[comp.lang.smalltalk] AT&T 6300+ ROM BIOS problem

bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry W. Kort) (05/26/89)

I have a PC 6300 Plus with a DEB board, 1MB on the Mother board,
and a pair of 2MB memory expansion boards.

I am using an application called DigiTalk Smalltalk V/286,
which runs fine on the IBM clones in our office.  This
application runs in protected mode and accesses real
extended memory above the 640KB DOS limit.

In order to run SmallTalk V/286 on my PC 6300+, I purchased
a ROM BIOS 3.0 upgrade kit, which is advertised to support
protected mode applications.  The kit includes 2 ROM BIOS
chips and 2 PAL chips, which I installed per instructions.

After installing the upgrade, I still could not run SmallTalk
V/286.  The machine hangs just as it did previously, and I
have to do a hard reboot.

Moreover, my DEB board no longer works properly.  MicroSoft Windows
and other applications using the DEB now have confetti on the screen.

The machine passes the Customer Diagnostic Tests, but Norton's
SI program reports fragmentation of Display Memory.  Each time
I run SI, I get a different fragmentation combination.

I would like to correspond with someone who is knowledgeable
about the ROM BIOS upgrade who can walk me through the problem.

Many thanks.

Barry Kort
MITRE Network Center
Internet: bwk@mbunix.mitre.org
  USENET: ...harvard!linus!mbunix!bwk

dean@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Dean Swan) (05/30/89)

From article <54627@linus.UUCP>, by bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry W. Kort):
> I have a PC 6300 Plus with a DEB board, 1MB on the Mother board,
> and a pair of 2MB memory expansion boards.
> 
> I am using an application called DigiTalk Smalltalk V/286,
> which runs fine on the IBM clones in our office.  This
> application runs in protected mode and accesses real
> extended memory above the 640KB DOS limit.

I don't know anything about the 6300, but about V/286:

- First, It sounds like you're using a something less than legitimate copy.
  If I'm wrong, ignore this comment.  If not, have the boss buy you another
  copy.

- Smalltalk V/286 can switch between protected and real modes in a couple of
  different ways.  The master disks come with a program to help you determine
  the way that works best on your machine.  If the default method doesn't work
  which sounds like your problem, then you have to specify a command line
  switch to use the alternate method.

- Also, depending on what else you use your extened memory for, you may have
  to set some other command line switches to tell smalltalk to stay out of
  certain areas of extended memory.  This is explained in an appendix of the
  manual.

Hope this helps some!

-Dean Swan
dean@sun.soe.clarkson.edu

craig@ge1cbx.UUCP (Craig W. Shaver) (06/01/89)

I found a similar problem with the DTK bios and resolved it by
switching to an Award bios purchased from Pinnacle Sales in
Santa Clara, CA (408) 249-5129.  Since I use Xenix on the same
machine I found out about problems with the bios when I upgraded
to 2.2.3.  It seems they had a bug that hung the machine when
it started up and tried to switch to protected mode.  I do
not know if you can use a new bios in the 6300 but I would
call Digitalk and AT&T to see if there is any fix.


Craig Shaver

================================================================
Quotron Systems Inc.    | Phone: (213) 302-4247
5454 Beethoven Street   | uucp: trwrb!scgvaxd!janus!trdrjo!craig
Post Office Box 66914	|
Los Angeles, CA 90066   |
================================================================

bwk@mbunix.mitre.org (Barry W. Kort) (06/01/89)

In article <3134@sun.soe.clarkson.edu> dean@sun.soe.clarkson.edu
(Dean Swan) responds to my earlier plea for help on DigiTalk
SmallTalk V/286, which does not run on my AT&T PC 6300 Plus:

 > - First, It sounds like you're using a something less than legitimate
 >   copy.  If I'm wrong, ignore this comment.  If not, have the boss buy
 >   you another copy.

By now we have bought some half-dozen copies.  I assure you DigiTalk
isn't losing money on us.

 > - Smalltalk V/286 can switch between protected and real modes in a
 >   couple of different ways.  The master disks come with a program
 >   to help you determine the way that works best on your machine. 
 >   If the default method doesn't work which sounds like your problem,
 >   then you have to specify a command line switch to use the alternate
 >   method.

Yes, I tried all 4 combinations of the /S (shutdown) and /T (restart)
switches.  Machs nix.

 > - Also, depending on what else you use your extened memory for, you
 >   may have to set some other command line switches to tell Smalltalk
 >   to stay out of certain areas of extended memory.  This is explained
 >   in an appendix of the manual.

I tried the /X, /D/ and /U command line options to keep V/286 from
trying to access the extra 384K on the motherboard, which, for reasons
unbeknownst to me, are assigned noncontiguously to the high-address
end of the machine's memory address limit.  I'm now considering a
suggestion to rip out the extra 384K to see if that is what's tripping
up V/286.

 > Hope this helps some!

I don't wish to sound unappreciative.  I do thank you for your advice.
I'm still looking for an existence proof that V/286 can be made to
run on the 6300 Plus, before I continue with more exploratory
neurosurgery on the motherboard.

--Barry Kort

jr@amanue.UUCP (Jim Rosenberg) (06/19/89)

In article <54810@linus.UUCP> bwk@mbunix (Barry Kort) writes:
> [...] responds to my earlier plea for help on DigiTalk
>SmallTalk V/286, which does not run on my AT&T PC 6300 Plus:

>I'm still looking for an existence proof that V/286 can be made to
>run on the 6300 Plus, before I continue with more exploratory
>neurosurgery on the motherboard.

I have a feeling you may be totally out of luck.  This question came up once
before, & I don't remember any happy-ever-afters.  The problem is most likely
that ST/V runs in protected mode.  Bless their leetul hearts, the designers at
Intel figured that protected mode was the duckiest thing for multitasking in
the history of the universe, that multitasking was for adult operating
systems, that adult operating systems need security, ergo to be able to go
from protected mode to real mode in an adult operating system would always be
a certifiable no-no:  SO THEY MADE NO WAY TO DO IT!  Now ST/V 286 runs
"native" in protected mode, but must get back to real mode to access DOS.
Therein lies the rub.

There *is* a way to get from protected mode back to real mode, but it will
make your hair stand on end.  It literally involves *RESETTING* CPU (no
kidding!)  but first there is some fancy footwork so that on "boot" the system
knows that this is not a "real" boot.  I believe this fancy footwork involves
writing some status stuff to the CMOS, *and* (I'm not clear on the details
here) writing something out to the *keyboard controller*.  (We're resetting
the whole damn CPU remember ...)

If your machine does not look like an AT, walk like an AT, quack like an AT,
and lay AT eggs then this whole protected --> real mode dodge is almost
certain not to work.  The 6300+ is a hybrid beast which I believe most
certainly *DOESN'T* look like a regulation AT in terms of CMOS & keyboard
controller.  The problem is much more difficult than simple BIOS
compatibility.

Your only hope is to find somebody who's got a way to get protected mode
software to work.  But don't get your hopes up.  You may simply have to face
the fact that ST/V just plain won't run on the 6300+.  If Digitalk does not
have a solution you are most likely out of luck.
-- 
 Jim Rosenberg
     CIS: 71515,124                         decvax!idis! \
     WELL: jer                                   allegra! ---- pitt!amanue!jr
     BIX: jrosenberg                  uunet!cmcl2!cadre! /

tbm@cbnews.ATT.COM (thomas.b.merrick) (06/26/89)

In article <452@amanue.UUCP> jr@amanue.UUCP (Jim Rosenberg) writes:
>In article <54810@linus.UUCP> bwk@mbunix (Barry Kort) writes:
>> [...] responds to my earlier plea for help on DigiTalk
>>SmallTalk V/286, which does not run on my AT&T PC 6300 Plus:
>
>>I'm still looking for an existence proof that V/286 can be made to
>>run on the 6300 Plus, before I continue with more exploratory
>>neurosurgery on the motherboard.
> ...

Yes, I called Digitalk for their promised fix for the 6300+.  They
said they had given up on it and offered me a refund.


















Hope this posts.

Tom Merrick