English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Coders > Coders. System

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 29 August 2018, 19:48   #1
dissident
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 169
Temporary turning FAST memory off

Hi,

is there a way to turn off FAST memory so the system can't allocate it any more apart from this very common technique?

Code:
  CNOP 0,4
rd_turn_off_FAST_memory
  move.l  #MEMF_FAST+MEMF_LARGEST,d1 ;Get largest FAST-memory block
  jsr     -216(a6)                   ;AvailMem()
  tst.l   d0                         ;Still FAST memory ?
  beq.s   rd_no_more_FAST_memory     ;No -> skip
  move.l  #MEMF_FAST+MEMF_LARGEST,d1 ;Get largest FAST-memory block
  jsr     -198(a6)                   ;AllocMem()
  bra.s   rd_turn_off_FAST_memory    ;Loop
  CNOP 0,4
rd_no_more_FAST_memory
  rts
If I do it this way, it's a one-way street. The FAST memory is irreversible lost. I want a solution like NoFastMem of the WB 1.2/1.3 does. Switching FAST memory off and on again.

Does anyone know a smarter way in assembler?
dissident is offline  
Old 29 August 2018, 20:21   #2
alkis
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Athens/Greece
Age: 47
Posts: 449
Start with an empty list
If list empty get all memory and store memory pointers to list
if list not empty, walk list & free all list memory pointers
alkis is offline  
Old 29 August 2018, 20:34   #3
Toni Wilen
WinUAE developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 43
Posts: 22,105
Even easier: store all address/size pairs in first (largest) allocated block.
Toni Wilen is offline  
Old 29 August 2018, 20:58   #4
dissident
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by alkis View Post
Start with an empty list
If list empty get all memory and store memory pointers to list
if list not empty, walk list & free all list memory pointers
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toni Wilen View Post
Even easier: store all address/size pairs in first (largest) allocated block.
Thanks alkis&Toni. I will try this. I hope that the first largest memory block is large enough to save all address/size pairs.
dissident is offline  
Old 29 August 2018, 22:32   #5
PeterK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hangover
Posts: 2,406
Why not patching AllocMem() and AvailMem() and let them simply return zero to all FastMem requests?
PeterK is offline  
Old 29 August 2018, 22:42   #6
Toni Wilen
WinUAE developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 43
Posts: 22,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterK View Post
Why not patching AllocMem() and AvailMem() and let them simply return zero to all FastMem requests?
OS internal memory allocations may bypass LVO calls and call internal functions directly and AllocMem() is not the only memory allocation function.

IMHO LVO patching should be only used if there is no other cleaner solution.
Toni Wilen is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 00:14   #7
PeterK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hangover
Posts: 2,406
Ok, it depends on what you want to keep off from getting FastMem. And yes, of course, there are also Allocate(), AllocPooled(), AllocAbs() and AllocVec(). The latter calls AllocMem(). Don't know what the other functions are doing, whether they are based on AllocMem() too or not.

But I just had a short look into the disassembler listing of NoFastMem, which could be easily integrated into other programs. NoFastMem patches AvailMem() and AllocMem(), maybe in a little bit different way, but it's going into the same direction.

On the other side, when you are trying to allocate all available FastMem blocks you are never finished with that task, because at any time other programs may set their used blocks of FastMem free again, and then you will get into a race condition with those which want to allocate these new FastMem blocks.

Last edited by PeterK; 30 August 2018 at 01:26.
PeterK is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 10:28   #8
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 45
Posts: 3,316
Why not using NoFastMem itself ?
From within a program it should be easy to call Execute() or a similar function.
If it doesn't work on pre 2.0 then it can probably be adapted.
meynaf is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 10:29   #9
dissident
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterK View Post
On the other side, when you are trying to allocate all available FastMem blocks you are never finished with that task, because at any time other programs may set their used blocks of FastMem free again, and then you will get into a race condition with those which want to allocate these new FastMem blocks.
Hi PeterK, the code below works fine. The loop allocates all FAST memory:

Code:
 CNOP 0,4
turn_off_FAST_memory
  move.l  $4.w,a6                   ;Get Exec-Base
  move.l  #$20004,d1                ;Request: MEMF_FAST+MEMF_LARGEST
  move.l  d1,d2                     ;Save request
  jsr     -216(a6)                  ;AvailMem(): Get first largest FAST-memory block
  move.l  d0,-(a7)                  ;Save size
  move.l  d2,d1                     ;Request: MEMF_FAST+MEMF_LARGEST
  jsr     -198(a6)                  ;AllocMem(): Allocate first largest FAST-memory block
  move.l  d0,-(a7)                  ;Save pointer 2x
  move.l  d0,a2
turn_off_FAST_memory_loop
  move.l  d2,d1                     ;Request: MEMF_FAST+MEMF_LARGEST
  jsr     -216(a6)                  ;AvailMem(): Get largest FAST-memory block
  move.l  d0,(a2)+                  ;Save size
  beq.s   no_more_FAST_memory       ;If NULL -> skip
  move.l  d2,d1                     ;Request: MEMF_FAST+MEMF_LARGEST
  jsr     -198(a6)                  ;AllocMem(): Allocate largest FAST-memory block
  move.l  d0,(a2)+                  ;Save pointer
  bra.s   turn_off_FAST_memory_loop ;Loop
  CNOP 0,4
no_more_FAST_memory
  rts

...

