ray@ole.UUCP (Ray Berry) (10/20/89)
I'd like to replace the ROM BIOS in an IBM 339 AT with a different (aftermarket) one that supports more than 1024 cylinders. Can anyone tell me whether the current Phoenix, Award, etc 286 AT BIOS's offer this support? Comments on 386 versions would also be welcome. -- Ray Berry kb7ht uucp: ...ole!ray CIS: 73407,3152 /* "inquire within" */ Seattle Silicon Corp. 3075 112th Ave NE. Bellevue WA 98004 (206) 828-4422
dgaulden@dcscg1.UUCP (David E. Gaulden) (10/23/89)
In article <1458@ole.UUCP> ray@ole.UUCP (Ray Berry) writes: > > I'd like to replace the ROM BIOS in an IBM 339 AT with a different >(aftermarket) one that supports more than 1024 cylinders. Can anyone tell >me whether the current Phoenix, Award, etc 286 AT BIOS's offer this support? >Comments on 386 versions would also be welcome. >-- You might want to look into your fixed drive controller also, as they usually don't support more than 1024 cylinders either. I had a IBM 339 AT at one time and ran AWARD 3.02 BIOS (current is ver 3.03) and it was compatable but not sure whether it supports > 1024 cylinders. Can get back to you on that... -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ IRL:Dave Gaulden | "Man who says, 'It cannot be done', DCSC Columbus, Ohio | Should not interrupt man who is dgaulden@dcsc.dla.mil | doing it."
chris@zorin.UUCP (Christopher Nielsen) (10/30/89)
In article <605@dcscg1.UUCP>, dgaulden@dcscg1.UUCP (David E. Gaulden) writes: > > You might want to look into your fixed drive controller also, as they > usually don't support more than 1024 cylinders either. > > I had a IBM 339 AT at one time and ran AWARD 3.02 BIOS (current is ver 3.03) > and it was compatable but not sure whether it supports > 1024 cylinders. Can > get back to you on that... > -- Well, I've worked with voice processing systems, using Maxtor 2190s, which have 1224 cylinders. Award bios is used, drive type 25. I am not sure about the version of Award Bios, but it does have the CNTL-ALT-ESC menu. The voice system (Vynet) makes a special partition, which does go above 1024 cylinders. Interesting thing though... I tried to do with with a Microport installation. It seemed to work ok... until one day I filled up the disk enough to go (apperently) above 1024 cyls. Suddenly, things went berzerk. Fdisk then though I had 1-199 cyls in use (1224 - 1024?). I then used another disk of the same type, creating a 1024 cyl. partition. Then copied the kernel over and over until 0 blocks. no problem... Anyway, I don't think the controller has any problems, cause I've seen it done. I was thinking either the BIOS, but then thought it unlikely, since there is a drive type supporting >1024 cyls. Could it be the partition table? (unix) that gave me problems? Don't know... Christopher A. Nielsen ////////////////// Zorin Data Systems, Inc //// P.O. Box 5669 Santa Monica, CA 90405-0669 //// (213) 399-3804 x 45 //// UUCP: randvax!zorin!info //// <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Zorin... "The Future On-Line" >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Howard.Spindel@f8.n30112.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Howard Spindel) (11/02/89)
> chris@zorin.UUCP (Christopher Nielsen) write: > Date: 30 Oct 89 06:30:39 GMT > Organization: Zorin Data Systems, Inc., Santa Monica, CA > > Interesting thing though... I tried to do with with a > Microport installation. > It seemed to work ok... until one day I filled up the disk > enough to go > (apperently) above 1024 cyls. Suddenly, things went berzerk. > Fdisk then > though I had 1-199 cyls in use (1224 - 1024?). I then used > another disk > of the same type, creating a 1024 cyl. partition. Then > copied the kernel > over and over until 0 blocks. no problem... > > Anyway, I don't think the controller has any problems, cause > I've seen it > done. I was thinking either the BIOS, but then thought it > unlikely, since > there is a drive type supporting >1024 cyls. Could it be the > partition > table? (unix) that gave me problems? Don't know... If your controller does not support > 1024 cylinders and your disk has 1224 cylinders (which incidentally is the same Maxtor I use and the same problem I encountered) what happens is that when your software tries to access cylinders above 1024 the cylinder number wraps mod 1024 and you wind up accessing cylinders 0-199 when you wanted 1024-1223. You then of course wind up trying to store two sectors worth of information in a single sector. It definitely sounds like one of the sectors you overwrote was the partition table. A controller which does not support > 1024 cylinders only has 10 bits of cylinder address to play with and cannot generate a cylinder address >= 1024. Many of the original IBM AT with the WD1002 controller have this problem. I had to upgrade to a WD1003 to get my Maxtor drive to work. -- Howard Spindel - via FidoNet node 1:105/14 UUCP: ...!{uunet!oresoft, tektronix!reed}!busker!30112!8!Howard.Spindel ARPA: Howard.Spindel@f8.n30112.z1.FIDONET.ORG
keithe@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Keith Ericson) (11/03/89)
In article <1120.254FF5A5@busker.FIDONET.ORG> Howard.Spindel@f8.n30112.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Howard Spindel) writes: >A controller which does not support > 1024 cylinders only has 10 bits >of cylinder address to play with and cannot generate a cylinder >address >= 1024. >Many of the original IBM AT with the WD1002 controller have this >problem. I had to upgrade to a WD1003 to get my Maxtor drive to work. Minor nit: you'll need the WD-1003A controller to get >1024 cylinder ^ capability. kEITHe PS - Anyone want to buy (one or several) WD-1003-non-A controllers? PPS - Just joking - I couldn't sell them 'cuz it would cost Tek more in paperwork than it's worth to unload these things. Unless somebody wants to buy all seven of them at one shot...