Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
From: Peter Berdeklis <peter AT atmosp DOT physics DOT utoronto DOT ca>
Subject: Re: Interrupts (Hardware) 
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.91.970408144302.24481A-100000@atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca>
Nntp-Posting-Host: chinook.physics.utoronto.ca
Sender: news AT info DOT physics DOT utoronto DOT ca (System Administrator)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Organization: University of Toronto - Dept. of Physics
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.95.970407120356.24230A-100000@rainbow> 
Date: Tue, 8 Apr 1997 18:46:40 GMT
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 95 DOT 970407120356 DOT 24230A-100000 AT rainbow> 
Lines: 20
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

On Mon, 7 Apr 1997, Ramesh Nallur wrote:
> Your answers have cleared all of my doubts except for one. Why can't I
> replace an IDT (PM) entry and expect the hardware interrupts to be
> caught(in PM only)???. 

Short answer - you can.

When the machine is in PM, a hardware interrupt calls the corresponding 
int in the IDT.  The PIC knows nothing about PM/RM - the decision is made 
by the processor alone.  The only concern is when running RM code.  Then 
you have to make sure that the int is reflected to PM, because, again, 
the PIC knows nothing about PM/RM.

Good luck with your project.  (P.S. I assume you've already downloaded 
and read the DPMI spec.)

---------------
Peter Berdeklis
Dept. of Physics, Univ. of Toronto