Talk:Interrupt

message: list of default PC IRQs, not sure if for this page since it's platform-specific: http://www.kblearning.com/a+studysite/aplusdiagrams/irqs.htm
----
This line bugs me:
: The waiting still occurs. Normally, the computer's microcode continually tests for an interrupt.
* Firstly this implies falsely that all processors are microcoded
* Secondly a processor polling for an interrupt signal at a specific point in a processing cycle does not involve waiting, just a decision point.
--Minority Report 21:46, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: INitial text

message: IRR redirects here. but i can't find no explanation. --
: You probably meant Interrupt Request Register? This is an implementation-specific register that may not be general enough to be explained in this article. Presently IRR points to a disambiguation page with no reference to this Interrupt Request Register.
:IRR could be introduced as an example of register, if a general algorithm for interrupt processing is described in this article. Teuxe (talk) 15:19, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I added this definition to IRR, but redirecting to programmable interrupt controller which is more appropriate. Teuxe (talk) 15:32, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  how come this article does not contain a paragraph about 'IRR' 

message: I propose for deletion the interrupt routine example (for PIC MCU) placed on the article. This example is messy, contains unrelated functionality, looks pretty odd and occupies about one third of content. I think that interrupt handler routines (and related functionality) are very platform dependent (and can be very easily found in reference documentation), so in this article we must concentrate on common aspects without examples. If nobody against - I will delete it in a week time. Pmod (talk) 20:04, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally Agreed. 129.27.142.133 (talk) 11:12, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interrupt routine example 

message: As currently described the article leaves an impression that there are severe problems in sharing interrupt lines. In present day architectures the problems have been well solved by interrupt controllers, which can quickly identify and prioritize the interrupt sources and which can be used by software interrupt servers to implement prioritized interrupt handling of any desired complexity. The plain wired-or architecture, which is behind the claims in the architecture, is quite obsolete except in simplest systems. (This is not to say that wired-or itself is obsolete, only in this context.) Even with properly implemented wired-or architecture the problem of multiple interrupt sources of different priorities can be solved by having masking at the generating end and by using software interrupt request queuing. The article should be changed and expanded to reflect the current state of art.Lauri.pirttiaho (talk) 15:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sharing interrupt lines 

message: This article has been found to be edited by students of the Wikipedia:India Education Program project as part of their (still ongoing) course-work. Unfortunately, many of the edits in this program so far have been identified as plain copy-jobs from books and online resources and therefore had to be reverted. See the India Education Program talk page for details. In order to maintain the WP standards and policies, let's all have a careful eye on this and other related articles to ensure that no material violating copyrights remains in here. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 15:20, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Look out for possible copyright violations in this article 

message: It would be interesting to have a "history" section that says when/where interrupts first appeared.  Some other versions of this article have one, though without source citations: the Dutch version explicitly says that the Electrologica X1 was the first (that would make the answer 1958, the year that machine first shipped) and the German one says that interrupts appeared "in the 1960, for example in the Electrologica X1" [sic].
Dijkstra's review paper () shows that he started working with interrupts in 1957 in the X1 design, but that does not say definitively that this was the first design with interrupts. !!!!
The March 1956 UNIVAC 1103A is usually cited as the first computer with an interrupt and the January 1957 (shipped August 1958) IBM 709 is usually cited as the first to have I/O interrupts. However, some military computers may have been there first. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 11:45, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  History? 

message: Given a choice of two references to cite, one of which was published at a more appropriate date, but with a printing defect,
 and the other
 published five years later but more readable, which should be cited in the article? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 10:52, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I would cite both, it's only WP:OVERKILL when you have more than 3. --Mathnerd314159 (talk) 17:13, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Condition of references versus timeliness of references 

message: Large parts of the article seem to be describing interrupts on a PC rather than interrupts in general. The information on specific interrupt systems should be in separate, appropriately named, sections or subsection from material on interrupts in general.
There are systems in which an interrupt causes processor status and interrupt reason to be pushed on the stack rather than stored at fixed locations. Does that belong in the article, or is it TMI? --Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 17:19, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I would suggest to have an overview because It highly depends on architecture. As long as we have sane sources on that of course. Given different ISAs I think it's best to keep details short. They are CPU-specific and belong to specific articles (e.g. x64, MIPS) etc. Help:LST is also to the rescue to avoid WP:COAT. AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 22:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I've revised some text to make it more general and added a  to the IRQ section. The article needs some text to describe interrupt handling on I/O channels with multiple devices, but I'm not sure what material should be at what heading level. --Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 17:14, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV - PC centric 

message: An interrupt that should occur but doesn't can cause software hangs, and some operating systems have code to deal with the issue. Should there be a section on that topic, or is it TMI? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 17:20, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess it would be a new section under "Hardware interrupts" similar to "Spurious interrupts"? If you can find some decent sources I would say go for it. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 06:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing interrupts