Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 14 Aug 1998 02:53:19 -0400 (EDT) | | From | "Mike A. Harris" <> | | Subject | Re: IRQ trouble |
| |
On Fri, 14 Aug 1998, Jeroen-bart Engelen wrote:
> > > > And I never saw that option in my BIOS. > > > > Besides, I thought IRQ9 was (unofficially) reserved for videoboards? > > > IRQ 9 is cascaded to IRQ 2, so technically it doesn't exist. ( although my > > > sportster winmodem uses IRQ 9 ;() > > > > Yes. My modem is on what I refer to as IRQ 2. In DOS programs, > > I set the software to use IRQ 2 and everything works. If I use > > "IRQ 9", nothing works. > > Hmmm.... > > > In Windows 3.1/95 I have to set it to IRQ 9 or nothing works. In > > Linux, I set it to IRQ 2 and it works. > > Why won't Linux detect that an IRQ is in use then?
man setserial
autodetect is there, but not perfect.
> Or does it? > It doesn't with IRQ9 on my system.
I don't like autodetect stuff like that. I'd rather specify it.
> > PC hardware is braindamaged IMHO. It would be nice to see a new > > architecture with a PIC with 256 IRQ's, all non-cascaded in one > > chip. Same goes for DMA and any other resources. > > We'll probably seen DNA chips before :-))
;o) True.
-- Mike A. Harris - Computer Consultant - Linux advocate
Escape from the confines of Microsoft's operating systems and push your PC to it's limits with LINUX - a real OS. http://www.redhat.com
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
|  |