How to disable shared interrupts without reinstall?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

I've got a Win2K system where shared interrupts are causing serious non-
functionalities. I've got devices only operating intermittently if at all,
apps which won't run, devices which Win2K intermittently detects as
removed. I get delays at boot time, miscellaneous locks, and various other
errors which I've been able to track down to the problem of shared
interrupts. It was irritating in the past but it's reached the point where
something has to be done.

But meanwhile, a complete, from-the-ground-up reinstall isn't an option.
That would be the easy way - reinstall with every power-saving option in
the BIOS turned off. In fact, when I did the original install I *did* have
all power-saving options off - or so I thought. Turns out the 2K ACPI
detector is *much* more aggressive than one might imagine and if you allow
it even the slightest hint that ACPI might hypothetically be an option, it
enables it. GRRR!

Anyway, I need to disable shared interrupts so I can assign everything in
such a way that my devices don't trip over each other. And I need to do it
without reinstalling. What do I need to do? I know I'm going to have to
replace the NTOSKRNL and HAL (which I can do from my bare-bones service
install on the same machine). But then I assume there are multiple registry
entries that also need to be changed. So what are *all* the things I need
to do (whether copying files, editing the registry, editing text files, or
whatever) in order to disable shared interrupts?


--
Alex Rast
ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com
(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

 

[codigo]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

"Alex Rast" <ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:964CCDDE1adrastnwnotlinkcom@216.168.3.44...
> I've got a Win2K system where shared interrupts are causing serious non-
> functionalities. I've got devices only operating intermittently if at all,
> apps which won't run, devices which Win2K intermittently detects as
> removed. I get delays at boot time, miscellaneous locks, and various other
> errors which I've been able to track down to the problem of shared
> interrupts. It was irritating in the past but it's reached the point where
> something has to be done.
>
> But meanwhile, a complete, from-the-ground-up reinstall isn't an option.
> That would be the easy way - reinstall with every power-saving option in
> the BIOS turned off. In fact, when I did the original install I *did* have
> all power-saving options off - or so I thought. Turns out the 2K ACPI
> detector is *much* more aggressive than one might imagine and if you allow
> it even the slightest hint that ACPI might hypothetically be an option, it
> enables it. GRRR!
>
> Anyway, I need to disable shared interrupts so I can assign everything in
> such a way that my devices don't trip over each other. And I need to do it
> without reinstalling. What do I need to do? I know I'm going to have to
> replace the NTOSKRNL and HAL (which I can do from my bare-bones service
> install on the same machine). But then I assume there are multiple
registry
> entries that also need to be changed. So what are *all* the things I need
> to do (whether copying files, editing the registry, editing text files, or
> whatever) in order to disable shared interrupts?
>
>
> --
> Alex Rast
> ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com
> (remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

Lets try this from the beggining. Run winnt32 /checkupgradeonly and confirm
that the hardware is compatible. Consult the HCL list in the case some
devices are detected as not compatible or in the case hardware is older.
Turn your bios OS detection to off and let the OS manage all power
management functions. Consider flashing the mobo's bios if acpi is
available.

W2K is much more stable with ACPI than with a standard HAL except when the
hardware doesn't support acpi. W2K's virtual IRQ table is a huge improvement
over the old HCL.

If you beleive that an add-on card, for example, does not provide 100% acpi
compatibility, download your motherboard's manual. Modern boards use shared
slots. Thats how they are engineered. The AGP port usually shares resources
with PCI #1 and sometimes both #1 and #2, etc. Examine the populated slots
in your box in the case a hardware "conflict" arises between an acpi-aware
resource and a non-acpi aware resource (you can pause bios POST with a
pause, ESC to release). Unload the device from the OS, shutdown and unplug
system, and switch the non-acpi device to a free un-shared slot as required.
Reinstall driver.

Your goal is not to run a standard HAL.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

at Thu, 05 May 2005 19:21:18 GMT in
<Rkuee.6306$VL3.636972@news20.bellglobal.com>, codigo@codigo.trap.com
(codigo) wrote :

>
>"Alex Rast" <ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
>news:964CCDDE1adrastnwnotlinkcom@216.168.3.44...
>> I've got a Win2K system where shared interrupts are causing serious
>> non- functionalities. I've got devices only operating intermittently
>> if at all, apps which won't run, devices which Win2K intermittently
>> detects as removed. I get delays at boot time, miscellaneous locks,
>> and various other errors which I've been able to track down to the
>> problem of shared interrupts. It was irritating in the past but it's
>> reached the point where something has to be done.
>>
>> But meanwhile, a complete, from-the-ground-up reinstall isn't an
>> option. That would be the easy way - reinstall with every power-saving
>> option in the BIOS turned off. In fact, when I did the original
>> install I *did* have all power-saving options off - or so I thought.
>> Turns out the 2K ACPI detector is *much* more aggressive than one
>> might imagine and if you allow it even the slightest hint that ACPI
>> might hypothetically be an option, it enables it. GRRR!
>>
>> Anyway, I need to disable shared interrupts so I can assign everything
>> in such a way that my devices don't trip over each other. And I need
>> to do it without reinstalling. What do I need to do? I know I'm going
>> to have to replace the NTOSKRNL and HAL (which I can do from my
>> bare-bones service install on the same machine). But then I assume
>> there are multiple
>registry
>> entries that also need to be changed. So what are *all* the things I
>> need to do (whether copying files, editing the registry, editing text
>> files, or whatever) in order to disable shared interrupts?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Alex Rast
>> ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com
>> (remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)
>
>Lets try this from the beggining. Run winnt32 /checkupgradeonly and
>confirm that the hardware is compatible. Consult the HCL list in the
>case some devices are detected as not compatible or in the case hardware
>is older. Turn your bios OS detection to off and let the OS manage all
>power management functions. Consider flashing the mobo's bios if acpi is
>available.

Letting the OS manage power management gives me a bad feeling in my
stomach. Understand that I would prefer *all* power management functions to
be OFF. *All* of them. I'm suspicious as is that the OS is managing power
management.

>W2K is much more stable with ACPI than with a standard HAL except when
>the hardware doesn't support acpi. W2K's virtual IRQ table is a huge
>improvement over the old HCL.
>
>If you beleive that an add-on card, for example, does not provide 100%
>acpi compatibility, download your motherboard's manual. Modern boards
>use shared slots. Thats how they are engineered. The AGP port usually
>shares resources with PCI #1 and sometimes both #1 and #2, etc. Examine
>the populated slots in your box in the case a hardware "conflict" arises
>between an acpi-aware resource and a non-acpi aware resource (you can
>pause bios POST with a pause, ESC to release). Unload the device from
>the OS, shutdown and unplug system, and switch the non-acpi device to a
>free un-shared slot as required. Reinstall driver.
>Your goal is not to run a standard HAL.

Nice in theory. But not in practice. My system has plenty of devices, any
one of which could in theory be "not 100% compatible". So my goal *is* to
run a standard HAL. That way I can ensure interrupts stay out of each
others' way.

My goal, however, is to fix a problem, not to get embroiled in a polemical
battle. Does someone here know how to disable shared interrupts and is
prepared to discuss how this is done without a long debate?

--
Alex Rast
ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com
(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

 

