Thanks for the info!

er... tells you how old i am doesn't it...

--Bob

Mauricio Giovagnini wrote:
> That's it.  Interrupt sharing is not a problem on new OSes since a long time! 
>
> Windows 2000/XP an Linux starting from kernel 2.2 (as I remember)
>
>
>
> ----- Mensaje original ----
> De: Herbert Graf <mailinglist3@farcite.net>
> Para: Microcontroller discussion list - Public. <piclist@mit.edu>
> Enviado: jueves 18 de enero de 2007, 17:31:45
> Asunto: Re: [EE] PC Serial Port
>
> On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 12:40 -0700, Bob Axtell wrote:
>   
>> John Pfaff wrote:
>>     
>>> I have a modem installed, but it's internal and uses COM3.
>>> I haven't been able to install the tablet driver, because it tells me 
>>> that COM1 is not available.
>>> Other programs (Hypter Terminal, Tera Term) tell me COM1 and COM3 are 
>>> available (the only two ports on the system), but can't use either one 
>>> because the "telephony device is in use".
>>> What I'm really looking for is a way to tell what process has the serial 
>>> port locked.
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> COM1 and COM3 share the safe interrupt port. So when COM3 is used, COM1 
>> is used as well.
>>     
>
> Before the days of PCI and interrupt sharing that was true.
>
> However, assuming the com ports are PCI devices (whether physically in a
> PCI slot, or simply virtually hanging off the PCI bus in the form of
> being built in to the south bridge), Windows should have zero problems
> with them sharing the same IRQ.
>
> TTYL
>
>   

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist