Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.lang.asm.x86    |    Ahh, the lost art of x86 assembly    |    4,675 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 3,616 of 4,675    |
|    R.Wieser to All    |
|    Re: Indirect INT calling    |
|    27 Oct 18 21:26:59    |
      From: address@nospicedham.not.available              Rick,              > The standard method for calling an interrupt vector is to       > PUSHF/D, then do a far call.              Not even clearing those flags a standard INT does ? Hmm...              > This puts the three parameters the interrupt       > vector expects to see on the stack when it issues IRET.              Hmm... I would need to copy the actual vector and call it it indirectly       (referencing CS, as DS could be pointing elsewhere) , but if I do not       actually need to clear those flags it would be workable. Thank, I'll keep       it in mind.              > You could issue an interrupt redirect, where you are       > intercepting INT Nn, and you choose some unused vector              That one also entered my mind. But I don't think I will pursue anything in       that direction, because of the problem determining where an "unused       interrupt" might be.              Regards,       Rudy Wieser              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca