thfisher@watmath.UUCP (11/12/87)
After reading the Bantam 1.2 manual, I decided to write a program that
set the bits to specify that hunks were to be loaded into a particular
area in memory. ie CHIP, FAST, or EITHER. After writing the program, and
testing it, I found that the programs which I modified loaded did not
load any differently than they had previously. The way I understood the
book was: to specify CHIP memory, set bit 29 of the hunk label, for fast memory,
set bit 30, and leave both unset for either.
Is this correct? What might I have done wrong? I know that these bits were
set, and the program still loaded and ran.
Thanks, I don't know what I would do without this newsgroup!!!
Terry Fisher
--
watmath!thfisher //
\\//-\miga user.
The meek shall inherit the earth because everyone else is leaving.
Disclaimer: Would you claim these ideas? Neither do I.carolyn@cbmvax.UUCP (Carolyn Scheppner CATS) (11/18/87)
In article <15503@watmath.waterloo.edu> thfisher@watmath.waterloo.edu (Terry Fisher) writes: >After reading the Bantam 1.2 manual, I decided to write a program that >set the bits to specify that hunks were to be loaded into a particular >area in memory. ie CHIP, FAST, or EITHER. After writing the program, and >testing it, I found that the programs which I modified loaded did not >load any differently than they had previously. The way I understood the >book was: to specify CHIP memory, set bit 29 of the hunk label, for fast memory, >set bit 30, and leave both unset for either. > >Is this correct? What might I have done wrong? I know that these bits were >set, and the program still loaded and ran. I fooled with this a while ago. Looks like object modules have the bit set in each hunk to specify memory type, but load files have the bits set in the hunk sizes in the initial 3F3 hunk_header hunk. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Carolyn Scheppner -- CATS >>Commodore Amiga Technical Support<< UUCP ...{allegra,ihnp4,rutgers}!cbmvax!carolyn PHONE 215-431-9180 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
phils@tekig.TEK.COM (Phil Staub) (11/19/87)
In article <15503@watmath.waterloo.edu> thfisher@watmath.waterloo.edu (Terry Fisher) writes:
<After reading the Bantam 1.2 manual, I decided to write a program that
<set the bits to specify that hunks were to be loaded into a particular
<area in memory. ie CHIP, FAST, or EITHER. After writing the program, and
<testing it, I found that the programs which I modified loaded did not
<load any differently than they had previously. The way I understood the
<book was: to specify CHIP memory, set bit 29 of the hunk label, for fast memory,
<set bit 30, and leave both unset for either.
Look at the bottom 1/3 of page 283 in said manual, and you'll find that
it's the hunk _size_ word, not the hunk label, which gets changed.
Good Luck,
Phil
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Staub "I do NOT approve. I merely said I UNDERSTAND."
tektronix!tekigm2!phils - Spock
phils@tekigm2.TEK.COMphils@tekig.TEK.COM (Phil Staub) (11/19/87)
OOPS. I've got the Bantam 1.1 manual (you mean there is a 1.2 manual?). the page number I referenced is to the 1.1 manual. Anyway, the info is still the same. Sorry about that. Phil -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phil Staub "I do NOT approve. I merely said I UNDERSTAND." tektronix!tekigm2!phils - Spock phils@tekigm2.TEK.COM