Misc/abrash-black-book
Watch
1
0
Fork
You've already forked abrash-black-book
 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

Change bold code snippets to inline code blocks

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
James Gregory 2013-12-31 17:12:29 +11:00
commit 3c76d884ef
185 changed files with 1772 additions and 1772 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

10
03-10.md
View file

@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ chapter: '03'
pages: 070-073
---
when declaring the timer routines **extern**, so that name-mangling
when declaring the timer routines `extern`, so that name-mangling
doesn't occur, and the linker can find the routines' C-style names.)
That's all it takes; after doing this, you'll be able to use the Zen
@ -59,8 +59,8 @@ push cs
call near ptr ReferenceZTimerOn
```
(and likewise for **ReferenceZTimerOff** ), which works because
**ReferenceZTimerOn** is in the same segment as the calling code. This
(and likewise for `ReferenceZTimerOff` ), which works because
`ReferenceZTimerOn` is in the same segment as the calling code. This
is normally a great optimization, being both smaller and faster than a
far call. However, it's not so great for the Zen
@ -68,12 +68,12 @@ far call. However, it's not so great for the Zen
timer, because our purpose in calling the reference timing code is to
determine exactly how much time is taken by overhead code—including the
far calls to **ZTimerOn** and **ZTimerOf**f! By converting the far calls
far calls to `ZTimerOn` and `ZTimerOf`f! By converting the far calls
to push/near call pairs within the Zen timer module, TASM makes it
impossible to emulate exactly the overhead of the Zen timer, and makes
timings slightly (about 16 cycles on a 386) less accurate.
What's the solution? Put the **NOSMART** directive at the start of the
What's the solution? Put the `NOSMART` directive at the start of the
Zen timer code. This directive instructs TASM to turn off all
optimizations, including converting far calls to push/near call pairs.
By the way, there is, to the best of my knowledge, no such problem with