hello all. forgive me if i am wrong but dont IRQ's only go upto irq15. Then
can someone explain why my graphics card currently is assigned IRQ18.
confused me to.
i am running winxp pro sp2. thanks.

Virtual IRQ's. Nothing to be alarmed about. Mine go up to IRQ 22

--
Regards,

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User

If you knew as much as you think you know,
You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!


"mancman3" <mancman3@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
newsB396478-9377-4FAF-BC7B-7F150146C5C1@microsoft.com...
> hello all. forgive me if i am wrong but dont IRQ's only go upto irq15.
> Then
> can someone explain why my graphics card currently is assigned IRQ18.
> confused me to.
> i am running winxp pro sp2. thanks.

thanks mate, but if virtual are they actually doing what they should be? eg.
on 1 hand an object (real) and on other hand fantasy. you with me? thanks.

"Richard Urban" wrote:

> Virtual IRQ's. Nothing to be alarmed about. Mine go up to IRQ 22
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Richard Urban
> Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
>
> If you knew as much as you think you know,
> You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>
>
> "mancman3" <mancman3@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> newsB396478-9377-4FAF-BC7B-7F150146C5C1@microsoft.com...
> > hello all. forgive me if i am wrong but dont IRQ's only go upto irq15.
> > Then
> > can someone explain why my graphics card currently is assigned IRQ18.
> > confused me to.
> > i am running winxp pro sp2. thanks.
>
>
>

Hardware irqs run 0 thru 15. Dos/windows followed this routinely until XP.
XP uses virtual irqs to allow mapping of hardware that is using the same
hardware irq with better dexterity.
It would make sense for the chipmakers to redesign a system with a doubling
of hardware irqs. They already did this once from the original design from
8 to 16 irqs many years ago.

"mancman3" <mancman3@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:27FDB795-5F8C-439E-8926-FA5A6303227C@microsoft.com...
> thanks mate, but if virtual are they actually doing what they should be?
eg.
> on 1 hand an object (real) and on other hand fantasy. you with me? thanks.
>
> "Richard Urban" wrote:
>
> > Virtual IRQ's. Nothing to be alarmed about. Mine go up to IRQ 22
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> >
> > Richard Urban
> > Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
> >
> > If you knew as much as you think you know,
> > You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
> >
> >
> > "mancman3" <mancman3@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > newsB396478-9377-4FAF-BC7B-7F150146C5C1@microsoft.com...
> > > hello all. forgive me if i am wrong but dont IRQ's only go upto irq15.
> > > Then
> > > can someone explain why my graphics card currently is assigned IRQ18.
> > > confused me to.
> > > i am running winxp pro sp2. thanks.
> >
> >
> >

thanks to you both for replys, i now have a better understanding of the IRQ
system. thanks.

"Lil' Dave" wrote:

> Hardware irqs run 0 thru 15. Dos/windows followed this routinely until XP.
> XP uses virtual irqs to allow mapping of hardware that is using the same
> hardware irq with better dexterity.
> It would make sense for the chipmakers to redesign a system with a doubling
> of hardware irqs. They already did this once from the original design from
> 8 to 16 irqs many years ago.
>
> "mancman3" <mancman3@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:27FDB795-5F8C-439E-8926-FA5A6303227C@microsoft.com...
> > thanks mate, but if virtual are they actually doing what they should be?
> eg.
> > on 1 hand an object (real) and on other hand fantasy. you with me? thanks.
> >
> > "Richard Urban" wrote:
> >
> > > Virtual IRQ's. Nothing to be alarmed about. Mine go up to IRQ 22
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Richard Urban
> > > Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
> > >
> > > If you knew as much as you think you know,
> > > You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
> > >
> > >
> > > "mancman3" <mancman3@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > > newsB396478-9377-4FAF-BC7B-7F150146C5C1@microsoft.com...
> > > > hello all. forgive me if i am wrong but dont IRQ's only go upto irq15.
> > > > Then
> > > > can someone explain why my graphics card currently is assigned IRQ18.
> > > > confused me to.
> > > > i am running winxp pro sp2. thanks.
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>

And now with PCI they are down to 4 (A,B,C and D) so the "numbers" are
really "virtual".

Lil' Dave wrote:

> Hardware irqs run 0 thru 15. Dos/windows followed this routinely until XP.
> XP uses virtual irqs to allow mapping of hardware that is using the same
> hardware irq with better dexterity.
> It would make sense for the chipmakers to redesign a system with a doubling
> of hardware irqs. They already did this once from the original design from
> 8 to 16 irqs many years ago.
>
> "mancman3" <mancman3@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:27FDB795-5F8C-439E-8926-FA5A6303227C@microsoft.com...
>
>>thanks mate, but if virtual are they actually doing what they should be?
>
> eg.
>
>>on 1 hand an object (real) and on other hand fantasy. you with me? thanks.
>>
>>"Richard Urban" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Virtual IRQ's. Nothing to be alarmed about. Mine go up to IRQ 22
>>>
>>>--
>>>Regards,
>>>
>>>Richard Urban
>>>Microsoft MVP Windows Shell/User
>>>
>>>If you knew as much as you think you know,
>>>You would realize that you don't know what you thought you knew!
>>>
>>>
>>>"mancman3" <mancman3@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>>>newsB396478-9377-4FAF-BC7B-7F150146C5C1@microsoft.com...
>>>
>>>>hello all. forgive me if i am wrong but dont IRQ's only go upto irq15.
>>>>Then
>>>>can someone explain why my graphics card currently is assigned IRQ18.
>>>>confused me to.
>>>>i am running winxp pro sp2. thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>