Preference of COM2 vs COM1

0

I have a vague recollection from way back when that there was some kind of recommendation that one should connect ones modem to COM2 rather than any other COM port. I even more vaguelly recall that this was due to COM2 usually having an IRQ not shared with anything else, and thus a lower chance for packet drops?

Presumably all of this is completely irrelevant nowadays with interrupts being assigned automatically, and interrupt sharing is supported just fine?

(This was way back before any of these fancy plug and play things like PCI or USB, IRQ's were assigned by piddling with jumpers on the MB or add-on cards.)

janneb

Posted 2015-03-03T11:48:31.027

Reputation: 987

Answers

1

If we go back to the 'DOS days', before PS/2 and USB existed (or at least were common), and having a mouse was a luxury (or at least uncommon); we're talking XT/AT days here...

COM1 was where the mouse traditionally went. It was usually a 9-pin port on the chassis, where as COM2 was usually a 25-pin port. Most "modem cables" came as 25-pin cables.

Standard COM ports on chassis

Since COM1 and COM2 were already assigned to those external ports, people with internal modems would often think that they should use COM3, since it's the next unused COM port.

COM1 and COM3 shared an IRQ (IRQ4) and I/O address (0x3F8), as did COM2 and 4 (IRQ3/0x2F8). If you tried to use a shared IRQ and/or I/O address with more than one device you'd run into a conflict and the devices wouldn't work properly (usually not at all).

Since COM1 was the usually mouse, COM2 is next numerically, and using COM3 would conflict with COM1, COM2 was the usual COM to pick for a modem.

Usually the jumpers you had to fiddle with were on internal modems, to set the preferred COM, IRQ, etc. Often these were dip switches (vs. jumpers), similar to what was on external modems.

Dip Switches

Disabling COM2 and 4 on the motherboard was also necessary for internal modems, sometimes this required fiddling jumpers on the motherboard, but this was usually just done in the BIOS settings (from pretty early on).

Back in those days it was hard to multitask, and with processing speeds being low, task-swapping was slow as well. So having an OS that shared IRQs was difficult if not impossible, and things still relied very much on the electronics vs. programming. Fast forward to today, and with speeds and resources to burn (so to speak), not to mention years of technical advancement in the area, sharing IRQs is much easier, and the OS does most of the lifting for you (think Plug'n'Play).

Ƭᴇcʜιᴇ007

Posted 2015-03-03T11:48:31.027

Reputation: 103 763

1

The problem originated when there were new peripherics for the PCs (e,g, mouse, graphic tablet, network card) that in order to be connected needed an IRQ and people when installed it, used the same IRQ of COM1 because it was the first available.

IRQs can't be shared so simply COM1 got disabled and you needed to connect your external modem to COM2.

Nowadays because of auto configure systems as PCI or USB is almost impossible to have a hardware conflict based on IRQ or I/O addresses overlapping.

jcbermu

Posted 2015-03-03T11:48:31.027

Reputation: 15 868