Re: Universal grammar
- From: haberg@xxxxxxxxxx (Hans Aberg)
- Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2006 13:00:59 GMT
In article <1n55kt75qfd1s$.184x0ip4w30jx.dlg@xxxxxxxxxx>, Joachim Pense
<snob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Paul> Which is just one of the hardware interrupts that can be
Paul> sent to a CPU.
That's a hardware _signal_, but usually not considered an interrupt:
1) RESET cannot be caught or masked.
2) INTERRUPT is caught, handled and then the system resumes from it.
RESET abruptly brings to the whole system to a "start" state and
never resumes from where it left off.
3) INTERRUPT is used by peripherals to catch the attention of the CPU,
asking CPU to do something for them quickly.
RESET is usually raised by operators (often human) to bring the
system to a "start" state.
Paul> Hans is absolutely correct. It's an interrupt, it's one of
Paul> the unmaskable hardware interrupts. Without it, the CPU
Paul> would start executing instructions from an unpredictable
Paul> address.
Reset or interrupt, it's for sure something that interrupts.
I think that in the low level technical language, that is, the one used
when dealing with the CPU as a piece of hardware, all those signals are
called interrupts. A software implementer computer manufacturer, working
on a higher level, may use a different language.
--
Hans Aberg
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Paul J Kriha
- Re: Universal grammar
- References:
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: LEE Sau Dan
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Paul J Kriha
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: LEE Sau Dan
- Re: Universal grammar
- From: Joachim Pense
- Re: Universal grammar
- Prev by Date: Re: Universal grammar
- Next by Date: Re: Armenia, homeland of the Etruscans?
- Previous by thread: Re: Universal grammar
- Next by thread: Re: Universal grammar
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|