Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a21cd90a5db0cc78

Jump to content

Talk:Inter-processor interrupt

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 15 years ago by 134.191.232.68 in topic Cache coherency

IPI vs IPC

[edit]

I'm not sure whether it's really "IPI" instead of "IPC", but it makes much more sense! There are also much better hits under Google for "IPI interrupt" than for "IPC" Interrupt. Additionally, "IPC" stands for Interprocess Communication, not for Interprocess Interrupt, as far as I know.

Yeah, IPC was a typo; I was also editing IPC articles at the time. Jsmethers 09:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

IRQL

[edit]

In Windows, this has IRQL as 29.

What is this IRQL-number?

It doesn't seem to be the IRQ-number, because the highest IRQ is 15 (0xF), when APIC is not used. Also according to Interrupt request the IPI is on IRQ13. Also APIC can use up to 224 IRQs, but by default the maximum that is used is 24. --MrBurns (talk) 09:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Cache coherency

[edit]

Current version says: "In x86 based systems, an IPI synchronizes the cache and memory management unit (MMU) between processors." I agree that IPI may be used on some systems for cache coherency, but x86 has (at least for several years) hardware cache coherency protocol (which is software-invisible and doesn't use IPI) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.191.232.68 (talk) 12:19, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply