From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi  Mon Dec 11 23:41:51 2006
X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de
Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de
Subject: Re: [MiNT] tos.hyp
From: Petr Stehlik <joy@sophics.cz>
To: mint@lists.fishpool.fi
In-Reply-To: <200611142102.p48274@b.maus.de>
References: <200611142102.p48274@b.maus.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 02:03:54 +0100
Message-Id: <1163552634.2941.4.camel@joy.home>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ms1.avonet.cz id kAF13u7j029871
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
X-original-sender: joy@sophics.cz
Precedence: bulk
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=help>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:mint-request@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
X-List-ID: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
List-subscribe: <mailto:mint-request@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=subscribe>
List-owner: <mailto:tjhukkan@fishpool.fi>
List-post: <mailto:mint@lists.fishpool.fi>
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.8 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL,
 BAYES_00
X-Spam-Level: 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by wh58-508.st.uni-magdeburg.de id kBBMfjJe002000

Gerhard Stoll píše v Út 14. 11. 2006 v 21:02 +0100:
> > what is the correct meaning of _SND cookie bits?
> 
> I have the information from the XBRA-List from Julian Reschke, the 
> docu about the MilanBlaster (only Bit 5, 2000-05-11) and the Falcon 
> Developer Documentation Version 1.1:
> 
> -------------------------------cut-------------------------------
> The Atari Falcon030 _SND cookie is a bitmap of abilities.
> Bit 0  PSG
> Bit 1  8-bit DMA
> Bit 2 16-bit CODEC
> Bit 3 DSP
> Bit 4 Connection Matrix

But this is wildly different from the other documents and what's even
weirder is the fact that Locksnd() can be called only if bit 2 of _SND
is set. My documentation says that bit 2 is "DMA Record with XBIOS"
which kinda makes sense to check before calling an XBIOS call (Locksnd).
But if your documentation is to be correct then why would anyone check
for 16-bit CODEC before calling Locksnd()? That just doesn't make any
sense.

Petr