  CNOP 0,4
turn_on_FAST_memory
  move.l  (a7)+,a2                  ;Get pointer to first largest block
  move.l  a2,a3                     ;Save it
turn_on_FAST_memory_loop
  move.l  (a2)+,d0                  ;Get size
  beq.s   free_first_block          ;If NULL -> skip
  move.l  (a2)+,a1                  ;Get pointer
  jsr      -210(a6)                 ;FreeMem()
  bra.s   turn_on_FAST_memory_loop  ;Loop
  CNOP 0,4
free_first_block
  move.l  a3,a1                     ;Get pointer of first largest block
  move.l  (a7)+,d0                  ;Get size of first largest block
  jmp     -210(a6)                  ;FreeMem()
But you are right, there's one disadvantage regarding the multitasking environment. If a program was opened before my routine allocated all FAST-memory and is quit before I release my allocated FAST-memory, there will be available FAST memory again. Turing off the multitasking via Forbid() and Permit() maybe useful only in very special cases.

My idea is to patch the memory-list at the pointer Exec-Base->MemList. Just removing the node of FAST memory out of the memory list with Remove() and inserting it again with Insert(). But this could be dangerous, because it's a private structure and could mess everything up.

Last edited by dissident; 30 August 2018 at 10:44.
dissident is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 10:37   #10
Toni Wilen
WinUAE developer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hämeenlinna/Finland
Age: 43
Posts: 22,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterK View Post
On the other side, when you are trying to allocate all available FastMem blocks you are never finished with that task, because at any time other programs may set their used blocks of FastMem free again, and then you will get into a race condition with those which want to allocate these new FastMem blocks.
Right, I forgot that problem.. There does not seem to be any nice and simple solutions.

Quote:
My idea is to patch the memory-list at the pointer Exec-Base->MemList. Just removing the node of FAST memory out of the memory list with Remove() and inserting it again with Insert(). But this could be dangerous, because it's a private structure and could mess everything up.
It should work until someone tries to free memory that was allocated from removed node.
Toni Wilen is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 10:37   #11
dissident
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
Why not using NoFastMem itself ?
From within a program it should be easy to call Execute() or a similar function.
If it doesn't work on pre 2.0 then it can probably be adapted.
Hi meynaf, I've tested it on a WinUAE-68060 config. NoFastMem also works with KS 3.1.

Yes, using it via Execute() could be a solution, but then my program would require the pre OS2.0 NoFastMem in a OS 2.0+ environment.

Last edited by dissident; 30 August 2018 at 10:50.
dissident is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 10:41   #12
dissident
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toni Wilen View Post
It should work until someone tries to free memory that was allocated from removed node.
Yes, I really had the same idea, so this can't be the solution. It's too complex and dangerous messing up this list.
dissident is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 13:36   #13
Tomislav
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Zagreb / Croatia
Posts: 144
I think that some bootblocks can do that. Turn off memory and floppy drives. And some could switch PAL/NTSC.

Last edited by Tomislav; 30 August 2018 at 14:24.
Tomislav is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 15:43   #14
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 45
Posts: 3,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by dissident View Post
My idea is to patch the memory-list at the pointer Exec-Base->MemList. Just removing the node of FAST memory out of the memory list with Remove() and inserting it again with Insert(). But this could be dangerous, because it's a private structure and could mess everything up.
Less dangerous than removing the entry, would be to set priority so that chipmem is allocated first. Then, no fast mem unless the system runs out of chip.
(But don't ask me how to do that, i've tried to change priority of the mem nodes and it didn't work ).


Quote:
Originally Posted by dissident View Post
Hi meynaf, I've tested it on a WinUAE-68060 config. NoFastMem also works with KS 3.1.

Yes, using it via Execute() could be a solution, but then my program would require the pre OS2.0 NoFastMem in a OS 2.0+ environment.
Normally in a 2.0+ environment, NoFastMem should be available somewhere, like sys:system/NoFastMem.

Then again, it all depends why you want to remove fastmem from the system.
What does your program do ? What is the final goal ?
Perhaps better solutions exist than just removing the fastmem.
meynaf is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 15:57   #15
Don_Adan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Warsaw/Poland
Age: 50
Posts: 1,082
Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
Less dangerous than removing the entry, would be to set priority so that chipmem is allocated first. Then, no fast mem unless the system runs out of chip.
(But don't ask me how to do that, i've tried to change priority of the mem nodes and it didn't work ).



