 16-bit x86 code is encoded just like real mode code except that the selectors are used for real. >> size, but I suspect you'll need to handle 16-bit CS. > > Unless I am missing what is special with the 16-bit base address, I only > would need to add that base address to whatever effective address (aka, > offset) is encoded in the ModRM and displacement bytes. Exactly. (And make sure the instruction decoder can decode 16-bit instructions correctly.) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-msdos" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
