OSDev.org

CrypticalCode0 wrote:I use the wiki as reference material, What i feel what is missing is a peek poke listing, and luckly the x86 design has killed the full potential of it.

I know what you mean... but the PC architecture isn't the C64 anymore, where the experienced user would just know the meaning of 53280 or 49152. You don't "peek & poke", you query the BIOS, peek the EDA, send CPUID requests, poll the PCI bus. Very different ways of getting information, each of which is described in the appropriate sub-page.

And very little of this has to do with any fixed addresses...

cxzuk wrote:Id really like to understand the purpose of each article, and for them to flow together nicer.

Agree.

cxzuk wrote:What is the role of the barebones tutorials.. what lessons are learnt?

It is a minimal "known good" starting point to get you through the bootloader phase into the "Hello World", this-is-a-C-function phase. It's an alternative to the various "write your own bootloader" tutorials out there.

cxzuk wrote:Is it possible to see any site stats for the wiki as it would be interesting to see where people visit and use the most?

That'd be the Special pages[/quote], linked from the sidebar. There's "Popular pages" among them.

ACcurrent wrote:Maybe we should just have a page for beginners (not beginners' mistake) but one which introduces them to the x86 architecture very simply.

I am opposed to dumbing down even further. The Wiki should give valuable information to those who are determined to write their own OS, and have the technical competence to do so (which does include perusing technical documentation). I do not feel we should cater for people not having the wits about them to write a "calculate prime numbers" type of user-space app, but want to have the bragging rights about their own "OS".

Anyway, there's the [url=http://wiki.osdev.org/Category:Babystep]Babystep tutorial, which does a good intro into basic things.

The point is that while tracking down docs is great, I do not see why a well documented page about x86 is "Dumbing Down" the page. Yes people should have technical competence, but by providing them with clearer and more appropriate information i.e Hey dude, the x86 arch is interupt driven etc. Also I feel that the wiki has more code than documentation. Honestly, isn't THAT dumbing down the wiki?

ACcurrent wrote:The point is that while tracking down docs is great, I do not see why a well documented page about x86 is "Dumbing Down" the page. Yes people should have technical competence, but by providing them with clearer and more appropriate information i.e Hey dude, the x86 arch is interupt driven etc. Also I feel that the wiki has more code than documentation. Honestly, isn't THAT dumbing down the wiki?

I concur, the wiki should be used to ease searching for information, not give a direct solution.
Everyone here knows how to program, and those who don't shouldn't get into OS programming before they know how to program. (obviously)

That is why i asked for a a list of peek addresses. (This can include some BIOS or EFI standardized entry points/calls)
And just because i refer to old school practices doesn't mean i don't know time has moved on.

CrypticalCode0 wrote:I concur, the wiki should be used to ease searching for information, not give a direct solution.

Not necessarily give, as most of the times pointing to is sufficient.

Point in case, BIOS. It gives a general intro on the subject, then points to the RBIL as the most complete reference known. Similar for UEFI, which is why I am a bit confused by your demands for "a list of peek addresses" - they do exist, and the relevant Wiki pages point out where to find and how to use them.

So, what are you suggesting?

sorry if what i said seemed like a demand i didn't meant to formulated my request as a demand since i am even willing to write it myself to show what i mean with it.

@Solar the UEFI is one of those cases where I see more code than actual information.
It seems to me that maybe part of it should be moved into a tutorial maybe? But the UEFI specs are quite clear so I would not advise shortening it and freeing it on some of the code. It also seems useful to include practical information such as the fact that majority of UEFI apps are 64 bit. I plan on expanding the section on UEFI though.

Under Basic Information there is a page called Definitions. I think we should remove that and take whatever we found useful and put it under the page Introduction.

Definitions is also a misleading name.

Agree?

Now I'm a nitpick.

On the frontpage there is uneven padding.

If you look at the title Bare Bones / Baby steps there is no padding above but all other titles have padding. I would have fixed that if I had permissions.

I added a page about crt0 as requested on the wish list. It is not much but it is a start. I'll write a page on loading kernel modules later when I've got time.

Please review the crt0 page because I'm no expert on how they work in general I just know how I implemented mine.

Jezze wrote:Under Basic Information there is a page called Definitions. I think we should remove that and take whatever we found useful and put it under the page Introduction.

Done.

Jezze wrote:On the frontpage there is uneven padding.

Done.

I would have fixed that if I had permissions.

Oh, you have, just not through the front page. You have to edit the individual boxes.

Jezze wrote:Please review the crt0 page because I'm no expert on how they work in general I just know how I implemented mine.

Done. Looks good. Link it from the appropriate places - a Wiki page not linked to is an orphan.

Maybe it would be a good idea to have a larger piece of text on the main page that says something like "Want to get started coding your own OS?". This would then guide the beginners through a process of steps he needs to follow to get started (e.g. first Getting Started, then Beginner Mistakes, then perhaps something from the bare bones tutorials, etc.). I know that that information is already present on the main page, but making it stand out even more might make it easier for beginners to find this information (and hopefully even further trim down the amount of beginner questions with RTM responses).

Just my 2 cents. The rest of the updates are looking good by the way, good work!

Combuster wrote:

Some stuff is simply outdated beyond usability. Detecting Colour and Monochrome Monitors? Seriously?

Be careful, guyfawkes and rdos might still need it

Absolutely not! I find the early graphics standards with color-planes, palettes and alike totally unusable, and thus regard it as legacy that I do not support. And never had. That's also why the graphics package is of relatively recent origin.

So for me, just let it go.

I'm thinking we should do something about the CPU topic. Having AMD K6 WriteBack Optimizations as the first item on the list seems... well not the first thing you would be interested in I guess...

Anyway started on another item on the wish list about symbol tables and how modules can interface with the kernel but I just realized now that I probably shouldn't have that info under symbol tables. Doh!