> I kept the use of a direct call to a dedicated entry point for NMIs
> (doubled down really).  AFAICT, there are no issues with the direct call
> in the current code, and I don't know enough about FRED to know if using
> INT $2 would be better or worse, i.e. less churn seemed like the way to
> go.  And if reverting to INT $2 in the future is desirable, splitting NMI
> and IRQ handling makes it quite easy to do so as all the relevant code
> that needs to be ripped out is isolated.

Thanks for making this change.

There is no big difference between "int $2" and calling the NMI handler explicitly.

Xin