[codigo]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

"Alex Rast" <ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:964DBC49Dadrastnwnotlinkcom@216.168.3.44...
> at Thu, 05 May 2005 19:21:18 GMT in
> <Rkuee.6306$VL3.636972@news20.bellglobal.com>, codigo@codigo.trap.com
> (codigo) wrote :
>
> >
> >"Alex Rast" <ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
> >news:964CCDDE1adrastnwnotlinkcom@216.168.3.44...
> >> I've got a Win2K system where shared interrupts are causing serious
> >> non- functionalities. I've got devices only operating intermittently
> >> if at all, apps which won't run, devices which Win2K intermittently
> >> detects as removed. I get delays at boot time, miscellaneous locks,
> >> and various other errors which I've been able to track down to the
> >> problem of shared interrupts. It was irritating in the past but it's
> >> reached the point where something has to be done.
> >>
> >> But meanwhile, a complete, from-the-ground-up reinstall isn't an
> >> option. That would be the easy way - reinstall with every power-saving
> >> option in the BIOS turned off. In fact, when I did the original
> >> install I *did* have all power-saving options off - or so I thought.
> >> Turns out the 2K ACPI detector is *much* more aggressive than one
> >> might imagine and if you allow it even the slightest hint that ACPI
> >> might hypothetically be an option, it enables it. GRRR!
> >>
> >> Anyway, I need to disable shared interrupts so I can assign everything
> >> in such a way that my devices don't trip over each other. And I need
> >> to do it without reinstalling. What do I need to do? I know I'm going
> >> to have to replace the NTOSKRNL and HAL (which I can do from my
> >> bare-bones service install on the same machine). But then I assume
> >> there are multiple
> >registry
> >> entries that also need to be changed. So what are *all* the things I
> >> need to do (whether copying files, editing the registry, editing text
> >> files, or whatever) in order to disable shared interrupts?
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Alex Rast
> >> ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com
> >> (remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)
> >
> >Lets try this from the beggining. Run winnt32 /checkupgradeonly and
> >confirm that the hardware is compatible. Consult the HCL list in the
> >case some devices are detected as not compatible or in the case hardware
> >is older. Turn your bios OS detection to off and let the OS manage all
> >power management functions. Consider flashing the mobo's bios if acpi is
> >available.
>
> Letting the OS manage power management gives me a bad feeling in my
> stomach. Understand that I would prefer *all* power management functions
to
> be OFF. *All* of them. I'm suspicious as is that the OS is managing power
> management.

Thats precisely the intent. If the OS manages all power management settings,
then, and only then, do you have a fighting chance to turn the power
features off. Been there, done that.

>
> >W2K is much more stable with ACPI than with a standard HAL except when
> >the hardware doesn't support acpi. W2K's virtual IRQ table is a huge
> >improvement over the old HCL.
> >
> >If you beleive that an add-on card, for example, does not provide 100%
> >acpi compatibility, download your motherboard's manual. Modern boards
> >use shared slots. Thats how they are engineered. The AGP port usually
> >shares resources with PCI #1 and sometimes both #1 and #2, etc. Examine
> >the populated slots in your box in the case a hardware "conflict" arises
> >between an acpi-aware resource and a non-acpi aware resource (you can
> >pause bios POST with a pause, ESC to release). Unload the device from
> >the OS, shutdown and unplug system, and switch the non-acpi device to a
> >free un-shared slot as required. Reinstall driver.
> >Your goal is not to run a standard HAL.
>
> Nice in theory. But not in practice. My system has plenty of devices, any
> one of which could in theory be "not 100% compatible". So my goal *is* to
> run a standard HAL. That way I can ensure interrupts stay out of each
> others' way.

Apparently, i've not made myself clear. Shared resources affects a Standard
HAL, not an ACPI HAL. Here is another fact: compatibility is not an "option"
with W2K. Its a strict requirement. Doesn't it make sense then that
identifying those devices that are not W2K compatible give you the benefit
of a system that runs instead of a BSOD chug? For all you know, maybe an
incompatible modem or some other minor issue is the difference between a
stable system and a pain.

>
> My goal, however, is to fix a problem, not to get embroiled in a polemical
> battle. Does someone here know how to disable shared interrupts and is
> prepared to discuss how this is done without a long debate?

You can't convert an ACPI HAL to a standard HAL, you can only go from
Standard to ACPI. The only option is to reinstall with a Standard HAL. Start
setup from CD-media, when you see "Press F6 if you need to install a third
party SCSI or RAID driver", press F5 and choose StandardPC.

>
> --
> Alex Rast
> ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com
> (remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win2000.general (More info?)

at Tue, 10 May 2005 08:12:13 GMT in
<y%Zfe.21859$B82.525025@news20.bellglobal.com>, codigo@codigo.trap.com
(codigo) wrote :

>"Alex Rast" <ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
>news:964DBC49Dadrastnwnotlinkcom@216.168.3.44...
>> at Thu, 05 May 2005 19:21:18 GMT in
>> <Rkuee.6306$VL3.636972@news20.bellglobal.com>, codigo@codigo.trap.com
>> (codigo) wrote :
>> >
>> >"Alex Rast" <ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com> wrote in message
>> >news:964CCDDE1adrastnwnotlinkcom@216.168.3.44...
>> >> I've got a Win2K system where shared interrupts are causing serious
>> >> non- functionalities....
>> >>
>> >> But meanwhile, a complete, from-the-ground-up reinstall isn't an
>> >> option. ...
>> >>
>> >> Anyway, I need to disable shared interrupts so I can assign
>> >> everything in such a way that my devices don't trip over each
>> >> other....
>> >
>> >Lets try this from the beggining....
>> >Turn your bios OS detection to off and let the OS
>> >manage all power management functions. Consider flashing the mobo's
>> >bios if acpi is available.
>>
>> Letting the OS manage power management gives me a bad feeling in my
>> stomach. Understand that I would prefer *all* power management
>> functions
>to
>> be OFF. *All* of them. I'm suspicious as is that the OS is managing
>> power management.
>
>Thats precisely the intent. If the OS manages all power management
>settings, then, and only then, do you have a fighting chance to turn the
>power features off. Been there, done that.

The BIOS setup utility on my machine allows you to completely disable power
management. You have to be careful about the order which you disable stuff
because if you disable the power management globally before the individual
power management settings have been disabled there can be some lingering
settings detritus, but done right, it disables everything. Then when you
install Win2K it installs the standard HAL and you don't get IRQ conflicts.
I have verified this for myself with another system. This second system has
the same motherboard and hardware and doesn't have any problems at all.

>> >W2K is much more stable with ACPI than with a standard HAL except
>> >when the hardware doesn't support acpi. ...
>>
>> Nice in theory. But not in practice. My system has plenty of devices,
>> any one of which could in theory be "not 100% compatible". So my goal
>> *is* to run a standard HAL. That way I can ensure interrupts stay out
>> of each others' way.
>
>Apparently, i've not made myself clear. Shared resources affects a
>Standard HAL, not an ACPI HAL.

Except that in the real world, the system I mentioned where ACPI was
accidentally installed experiences conflicts on a daily basis, whereas the
system with no ACPI experiences no such conflicts. And once again, they're
using the same hardware.

> Here is another fact: compatibility is
>not an "option" with W2K. Its a strict requirement.

What I've experienced is that in addition to the fact that many devices
fudge the compatibility a little, there are quite frequently multiple
different methods to achieve "100% compatibility" which are sometimes
themselves mutually conflicting unless you can set everything manually and
explicitly.

> Doesn't it make
>sense then that identifying those devices that are not W2K compatible
>give you the benefit of a system that runs instead of a BSOD chug?

It makes more sense to me that being able to set all your devices up
manually so as to sidestep any conflicts gives you a more absolute
guarantee that the system will work. It furthermore makes more sense to me
that such a capability allows you to use desirable devices that might have
a few relatively minor compatibility concerns without fear, instead of
being forced to compromise on device choices or worse still, not being able
to use certain types of devices at all. The system you propose is probably
a reasonable solution for the relative computer novice, but for someone who
knows computers well it ends up being more constraining than it is
beneficial.

>> Does someone here know how to disable shared
>> interrupts and is prepared to discuss how this is done without a long
>> debate?
>
>You can't convert an ACPI HAL to a standard HAL, you can only go from
>Standard to ACPI.

Are you saying, then, that certain aspects of the ACPI install are embedded
in undocumented binary configuration files which are created by the system
at install time, as opposed simply to files on the install CD or settings
in registry? This would seem to me to be the only way that the scenario you
describe could be possible. I have to comment that if certain aspects of
Win2K configuration are undocumented by Microsoft, this represents a
serious irresponsibility on their part, although leaving things
undocumented is nothing new for them.

--
Alex Rast
ad.rast.7@nwnotlink.NOSPAM.com
(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)