News:

Masm32 SDK description, downloads and other helpful links
Message to All Guests

Main Menu

Interesting Boot Loader Project

Started by Zen, November 07, 2013, 06:40:50 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Zen

Zen

Vortex

Hi Zen,

Thanks for the article. :t It demonstrates the usage of both of asm and C to code a bootloader.

dedndave

he also did part 2

personally, i don't think a bootloader is any place for a compiler   :P
in IBM-world, you get 512 bytes
speed is not really an issue
but, you better manage every byte carefully

Farabi

Quote from: dedndave on November 07, 2013, 07:02:55 AM
he also did part 2

personally, i don't think a bootloader is any place for a compiler   :P
in IBM-world, you get 512 bytes
speed is not really an issue
but, you better manage every byte carefully

512 bytes is only for the loader. Syslinux use the boot loader really to load a system files sized of 512kbytes each. Dont worry about 512-bytes, just make sure it can read the first 100 sector of the rewriteable media. The rest should be fine.
Once Im planning to make my own FAT format, but then, I cancel it, Im confused thinking about the compatibility. Im planning to take 10% of the total size as a FAT, and 4-bytes on each sector point to the next sector for read to form a file.
http://farabidatacenter.url.ph/MySoftware/
My 3D Game Engine Demo.

Contact me at Whatsapp: 6283818314165

Gunther

Zen,

thank you for the link. It's very instructive also for starters. But I'm amazed already: No one has criticized the fact that he uses AT&T syntax. Strange.

Gunther
You have to know the facts before you can distort them.

Vortex

Hi Gunther,

You are right about the AT&T syntax. It's ugly and hard to read.

MichaelW

Quote from: Vortex on November 08, 2013, 08:20:07 AM
It's ugly and hard to read.

Yes, potentially more compiler friendly, but ugly and harder to read and type. He could have easily used Intel syntax, also for the inline assembly AFAIK. For an article aimed at beginners Intel syntax would have been a better choice, IMO.
Well Microsoft, here's another nice mess you've gotten us into.

Gunther

Michael,

Quote from: MichaelW on November 08, 2013, 03:15:28 PM
Yes, potentially more compiler friendly, but ugly and harder to read and type. He could have easily used Intel syntax, also for the inline assembly AFAIK. For an article aimed at beginners Intel syntax would have been a better choice, IMO.

you're definitely right. Intel syntax is more widespread. On the other hand, AT&T syntax can help one by programming in assembly language for the PowerPC.

Gunther
You have to know the facts before you can distort them.