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 v2.0.0 beta testing thread

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

  • toms01
    replied
    Hi,
    my posts are moderated (my post-count seems not high enough), therefore my answers are not visible instantly...
    I started a thread in the a1k.org-forum with this modified bios. Is it possible to send me your Email-Address, i can send you the zip-archive with it.
    Thomas

    Leave a comment:


  • hwarin
    replied
    Originally posted by Malc View Post
    You MUST use XTIDECFG.COM to configure the XUB and Save then Flash..
    Seen that, it was my mistake ! (Possibly, documentations on flashing SST might be a bit unsufficiently clear for the absolute hurry beginner that I was at the moment)

    Originally posted by Malc View Post
    Nope!, Use XTIDECFG.COM as above, It will do the checksum.
    That was too late, SST was bricked and the M24 was not booting anymore, even from floppy. The EPROM programmer was the only solution to recover/erase it as I couldn't reach JP1 with the M24 powered on.


    Originally posted by Malc View Post
    Configure the XUB for "XTIDE rev 2 (Olivetti M24)" device type,
    I will for sure test this device type on the M24.

    Originally posted by Malc View Post
    The L in IDE_XTL stands for LARGE, The official r601 binaries do not have the "Very_late_init" module included, Are you saying you want a bios with it included ?
    Definitly, yes, I need to figure out what's going on with the sidecar (A1060), even if I Don't think that it'll help to solve the issue.
    - I must try that before going to tweak binaries (see Toms01's post with "jne SHORT .VeryLateInitFailed ; XTIDE Universal BIOS does not work. <<<<==== Fails here")
    - If you also could precise me where I'll can find the entry for label "Int13hBiosInit_Handler:" in this binary would save me lots on time.

    If this was starting to work, it would be a major improvement as I would be able to reach XT-IDE's initialization step and have first testings !

    Thanks for your help - Hervé

    Leave a comment:


  • Malc
    replied
    Originally posted by hwarin View Post
    YES, I've missed a mandatory step : Initial .BIN configuration [load .BIN file/make change if any/save file]
    You MUST use XTIDECFG.COM to configure the XUB and Save then Flash..

    Don't know if it's the best method but I did it with a TL866 : Read flash/changed 2 first bytes (55/AA) to FF/Write flash.
    Nope!, Use XTIDECFG.COM as above, It will do the checksum.

    Configure the XUB for "XTIDE rev 2 (Olivetti M24)" device type, The L in IDE_XTL stands for LARGE, The official r601 binaries do not have the "Very_late_init" module included, Are you saying you want a bios with it included ?

    Leave a comment:


  • hwarin
    replied
    Originally posted by hwarin View Post

    I've just flashed R601 IDE_XT.BIN to my Rev2 board on the M24. All went fine for the flashing process but the M24 now says "Optionnal ROM at C800:0000 Fail" and won't boot anymore.


    -> Did I missed Something in the process of flashing [the .BIN file was less than 8Kb] ?
    YES, I've missed a mandatory step : Initial .BIN configuration [load .BIN file/make change if any/save file]

    Originally posted by hwarin View Post
    -> What would be the proper method to recover from the "bricked" BIOS ? (I might use a TL866 to reflash it as I can't reach JP1 jumper with the M24 powered on)

    Don't know if it's the best method but I did it with a TL866 : Read flash/changed 2 first bytes (55/AA) to FF/Write flash.

    As a result :
    - The M24 boots correctly with R601 (noticed snow during initialization that I was not having before)
    - Sidecar's behaviour has still the same problem : no boot menu, IDE-XT BIOS is not recognized at all

    (notice that Toms01 has probably pointed out the issue in XTIDE Universal BIOS thread)

    Originally posted by toms01 View Post
    Hi,

    i don't think this is a real solution.
    The problem is that INT19-Init is never called with activated Janus-Handler, VERY_LATE_INIT (INT13) is called, but
    fails here (marked) in Int13hBiosInit.asm:
    Code:
    36	Int13hBiosInit_Handler:
    37	    ; Initialize XTIDE Universal BIOS only if Int13hBiosInit_Handler is still at
    38	    ; vector 13h. Otherwise some other BIOS has hooked us and our very late
    39	    ; initialization is not possible.
    40	    push    ds
    41	    push    ax
    42	    LOAD_BDA_SEGMENT_TO ds, ax
    43	    pop     ax
    44	    cmp     WORD [BIOS_DISK_INTERRUPT_13h*4], Int13hBiosInit_Handler
    45	    pop     ds
    46	    jne     SHORT .VeryLateInitFailed   ; XTIDE Universal BIOS does not work.  <<<<==== Fails here
    47	
    48	    ; Ignore all but read command (assumed to read boot sector)
    49	    cmp     ah, READ_SECTORS_INTO_MEMORY
    50	    je      SHORT Int19h_BootloaderHandler
    If you delete the >jne SHORT .VeryLateInitFailed< XTIDE starts with activated Janus-Handler and the HDD is accessible, but the Janus-functions AWRITE, AMOUSE,... doesnt work.
    I think a "boot-mode" of a Seagate ST01/02 (INT13?) should help, this controller works out of the box.


