| 51,6 → 51,8 |
|---|
| .irqh dd ? |
| endl |
| |
| DEBUGF 1, "K : Attach Interrupt %d Handler %x\n", [irq], [handler] |
| |
| and [.irqh], 0 |
| |
| push ebx |
| 154,25 → 156,6 |
|---|
| cmp [v86_irqhooks+ebp*8], 0 |
| jnz v86_irq |
| |
| cmp bp, 6 |
| jnz @f |
| push ebp |
| call [fdc_irq_func] |
| pop ebp |
| @@: |
| |
| cmp bp, 14 |
| jnz @f |
| push ebp |
| call [irq14_func] |
| pop ebp |
| @@: |
| cmp bp, 15 |
| jnz @f |
| push ebp |
| call [irq15_func] |
| pop ebp |
| @@: |
| bts [irq_active_set], ebp |
| |
| lea esi, [irqh_tab+ebp*8] ; esi= list head |
| 217,14 → 200,6 |
|---|
| ; Note: this still isn't 100% correct, because two IRQs can fire simultaneously, |
| ; the better way would be to find the correct IRQ, but I don't know how to do |
| ; this in that case. |
| ; Also, [fdc_irq_func], [irq14_func], [irq15_func] could process interrupt |
| ; but do not return whether they did it, so just ignore IRQs 6, 14, 15. |
| cmp ebp, 6 |
| jz .fail |
| cmp ebp, 14 |
| jz .fail |
| cmp ebp, 15 |
| jz .fail |
| push ebp |
| xor ebp, ebp |
| .try_other_irqs: |
| 232,8 → 207,14 |
|---|
| jz .try_next_irq |
| cmp ebp, 1 |
| jz .try_next_irq |
| cmp ebp, 6 |
| jz .try_next_irq |
| cmp ebp, 12 |
| jz .try_next_irq |
| cmp ebp, 14 |
| jz .try_next_irq |
| cmp ebp, 15 |
| jz .try_next_irq |
| lea esi, [irqh_tab+ebp*8] |
| mov ebx, esi |
| .try_next_handler: |