Announcement

Collapse

Forum etiquette

Our mission ...

This forum is part of our mission to promote the preservation of vintage computers through education and outreach. (In real life we also run events and have a museum.) We encourage you to join us, participate, share your knowledge, and enjoy.

This forum has been around in this format for over 15 years. These rules and guidelines help us maintain a healthy and active community, and we moderate the forum to keep things on track. Please familiarize yourself with these rules and guidelines.


Remain civil and respectful

There are several hundred people who actively participate here. People come from all different backgrounds and will have different ways of seeing things. You will not agree with everything you read here. Back-and-forth discussions are fine but do not cross the line into rude or disrespectful behavior.

Conduct yourself as you would at any other place where people come together in person to discuss their hobby. If you wouldn't say something to somebody in person, then you probably should not be writing it here.

This should be obvious but, just in case: profanity, threats, slurs against any group (sexual, racial, gender, etc.) will not be tolerated.


Stay close to the original topic being discussed
  • If you are starting a new thread choose a reasonable sub-forum to start your thread. (If you choose incorrectly don't worry, we can fix that.)
  • If you are responding to a thread, stay on topic - the original poster was trying to achieve something. You can always start a new thread instead of potentially "hijacking" an existing thread.



Contribute something meaningful

To put things in engineering terms, we value a high signal to noise ratio. Coming here should not be a waste of time.
  • This is not a chat room. If you are taking less than 30 seconds to make a post then you are probably doing something wrong. A post should be on topic, clear, and contribute something meaningful to the discussion. If people read your posts and feel that their time as been wasted, they will stop reading your posts. Worse yet, they will stop visiting and we'll lose their experience and contributions.
  • Do not bump threads.
  • Do not "necro-post" unless you are following up to a specific person on a specific thread. And even then, that person may have moved on. Just start a new thread for your related topic.
  • Use the Private Message system for posts that are targeted at a specific person.


"PM Sent!" messages (or, how to use the Private Message system)

This forum has a private message feature that we want people to use for messages that are not of general interest to other members.

In short, if you are going to reply to a thread and that reply is targeted to a specific individual and not of interest to anybody else (either now or in the future) then send a private message instead.

Here are some obvious examples of when you should not reply to a thread and use the PM system instead:
  • "PM Sent!": Do not tell the rest of us that you sent a PM ... the forum software will tell the other person that they have a PM waiting.
  • "How much is shipping to ....": This is a very specific and directed question that is not of interest to anybody else.


Why do we have this policy? Sending a "PM Sent!" type message basically wastes everybody else's time by making them having to scroll past a post in a thread that looks to be updated, when the update is not meaningful. And the person you are sending the PM to will be notified by the forum software that they have a message waiting for them. Look up at the top near the right edge where it says 'Notifications' ... if you have a PM waiting, it will tell you there.

Copyright and other legal issues

We are here to discuss vintage computing, so discussing software, books, and other intellectual property that is on-topic is fine. We don't want people using these forums to discuss or enable copyright violations or other things that are against the law; whether you agree with the law or not is irrelevant. Do not use our resources for something that is legally or morally questionable.

Our discussions here generally fall under "fair use." Telling people how to pirate a software title is an example of something that is not allowable here.


Reporting problematic posts

If you see spam, a wildly off-topic post, or something abusive or illegal please report the thread by clicking on the "Report Post" icon. (It looks like an exclamation point in a triangle and it is available under every post.) This send a notification to all of the moderators, so somebody will see it and deal with it.

If you are unsure you may consider sending a private message to a moderator instead.


New user moderation

New users are directly moderated so that we can weed spammers out early. This means that for your first 10 posts you will have some delay before they are seen. We understand this can be disruptive to the flow of conversation and we try to keep up with our new user moderation duties to avoid undue inconvenience. Please do not make duplicate posts, extra posts to bump your post count, or ask the moderators to expedite this process; 10 moderated posts will go by quickly.

New users also have a smaller personal message inbox limit and are rate limited when sending PMs to other users.


Other suggestions
  • Use Google, books, or other definitive sources. There is a lot of information out there.
  • Don't make people guess at what you are trying to say; we are not mind readers. Be clear and concise.
  • Spelling and grammar are not rated, but they do make a post easier to read.
See more
See less

XTIDE Universal BIOS

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #61
    The other 8-bit multi I/O card that i have is just like yours! I have tried it and it works fine with XTIDE. You seem to have the I/O card jumpered a bit differently. Try to set jumpers to match these settings:

    Comment


      #62
      Time to release v1.0.0_RC2. Here are the changes since RC1:
      • No more boot menu slowdown when no XTIDE Universal BIOS controlled drives present (actually i forgot to test this but it should be fixed)
      • Major improvements for error handling
      • Small improvements for interrupt handling
      • Hard disks are now reset properly. This fixes some Block Mode related bugs:
      • No more possible master drive data corruption when slave drive is reset
      • Block mode is now properly enabled for drives that require several seconds to reset


      I made large changes to error handling and this is why i wasn't able to release RC2 last week as i intended. Improved error handling now hopefully prevents data corruption bugs in the future. Improved error handling has a cost: transfer rates are now a little bit slower for drives that do not support block mode or only supports very small block size (CF cards and very old hard disks).