    For the moment, I Don't have the proper tool chain available to compile myself.
    ==> Could someone provide me a .BIN with Tom01's change or tell me where to patch R601 code in IDE_XTL.BIN (L for VeryLateInit ?) ?


    Regards - Hervé

    Leave a comment:


  • hwarin
    replied
    Originally posted by Krille View Post
    Good news everyone!

    Malc kindly tested and benchmarked the new transfer mode on his 5160 with an 8088 CPU and it works just fine and is approximately 10% faster than the XTIDE rev 1 device type/transfer mode so I have committed the new code to the repository. In other words, r601 is out.

    Binaries available here.

    (I would still very much like to see benchmarks from the target machines).
    Hi, all,

    I've just flashed R601 IDE_XT.BIN to my Rev2 board on the M24. All went fine for the flashing process but the M24 now says "Optionnal ROM at C800:0000 Fail" and won't boot anymore.


    -> Did I missed Something in the process of flashing [the .BIN file was less than 8Kb] ?

    -> What would be the proper method to recover from the "bricked" BIOS ? (I might use a TL866 to reflash it as I can't reach JP1 jumper with the M24 powered on)

    Regards - Hervé

    Leave a comment:


  • Krille
    replied
    Yeah, ide_xt.bin and ide_xtl.bin is for 8088/8086 and ide_xtp.bin and ide_xtpl.bin is for NEC V20/V30 (and 80186/80188 of course).

    Leave a comment:


  • Malc
    replied
    For NEC V30 support use IDE_XTP.bin from r601

    Leave a comment:


  • Trixter
    replied
    Originally posted by Trixter View Post
    I'm still planning on testing on 8086 and NEC V30 to measure any gains (unless someone else beats me to it).
    Received my v4 XT-IDE with slot-8 mod, however I'm in the middle of a project where I have 5160s and a Tandy 1000 set up and exploded all over the place. Once that's done, I'll set up a 6300 and get to testing.

    Can NEC V30 support be selected with the xumb config program and simply reflashed, or will I need to re-assemble the source? I'll be testing with both, of course.

    Leave a comment:


  • pearce_jj
    replied
    wow and the auto build script is still working

    http://www.xtideuniversalbios.org/binaries/r601/

    Nice work Krille.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trixter
    replied
    Originally posted by pearce_jj View Post
    I've wondered for some time why databases from the time didn't write to disk partitions directly, it would have been a lot faster with such tiny cpu and ram. Or use FAT12 at least.
    Compatibility. Some devices were only addressable via DOS (ie. no int 13h interface). Also, in some cases, programmer naivety; in other cases, code was ported over from CPM for a set fee (or time limit on the contract).

    Originally posted by Krille View Post
    Malc kindly tested and benchmarked the new transfer mode on his 5160 with an 8088 CPU and it works just fine and is approximately 10% faster than the XTIDE rev 1 device type/transfer mode so I have committed the new code to the repository. In other words, r601 is out.
    Nice. I'm still planning on testing on 8086 and NEC V30 to measure any gains (unless someone else beats me to it).

    Leave a comment:


  • Krille
    replied
    Good news everyone!

    Malc kindly tested and benchmarked the new transfer mode on his 5160 with an 8088 CPU and it works just fine and is approximately 10% faster than the XTIDE rev 1 device type/transfer mode so I have committed the new code to the repository. In other words, r601 is out.

    Binaries available here.

    (I would still very much like to see benchmarks from the target machines).

    Leave a comment:


  • pearce_jj
    replied
    I've wondered for some time why databases from the time didn't write to disk partitions directly, it would have been a lot faster with such tiny cpu and ram. Or use FAT12 at least.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trixter
    replied
    I'm not sure how this would work in practice, because the characters mentioned when it gets "a little strange" are just the ASCII characters beyond upper-case letters. Past those, we get into lower-case letters, but since DOS treats lower-case letters as upper-case, you wouldn't be able to actually access them. At a bare minimum, COMMAND.COM and FDISK would have to be patched to allow any ascii character as a letter, and traditional DOS programs would likely not be able to access those drives either.

    Such an experiment is only useful if the storage is actually accessible by programs so I still posit that 24 would be the practical limit. I suppose you could forcefully override A: and B: as well, but that almost seems like cutting off the nose to spite the face.

    Leave a comment:


  • JohnElliott
    replied
    Originally posted by Trixter View Post
    That's... an interesting prospect. Assuming two 8GB CFs per cable, that would be 64GB in a single system -- but DOS would only give me 24 drive letters, so I'd only be able to use 48GB of it. I'll pass
    According to devdriv.txt in the source release, MSDOS 2 supports 63 drives:
    The theoretical limit is 63 (2^6 - 1), but it should be noted that after 26 the drive letters get a little strange (like ] \ and ^)
    Must admit, I've never tried it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Trixter
    replied
    (15 minutes is way too short a time for editing posts. Admins, please lengthen.)
    Looking at the geoworks source code at bluewayse/pcgeos, CPU detect looks ok (it's in SysInit.asm) but there seems to be a disconnect between detecting an 80186 and later in the code assuming there is only an 8086 or 80286. I'd really have to trace it to see.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X