Hi!
> > stop top-replying, but use inline-replying from now on.
> I participate in some lists where the rule is top replying...
> Some people think it is better because it is faster to read bigger
> quantity of messages :)
I personally suggest inline replying combined with
shortening quotes. Of
Robert Riebisch escreveu:
> To avoid such confusion in the future it might be good idea to stop
> top-replying, but use inline-replying from now on.
I participate in some lists where the rule is top replying...
Some people think it is better because it is faster to read bigger
quantity of messag
"Alain M." wrote:
> Sorry, Ladislav and Florian...
>
> I realyzed that I was not clear in may question: I want to know about
> this driver: "XMGR and UIDE" with SATA, available in the link bellow.
To avoid such confusion in the future it might be good idea to stop
top-replying, but use inline-re
Sorry, Ladislav and Florian...
I realyzed that I was not clear in may question: I want to know about
this driver: "XMGR and UIDE" with SATA, available in the link bellow.
The older XDMA.SYS I have installed in many of machines and I know for
sure that it is stable...
Thanks for your answers :)
From: "Alain M." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "fd-dev" ;
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2008 8:47 PM
> Subject: [Freedos-devel] UDMA drivers, please report usage...
>
>
>> That is a prety impressive driver...
>>
>> I would l
y, June 03, 2008 8:47 PM
Subject: [Freedos-devel] UDMA drivers, please report usage...
> That is a prety impressive driver...
>
> I would like to know who is using it and in what situations, specially
> real-world cases (as oposed to simulations, not fantasy :) )
>
> tha
That is a prety impressive driver...
I would like to know who is using it and in what situations, specially
real-world cases (as oposed to simulations, not fantasy :) )
thanks to all,
Alain
Eric Auer escreveu:
> Hi!
>
>>> [...] and that you can use Jack's UIDE driver with UDMA
>>> and SATA hard
At 09:21 PM 3/29/2004 +0200, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
>>Not yet, looks like it should be. I'll see about it, read what MS docs say about
>>the option. Should be a reasonably quick add, since it's awfully close to NOEMS in
>>a lot of behaviors.
>
>suggested using FRAME=NONE to Erwin, since he needs
Hi Michael,
Not yet, looks like it should be. I'll see about it, read what MS docs say about the option. Should be a reasonably quick add, since it's awfully close to NOEMS in a lot of behaviors.
suggested using FRAME=NONE to Erwin, since he needs to limit VCPI to 2MB, but NOEMS makes 32MB on
At 04:58 PM 3/29/2004 +0200, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
>btw, is FRAME=NONE supported in EMM386.EXE rc2 ?
Not yet, looks like it should be. I'll see about it, read what MS docs say about the
option. Should be a reasonably quick add, since it's awfully close to NOEMS in a lot
of behaviors.
--
Hello Bernd,
BB> can Lucho, Michael or Tom confirm VDS is only needed when EMS is provided?
VDS is required, if logical adresses (as seen from CPU) !=
physical addresses (as seen from UDMA controller).
In praxis, with our current EMM386, addresses <= 0xa are mapped
identical, so everything w
that's nice.
So VDS is required when EMS is served,
not when VCPI and/or UMBs are provided.
NOEMS and EMS settings use different blockdevice-names:
one more optimizing thing for me then:
@echo off
rem load UDMA from commandline using DEVLOAD program. /H = DEVICEHIGH behaviour.
rem try NOEMS first,
Hello,
>>I'll try DEVICEHIGH with EMM386.
>>didn't Tom implement a basic VDS option?
>>DEVICE=EMM386.EXE VDS
Even Lucho said UDMA need VDS, I simply use the DEVICE=EMM386.EXE
NOEMS it works fine.
It's more stable than FDDXMS+UMBPCI in my ALI Aladdin chipset, using
FDDXMS+UMBPCI sometimes UDMA cl
Luchezar Georgiev schreef:
I think that each OS has its own niche. Neiether Linux nor DOS can oust
each other. But try to fit a Linux in the BIOS flash ROM chip when you
have only several tens of kilobytes free there!
www.linuxbios.org
---
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 20:50:39 +0800, Johnson Lam wrote:
Though the driver may not bug free, but it bring the technology back to
DOS. Still have a lot of people including my friend think that DOS is
out, why not Linux?
I think that each OS has its own niche. Neiether Linux nor DOS can oust
each o
On Sun, 28 Mar 2004 17:34:56 +0300, you wrote:
Hi Lucho,
>It's good to have so experienced programmers contribute to FreeDOS. One
>thing could prevent them from doing so though - the possibility of being
Though the driver may not bug free, but it bring the technology back
to DOS. Still have a
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 00:56:48 +0200, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
crash if UDMA loaded high, but no VDS present // XMS-test should have
been done and succeeded.
UDMA checks if VDS are active and if so, uses them to "lock" the buffer
and obtain a physical address, else calculates the physical address
itse
At 12:56 AM 3/29/2004 +0200, Bernd Blaauw wrote:
>I'll try DEVICEHIGH with EMM386.
>didn't Tom implement a basic VDS option?
>DEVICE=EMM386.EXE VDS
I strongly recommend against using the VDS option. It apparently was broken before my
VCPI and UMB work and the UMB code I added at a minimum broke
guessed UDMA flowchart:
0)init
1)check soutbridge // if southbridge unknown, abort
2)do basic tests // if a test fails, abort
3)check for XMS // if fail, go to 5
4)do advanced tests // XMS required, if a test fails, abort
5)load UDMA-code/driver
6)crash if UDMA loaded high, but no VDS present // X
At 05:34 PM 3/28/2004 +0300, Luchezar Georgiev wrote:
>On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 15:23:44 -0600, Michael Devore wrote:
>
>>It's an ALi M5229, which is an Acer Labs Aladin IV+ TX PRO if that's what you mean.
>>I don't know a south bridge from a London bridge or a dental bridge, myself.
>
>M5229 is the i
Luchezar Georgiev wrote:
It's good to have so experienced programmers contribute to FreeDOS. One
thing could prevent them from doing so though - the possibility of being
"flamed off" in our forums. Not everyone can withstand the ingratitude,
disrespect and quarrelsomeness that SOMETIMES pour fr
On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 15:23:44 -0600, Michael Devore wrote:
It's an ALi M5229, which is an Acer Labs Aladin IV+ TX PRO if that's
what you mean. I don't know a south bridge from a London bridge or a
dental bridge, myself.
M5229 is the integrated UDMA IDE controller. The south bridge chip must be
Hi!
27-Мар-2004 15:23 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Devore) wrote to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
MD> It's an ALi M5229, which is an Acer Labs Aladin IV+ TX PRO if that's what
MD> you mean. I don't know a south bridge from a London bridge or a dental
MD> bridge, myself.
All curent chipsets contain two
At 09:54 AM 3/27/2004 +0200, Luchezar Georgiev wrote:
>On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 13:38:50 -0600, Michael Devore wrote:
>
>>>UDMA requires VDS in V86 mode. Without XMS driver it can't do its tests and loads
>>>but fails.
>>
>>HIMEM gives XMS without V86, so it theoretically should work in that situation.
On Fri, 26 Mar 2004 13:38:50 -0600, Michael Devore wrote:
UDMA requires VDS in V86 mode. Without XMS driver it can't do its tests
and loads but fails.
HIMEM gives XMS without V86, so it theoretically should work in that
situation.
Yes, but in practice it doesn't work everywhere. What chipset (so
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 20:11:22 +0800, Johnson Lam wrote:
Just curious, can I ask why you quit coding UDMA?
I just got a UDMA problem about my weird PC and want to ask you for
help. If you quit because of reasons other than busy life. I've to ask
the next maintainer ...
But I doubt very much. How ma
Hi Lucho,
Just curious, can I ask why you quit coding UDMA?
I just got a UDMA problem about my weird PC and want to ask you for
help. If you quit because of reasons other than busy life. I've to ask
the next maintainer ...
But I doubt very much. How many people can code such a low-level
device d
UDMA version 6.9 is out. The most important change is that it now works on systems with *any* CHS geometry, most notably on Compaq (HP) systems with 240 logical heads (previously it required 255 heads). This increased the resident part size from 592 to 624 bytes. Please test on Intel 82801EB (ICH-5
This is to announce two things:
UDMA 6.8 is out. Besides the ubiquitous optimisations, the main news in it is that especially for some badly written BIOS's pretending to meet but *not* meeting the EDD standard, a special hardware-only scan mode has been added. If anyone can test it on the latest I
29 matches
Mail list logo