      I was able to slightly clean interrupt handling code while improving error handling.

      Comment


        #63
        I am unable to update my chips to RC2 from RC1, the utility keeps reporting the EEPROM keeps timing out, i can force the issue by manually using the flasher, or telling it to add a wait-state while writing, but if i do that, it stops just short of detecting the hard drive, or the XT reports that the ROM is bad. This has been tried on all the chips, one got bricked, the others wont take new code. only 1 of them took the new code and works ok, it was flashed using the defaults, same as the others. What could be causing this. I have even tried the recovery method earlier in this thread, no luck there either

        *update*

        I was able to manually update 1 of the bad chips using the /A parameter of the flash program, but it keeps saying verify failed, 2 columns are shown the left has different values than the right ones. I'm guessing these chips are simply refusing to take the code, no matter what jumper settings i feed it.

        **update** it reports unexpected byte where another should be and fails, with the write enable jumper, ON of OFF it's ignoring the jumper. I am beginning to wonder if i have found a bug in the card
        Last edited by k2x4b524[; March 15, 2010, 08:25 PM.
        Nothing beats the roar of a 36yr old drive coming to life after a decade in storagg

        Comment


          #64
          Here are some transfer rate comparisons using iotest.exe.

          Computer: Tandy 1000 SX
          Processor: NEC V20 @ 7.16MHz
          Bios version: v1.0.0_RC2
          Hard disk: Apacer Photo Steno II Pro 256MB CF card
          Operating system: Tandy DOS 3.3
          Partition size: 32 MB

          Write speeds: (iotest write 1024 5)
          XT+ build 141.09 KB/s
          XT build 115.81 KB/s
          Read speeds: (iotest read 1024 5)
          XT+ build 189.52 KB/s
          XT build 154.20 KB/s
          ----------
          Computer: Tandy 1000 SX
          Processor: NEC V20 @ 7.16MHz
          Bios version: v1.0.0_RC2
          Hard disk: Hitachi 6GB Microdrive
          Operating system: MS-DOS 6.22
          Partition size: 512 MB

          Write speeds: (iotest write 1024 5)
          XT+ build 154.03 KB/s
          XT build 131.52 KB/s
          Read speeds: (iotest read 1024 5)
          XT+ build 201.97 KB/s
          XT build 163.53 KB/s
          ----------
          Computer: XT Clone (Trifunic)
          Processor: 8088-2 @ 4.77MHz
          Bios version: v1.0.0_RC2
          Hard disk: Hitachi 6GB Microdrive
          Operating system: MS-DOS 6.22
          Partition size: 512 MB

          Write speeds: (iotest write 1024 5)
          XT build 103.58 KB/s
          Read speeds: (iotest read 1024 5)
          XT build 124.97 KB/s
          -------------
          Computer: XT Clone (Trifunic)
          Processor: 8088-2 @ 4.77MHz
          Bios version: v1.0.0_RC2
          Hard disk: Seagate ST51080A (1GB)
          Operating system: IBM DOS 5.02
          Partition size: 512 MB

          Write speeds: (iotest write 1024 5)
          XT build 106.77 KB/s
          Read speeds: (iotest read 1024 5)
          XT build 125.12 KB/s

          Comment


            #65
            How do these speeds compare to that of the MFM drives of the era?

            IBM 5160 - 360k, 1.44Mb Floppies, NEC V20, 8087-3, 45MB MFM Hard Drive, Vega 7 Graphics, IBM 5154 Monitor running MS-DOS 5.00
            IBM PCJr Model 48360 640kb RAM, NEC V20,, jrIDE Side Cart, 360kb Floppy drives running MS-DOS 5.00
            Evergreen Am5x86-133 64Mb Ram, 8gb HDD, SB16 in a modified ATX case running IBM PC-DOS 7.10

            Comment


              #66
              Here are transfer rates from Seagete ST-225 MFM drive that i have on the XT clone. It is low level formatted with controller default values so interleave might not be optimal.

              Computer: XT Clone (Trifunic)
              Processor: 8088-2 @ 4.77MHz
              MFM Controller: WD1002S-WX2
              Hard disk: Seagate ST-225 (20MB MFM)
              Operating system: IBM DOS 5.02
              Partition size: 20 MB

              Write speeds: (iotest write 1024 5)
              26.40 KB/s
              Read speeds: (iotest read 1024 5)
              27.74 KB/s
              Last edited by aitotat; March 21, 2010, 06:32 AM.

