Re: System IRQ's

From: Kadaitcha Man (nospam_at_rainx.cjb.net)
Date: 08/04/04 

Date: Wed, 04 Aug 04 06:08:32 +0545

JT wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 17:19:34 GMT, "relic" <nospam@relic211.cjb.net>
> wrote:
>
>> JT wrote:
>>> On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 20:33:23 GMT, "relic" <nospam@relic211.cjb.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> DeMoN LaG wrote:
>>>>> "relic" <nospam@relic211.cjb.net> wrote in
>>>>> news:ptbPc.68611$SO5.47788 @twister.socal.rr.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Go ogle. It's ACPI.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ACPI and APIC are two different things. Go ogle yourself.
>>>>
>>>> There are 4 entries. NOTHING to do with System IRQ's is mentioned
>>>> in them. That would be ACPI.
>>>
>>>
>>
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/system/sysperf/IO-APIC.mspx#XSLTsection127121120120
>>>
>>> Microsofts info on APIC. Google for "APIC interupt" and you won't
>>> get all the noise of non-related links
>>>
>>
>> I probably sounded like I'm trying to argue that it's /not/ APIC,
>> it's that I saw advice to the OP about using APIC. I believe the
>> option in BIOS is ACPI, not APIC; at least it is on the motherboards
>> I've seen lately. You have to enable ACPI to get APIC.
>
> Depends heavily on the BIOS and what they have modified. APIC does
> not Have to depend on ACPI.
>
> You came across as though APIC didn't exist, which it very much does.

You fucking gormles nong. That misses the point entirely. The fact remains,
the yanKKKee-like Howdying fucktard named Walph, put his size 12 hobnail
boot in his own gob and tried to swallow it.