From: Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Old AmiBIOS support
Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 21:44:18 -0500 (EST)
> Well, then I would add this check to the Stage 1 unless 4 bytes are
> considered too precious.
Of course, even 4 bytes are very precious for the Stage 1, beca
Hello, Gordon!
> Actually, no. If bit 0 of %cx is 0, LBA is not used.
Thanks. Of course, it was "and", not "add" :-(
That's why I like cut & paste :-)
> See the below `API subset support bitmap' description to see why we
> need andw $1, %cx to be nonzero before we use subfunction 0x42.
Well,
> Pavel Roskin writes:
PR> I have found that Stage 2 does an additional check that fails for
PR> that old AmiBIOS. After calling int 0x13 with %ah=0x41 Stage 2
PR> checks %cx If it is 0x, LBA is not used
Actually, no. If bit 0 of %cx is 0, LBA is not used.
PR> (why? I'll try to fi
On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, OKUJI Yoshinori wrote:
> From: Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Old AmiBIOS support
> Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 16:38:19 -0500 (EST)
>
> > AmiBIOS (C) 1994 has very limited LBA support.
> > Function 0x42 (LBA read) is not sup
Hello, OKUJI!
> > AmiBIOS (C) 1994 has very limited LBA support.
> > Function 0x42 (LBA read) is not supported.
>
> That's somewhat interesting... Which functions does it support?
Actually, there is a check in BIOS that %ah is between 0x41 and 0x4b
This means that 0x42 is meant to be supporte
From: Pavel Roskin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Old AmiBIOS support
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 16:38:19 -0500 (EST)
> AmiBIOS (C) 1994 has very limited LBA support.
> Function 0x42 (LBA read) is not supported.
That's somewhat interesting... Which functions does it supp
Hello!
AmiBIOS (C) 1994 has very limited LBA support.
Function 0x42 (LBA read) is not supported.
The question "should use CHS instead?" has an answer "Yes".
It is certainly better that just print "Read Error" and stop.
The situation is different in start.S
If the Stage 1 indicates that LBA was