Normally in a 2.0+ environment, NoFastMem should be available somewhere, like sys:system/NoFastMem.

Then again, it all depends why you want to remove fastmem from the system.
What does your program do ? What is the final goal ?
Perhaps better solutions exist than just removing the fastmem.
Right, dependent what he want to do. If he want to load exe files to chip ram, he can modify hunks to load into chip ram. If he want to disable Alloc fast mem, he can alloc full Fast at begining and nothing will be loaded/allocated to fast mem.
Don_Adan is offline  
Old 30 August 2018, 19:56   #16
alkis
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Athens/Greece
Age: 47
Posts: 449
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterK View Post
But I just had a short look into the disassembler listing of NoFastMem, which could be easily integrated into other programs. NoFastMem patches AvailMem() and AllocMem(), maybe in a little bit different way, but it's going into the same direction.
This.

It patches AvailMem to never report the fast mem (which stays unallocated), and patches AllocMem to clear the bit of FAST_MEMORY and always return CHIP_MEMORY.
alkis is offline  
Old 31 August 2018, 09:13   #17
dissident
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomislav View Post
I think that some bootblocks can do that. Turn off memory and floppy drives. And some could switch PAL/NTSC.
Yes, I know such bootblocks. Often you have a menu there to select PAL/NTSC mode or turn off FAST memory. I didn't check such a bootcode yet, but I guess FAST memory is turned off like the first code I posted. As this routine is called before any CLI window is opened and the bootroutine is a main routine, there can't be much other routines releasing their allocated FAST memory after FAST memory was turned off.
dissident is offline  
Old 31 August 2018, 09:26   #18
meynaf
son of 68k
meynaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 45
Posts: 3,316
I fail to see any good use for that in a bootblock.

If you're running your own code, it's a magnitude simpler to just pass the correct flags to allocmem calls in order to get chipmem.
And if it's not your own code that runs after, patching it shouldn't be that hard either.
meynaf is offline  
Old 31 August 2018, 09:46   #19
dissident
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
Less dangerous than removing the entry, would be to set priority so that chipmem is allocated first. Then, no fast mem unless the system runs out of chip.
(But don't ask me how to do that, i've tried to change priority of the mem nodes and it didn't work ).
Yes, I already had the same idea, changing the priority of the node. This could be done this way by the old tool SlowMemLast of WB 1.2. Or they also patched the AllocMem() function.


Quote:
Originally Posted by meynaf View Post
Normally in a 2.0+ environment, NoFastMem should be available somewhere, like sys:system/NoFastMem.

Then again, it all depends why you want to remove fastmem from the system.
What does your program do ? What is the final goal ?
Perhaps better solutions exist than just removing the fastmem.
I've checked it. On the WB 3.0 disc NoFastMem is still in the system drawer. Funnily I didn't expect this and though didn't check it.

Sorry, that I didn't mention it. What I intended to do is loading executable files with LoadSeg(). These files should not be loaded into FAST memory, because it is most likely, they were coded on a machine without extra memory and the coder didn't expect there will be such like in old intros/demos. So FAST memory must be turned off before. After some system modifications, the code of the file is executed. But if any error occurs during my modifications or the file can't be loaded, I have to free the allocated FAST memory and exit my program.
To my mind, I already have a solution that is not too complicated with the second code I have posted.
dissident is offline  
Old 31 August 2018, 09:57   #20
dissident
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Adan View Post
Right, dependent what he want to do. If he want to load exe files to chip ram, he can modify hunks to load into chip ram.
Yes, modifying the hunks could be a solution, but fails, if the exe file itself allocates memory not correctly and doesn't request CHIP memory in particular. To be honest, modifying hunks is not something I've done yet.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don_Adan View Post
If he want to disable Alloc fast mem, he can alloc full Fast at begining and nothing will be loaded/allocated to fast mem.
Yes, you got it. That's exactly what I will do.
dissident is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WinUAE 3.2.1. memory dump for fake fast memory areas broken StingRay support.WinUAE 1 14 December 2015 21:39
A1200 Loses Fast Memory Amicol Amiga scene 24 23 February 2014 18:49
Adding more then 8 MB of Fast Memory in WINUAE? Kenan support.WinUAE 3 16 June 2013 20:20
Use of 4MB PCMCIA Fast Flash Memory as Fast RAM in A1200 nkarytia support.Hardware 10 16 September 2011 14:37
Max Fast Memory In WinUAE CodyJarrett support.WinUAE 11 19 April 2002 22:18

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:52.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Page generated in 0.12451 seconds with 13 queries