              Comment


                #67
                More transfer rates. Again with the same 6GB microdrive but now on a 286. 16-bit IDE controller gives 9 times better read rates so 16-bit IDE controller sure is useful if 16-bit ISA slots are available. I also tried to disable turbo (16 to 8 MHz) but it had only little effect since ISA runs at 8 MHz on both cases.

                Computer: AT clone
                Processor: 286 @ 16 MHz
                Bios version: v1.0.0_RC3 (not yet released)
                Hard disk: Hitachi 6 GB Microdrive
                Operating system: MS-DOS 6.22
                Partition size: 2 GB

                Write speeds: (iotest write 1024 5)
                AT build, 8-bit XTIDE: 187.94 KB/s
                AT build, 16-bit IDE: 834.85 KB/s
                Read speeds: (iotest read 1024 5)
                AT build, 8-bit XTIDE: 251.87 KB/s
                AT build, 16-bit IDE: 2221.56 KB/s

                Comment


                  #68
                  I've installed the AT build of the XTIDE BIOS in my 486 system which has a SCSI setup (most of my systems are SCSI). When I have a drive attached to the IDE controller, I am not able to boot from my SCSI drive by selecting the SCSI BIOS from the XTIDE boot menu, and it then proceeds to boot from the IDE device attached instead. I was already familiar with this problem from running SCSI/IDE combined setups in the past, but is there any chance the XTIDE BIOS can be modified to overcome this limitation?
                  "Will the Highways on the internets become more few?"

                  V'Ger XT

                  Comment


                    #69
                    Is the SCSI BIOS initialized before XTIDE (SCSI ROM found at lower memory address than XTIDE)? Do the SCSI drives appear before or after the IDE drives on the boot menu?
                    I suspect that the SCSI BIOS does some drive number swapping. It would conflict with XTIDE drive swapping so try to disable drive swapping using idecfg.com.

                    Comment


                      #70
                      I believe the XTIDE is at D400, and the SCSI BIOS is at D800.

                      I will look into the the drive swapping issue.

                      Do I need to have the ROM plugged into the XTIDE controller to use IDECFG, or can I perform the operation from the network adapter?
                      Last edited by Anonymous Coward; April 9, 2010, 07:54 AM.
                      "Will the Highways on the internets become more few?"

                      V'Ger XT

                      Comment


                        #71
                        The EEPROM must be plugged into XTIDE for writing.
                        Early initialization is the default for AT build so XTIDE detects drives before SCSI BIOS since XTIDE ROM is at lower address than SCSI ROM. Try late initialization if the drive swapping won't help. Late initialization will detect drives on the boot loader so all SCSI drives are detected by then.

                        Comment


                          #72
                          I moved the IDE BIOS to load after the SCSI BIOS, and while the XTIDE is now able to pass the bootup sequence to the SCSI controller successfully, the system is locking up when the ASPI drivers are loading. I am going to try disabling drive swapping.
                          "Will the Highways on the internets become more few?"

                          V'Ger XT

                          Comment


                            #73
                            I disabled drive swapping, but my system is still locking up/resetting when I try to load ASPI7DOS. I don't have any IRQ or base address conflicts. I'm not quite sure what's going on.
                            "Will the Highways on the internets become more few?"

                            V'Ger XT

                            Comment


                              #74
                              What does the ASPI7DOS do? Why is it needed if the SCSI drives appear on the boot menu? Does the ASPI7DOS load correctly when XTIDE is installed without any drives connected to it?
                              Does the boot menu display size for the SCSI drives correctly? Do they appear before or after XTIDE controlled drives?
                              Did you tried to configure XTIDE to initialize before and after the SCSI BIOS after you disabled drive swapping?
                              Does boot menu appear even when XTIDE initializes before SCSI (and XTIDE uses early initialization)?
                              Do you have interrupts enabled or disabled on the XTIDE?

                              Comment


                                #75
                                ASPI7DOS is a SCSI API for Adaptec controllers on EISA and VL bus systems. It allows the ability to communicate with CD-ROM drives and other removable devices. ASPI7DOS does NOT load correctly without any drives connected to the XTIDE. The menu appears to report the size of my SCSI disk correctly. The SCSI drive is listed BEFORE the drive connected to the XTIDE. I did try initializing XTIDE before the SCSI BIOS with drive swapping disabled. In that case the behaviour was slightly different. The system always locks up instead of resetting. The boot menu does appear regardless of which BIOS initializes first, though I did not try "early initialization". The interrupts are enabled on XTIDE. (this is on an AT (EISA) system)
                                Last edited by Anonymous Coward; April 11, 2010, 08:52 AM.
                                "Will the Highways on the internets become more few?"

                                V'Ger XT

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X