User talk:BryceMW-CA

Welcome to my talk page! Let me know if you have any feedback!

Instruction set field of x86 processor infoboxes

One of the projects that I am working on right now is to update the infoboxes of x86 CPUs to be more consistent in how they present the instruction set and extensions. Since this spans multiple pages, there's no obvious place for me to put my explanation for anyone who is concerned with my edits so I am explaining here. I am mostly interested in consistency rather than any particular format so please reply here if you would prefer something different so I can go and update all of the pages.

So far, I have made a decision on what to consider the "Instruction Set". I am including x86-16, IA-32, and x86-64. Obviously, there is a naming debate about each of these (has this ever been hashed out on Wikipedia?). I originally used x86-32 instead of IA-32 for consistency but someone went around and changed all of the pages where I had done that to IA-32. I don't really care what name is chosen so I have decided to go with that from here on. I think that using IA-32 even on AMD pages is acceptable.

If a processor supports only one of Real Mode or VM86 mode (outside of the 16-bit processors where Real Mode is the only mode), I would add a note about that. Similarly for any processors that only support one of Legacy Mode or Compatibility Mode (excluding non-64 bit processors of course). Because these names are terrible (and I haven't even checked if AMD has different names), there aren't really any Wikipedia pages that properly explain what the difference is. Maybe that is something that I need to change. There are multiple of these names that could be used as well. I mainly went with these based on how Intel marks which instructions are valid in which modes in their architecture manual. They label Compatibility Mode as the sub-mode of IA-32e that runs "legacy protected mode software". Legacy Mode isn't even defined as far as I can tell but must be referring to running code directly in protected mode (i.e. a 32-bit operating system running 32-bit code). Maybe I should go with different names but as far as I can tell, there are no processors with these particular exceptions right now. The coprocesssor formats of the Xeon Phi don't support either Real Mode or VM86 mode. The host processor forms do support Real Mode and presumably VM86 mode but I'm not entirely sure.

Hope this helps, I appreciate any feedback on this. I'll add an update once I get to dealing with extensions since they will be much harder to classify. — Bryce (Talk) 17:22, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP Block Exemption

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

BryceMW-CA (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I'd like to request an IP block exemption on my account. The IP I'd like to edit from is 64.124.34.109 which is used by the office I work at and is not a proxy or VPN. I believe it is just caught in a block of a larger range. I am editing this page from my phone because I am unable to edit even my talk page on my work desktop. I tried to use the UTRS but it seems that is only used for global IP block exemptions. Even though this IP is under a global block, I was requested to use a different method to apply for a local exemption. I don't have the longest edit history but I like to be able to make minor fixes where I can and I have a few larger projects that I was working on a couple months ago when my office used an IP that was not blocked. I do not wish to edit via an actual proxy or VPN and I will ensure that I do not do so accidentally. I apologize if this is still not the correct way to apply for an exemption, it is unclear what the correct method is. Thanks — Bryce (Talk) 14:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Granted for one year. You are free to request renewal after one year, if it's still needed. You are also welcome (but certainly not required) to remove this unblock message and the discussion below if you wish. Yamla (talk) 21:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have verified that you have access to a non-blocked IP address. Please understand my tone is "inquiring" and not "accusational", not remotely. Please elaborate on why you need IPBE when you have access to a non-blocked IP address. You don't need to get overly specific but at the moment, there's no policy grounds for granting IPBE. --Yamla (talk) 15:39, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the message. I have access only via my phone at this time. While it is possible to make edits that way, it is much more difficult than desktop editing. I am also primarily browsing on my work desktop so to make an edit, I would have to get out my personal phone, navigate to the same page, and then make the edit. Tethering to my phone isn't an option. Nearly all of my prior edits this year have been via my work desktop which previously used an IP that was not within a blocked range. I'm unsure if the block was added recently or the network administrators switched to a different IP range that is blocked. Without access via my desktop, I don't think that I would edit at all.

Let me know if you have any further questions. — Bryce (Talk) 16:13, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting back to me! Granted for one year. --Yamla (talk) 21:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP block exempt

I have granted your account an exemption from IP blocking. This will allow you to edit the English Wikipedia through full blocks affecting your IP address when you are logged in.

Please read the page Wikipedia:IP block exemption carefully, especially the section on IP block exemption conditions. Inappropriate usage of this user right may result in revocation. I hope this will enhance your editing, and allow you to edit successfully and without disruption. Yamla (talk) 21:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]