What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Question about which tools to use, bugs, the best way to implement a function, etc should go here. Don't forget to see if your question is answered in the wiki first! When in doubt post here.
User avatar
BrightLight
Member
Member
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:11 am
Location: Maadi, Cairo, Egypt
Contact:

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by BrightLight »

You know your OS is advanced when you stop using the Intel programming guide as a reference.
User avatar
Ch4ozz
Member
Member
Posts: 170
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 2:46 pm
Libera.chat IRC: esi

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by Ch4ozz »

Looks good!
Do you have a GUI console implementation?
User avatar
BrightLight
Member
Member
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:11 am
Location: Maadi, Cairo, Egypt
Contact:

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by BrightLight »

Ch4ozz wrote:Looks good!
Do you have a GUI console implementation?
Thanks!
No, and I don't plan to add support for console UI in my kernel. Although it is definitely possible to implement this in userspace.
You know your OS is advanced when you stop using the Intel programming guide as a reference.
User avatar
Octacone
Member
Member
Posts: 1138
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:13 am

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by Octacone »

You are 1360 x 768 God.
Just curious, VESA or BGA? That is freaking amazing, I can't reach more than 1024x768x32 w/ VESA.
It looks amazing, it is not much, but it is very very very exciting. Good job! =D>
OS: Basic OS
About: 32 Bit Monolithic Kernel Written in C++ and Assembly, Custom FAT 32 Bootloader
User avatar
BrightLight
Member
Member
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:11 am
Location: Maadi, Cairo, Egypt
Contact:

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by BrightLight »

thehardcoreOS wrote:You are 1360 x 768 God.
Just curious, VESA or BGA? That is freaking amazing, I can't reach more than 1024x768x32 w/ VESA.
It looks amazing, it is not much, but it is very very very exciting. Good job! =D>
It's VESA. Real hardware doesn't support BGA, and I don't have a BGA driver.
Technically, reaching any resolution with VESA is all the same; just don't depend on hardcoded mode numbers and you can achieve any resolution supported by the BIOS/monitor configuration.
You know your OS is advanced when you stop using the Intel programming guide as a reference.
User avatar
Octacone
Member
Member
Posts: 1138
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:13 am

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by Octacone »

omarrx024 wrote:
thehardcoreOS wrote:You are 1360 x 768 God.
Just curious, VESA or BGA? That is freaking amazing, I can't reach more than 1024x768x32 w/ VESA.
It looks amazing, it is not much, but it is very very very exciting. Good job! =D>
It's VESA. Real hardware doesn't support BGA, and I don't have a BGA driver.
Technically, reaching any resolution with VESA is all the same; just don't depend on hardcoded mode numbers and you can achieve any resolution supported by the BIOS/monitor configuration.
Very interesting. Can GRUB enabled VESA support custom resolutions like that?
OS: Basic OS
About: 32 Bit Monolithic Kernel Written in C++ and Assembly, Custom FAT 32 Bootloader
User avatar
Kazinsal
Member
Member
Posts: 559
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 7:38 pm
Libera.chat IRC: Kazinsal
Location: Vancouver
Contact:

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by Kazinsal »

VBE is interesting because on some cards it's just a dumb emulation and on others it's fairly well-stocked with resolutions. On a couple that I've encountered, it actually pulls its mode tables from a section of system memory, so if you know how to craft the numbers required by the VESA Generalized Timing Formula, you can inject new modes into the list and the VBE code will happily set high resolution video modes of your design.

This is kind of off-topic though. Perhaps I'll write a wiki article on it.
User avatar
Octacone
Member
Member
Posts: 1138
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:13 am

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by Octacone »

Kazinsal wrote:VBE is interesting because on some cards it's just a dumb emulation and on others it's fairly well-stocked with resolutions. On a couple that I've encountered, it actually pulls its mode tables from a section of system memory, so if you know how to craft the numbers required by the VESA Generalized Timing Formula, you can inject new modes into the list and the VBE code will happily set high resolution video modes of your design.

This is kind of off-topic though. Perhaps I'll write a wiki article on it.
Well, I would really like to see a wiki article about that.

Lets not go off-topic so here is my keyboard finally fixed.
Attachments
finallyKeyboardCharacters.png
finallyKeyboardCharacters.png (8.89 KiB) Viewed 3805 times
Last edited by Octacone on Thu May 11, 2017 12:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.
OS: Basic OS
About: 32 Bit Monolithic Kernel Written in C++ and Assembly, Custom FAT 32 Bootloader
onlyonemac
Member
Member
Posts: 1146
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2014 2:59 pm

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by onlyonemac »

Kazinsal wrote:On a couple that I've encountered, it actually pulls its mode tables from a section of system memory, so if you know how to craft the numbers required by the VESA Generalized Timing Formula, you can inject new modes into the list and the VBE code will happily set high resolution video modes of your design.
Although that's probably going to be card-specific enough that you might as well write actual card drivers.
When you start writing an OS you do the minimum possible to get the x86 processor in a usable state, then you try to get as far away from it as possible.

Syntax checkup:
Wrong: OS's, IRQ's, zero'ing
Right: OSes, IRQs, zeroing
User avatar
BrightLight
Member
Member
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:11 am
Location: Maadi, Cairo, Egypt
Contact:

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by BrightLight »

thehardcoreOS wrote:Very interesting. Can GRUB enabled VESA support custom resolutions like that?
I don't use GRUB. Probably it can; but on hardware that doesn't support these custom resolutions your kernel won't boot. In general, using GRUB for video modes is easy but has many disadvantages.
You know your OS is advanced when you stop using the Intel programming guide as a reference.
User avatar
Octacone
Member
Member
Posts: 1138
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2015 6:13 am

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by Octacone »

omarrx024 wrote:
thehardcoreOS wrote:Very interesting. Can GRUB enabled VESA support custom resolutions like that?
I don't use GRUB. Probably it can; but on hardware that doesn't support these custom resolutions your kernel won't boot. In general, using GRUB for video modes is easy but has many disadvantages.
Yeah, it is better to write your own VESA VBE 3.0 then mess with GRUB.
The thing I "hate" when using GRUB VESA is that you can't control when it sets it. For example I want to enter GRUB VESA video mode only when I type "start-gui" but can't do that because of GRUB.
OS: Basic OS
About: 32 Bit Monolithic Kernel Written in C++ and Assembly, Custom FAT 32 Bootloader
User avatar
BrightLight
Member
Member
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:11 am
Location: Maadi, Cairo, Egypt
Contact:

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by BrightLight »

octacone wrote:Yeah, it is better to write your own VESA VBE 3.0 then mess with GRUB.
The thing I "hate" when using GRUB VESA is that you can't control when it sets it. For example I want to enter GRUB VESA video mode only when I type "start-gui" but can't do that because of GRUB.
I use VBE 2.0, not VBE 3.0. VBE 2.0 really has everything I need: a linear framebuffer and 32-/24-bit modes. If I recall correctly, 24-bit modes were support in VBE 1.2 as well, but I don't use it because I don't want to use bank switching. I think VBE 3.0 is just like VBE 2.0 but with a protected mode interface. Anyway, Bochs doesn't support VBE 3.0.
There are workarounds around this problem with GRUB; but I guess this is getting too off-topic.
You know your OS is advanced when you stop using the Intel programming guide as a reference.
User avatar
BrightLight
Member
Member
Posts: 901
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:11 am
Location: Maadi, Cairo, Egypt
Contact:

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by BrightLight »

I'm sorry but I can't help posting here, lol. Too much free time in my hands. My scheduler is obviously keeping the CPU usage very low. :)
When the CPU is idle, it really is a constant loop of "sti; hlt; call yield", and yield gives control to the running tasks, both of which are waiting for mouse click (which is a GUI event), and so they call yield again, returning to the idle task.
CPU usage is apparently very little over 0.002%. :)
Attachments
cpu usage.png
cpu usage.png (4.76 KiB) Viewed 3683 times
You know your OS is advanced when you stop using the Intel programming guide as a reference.
tsdnz
Member
Member
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2013 4:09 am

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by tsdnz »

omarrx024 wrote: CPU usage is apparently very little over 0.002%. :)
Nice, it's a great buzz.
tsdnz
Member
Member
Posts: 333
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2013 4:09 am

Re: What does your OS look like? (Screen Shots..)

Post by tsdnz »

omarrx024 wrote:When the CPU is idle, it really is a constant loop of "sti; hlt; call yield", and yield gives control to the running tasks, both of which are waiting for mouse click (which is a GUI event), and so they call yield again, returning to the idle task.
CPU usage is apparently very little over 0.002%. :)
How many loops per second?
How fast is the core?
How does it come out of hlt?
Post Reply