• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

Maxblast EZ-BIOS Question

ISTR that some WD drives had "three" jumpered personalities: Single, Master and Slave. I wonder if you've got some of those. Have you tried the WD hard drive as master and a CD-ROM drive as slave?
 
Last edited:
ISTR that some WD drives had "three" jumpered personalities: Single, Master and Slave. I wonder if you've got some of those. Have you tried the WD hard drive as master and a CD-ROM drive as slave?

Well, how about that? I just tried hooking up a CD drive as the slave and everything worked. The BIOS quickly identified the WD hard drive and the boot process went as quickly as with any other drive. Plus, the machine booted off a hard drive which it will not boot from if left as a single drive.

I just removed the CD drive and made no other changes: the problem returns. The BIOS did not detect the HD until the fourth time I tried. The boot process also took a long time and I got the "non-system disk" message. Putting the CD back as the slave made everything run fine again.

By the way, while I see five pin pairs all the WD drives only have three documented pin locations - master, slave and CS. None of the drives have those other selections of "single" or "master with slave".

Another fact - hooking up two WD drives as master/slave (a 1.6GB and 6.4GB) also has the result of having everything work fine.

So, what have we learned here? What is the story with the WD drives?

Thanks...Joe
 
Last edited:
What happens in a single-drive situation if no jumpers are installed?

Hmmm, what models are the WD drives? I may have one or the other on my shelf--I'll have to try your experiment.
 
By the way, while I see five pin pairs all the WD drives only have three documented pin locations - master, slave and CS. None of the drives have those other selections of "single" or "master with slave".

Another fact - hooking up two WD drives as master/slave (a 1.6GB and 6.4GB) also has the result of having everything work fine.
The WD drives with five pairs of pins use *no* jumpers connected to designate a single drive. It's clearly designated on the top of some of their drives.

So, what have we learned here? What is the story with the WD drives?
You have learned that drives need to be correctly configured for single, master or slave! :)

You need to remove the master jumper on the 1.6 GB drive and the slave jumper on the 6.4 GB drive for either of them to function properly as a single drive.
 
Last edited:
The WD drives with five pairs of pins use *no* jumpers connected to designate a single drive. It's clearly designated on the top of some of their drives.

You have learned that drives need to be correctly configured for single, master or slave! :)

You need to remove the master jumper on the 1.6 GB drive and the slave jumper on the 6.4 GB drive for either of them to function properly as a single drive.

DOH!!!

The 6.4GB drive (model AC26400-00RN) has the pin configuration on the label and you are correct - a single drive should have no jumpers installed. In my flurry of testing I just went by the notation on the pins and stopped looking at the label. The 1.6GB drive (model WDAC31600-00H) has no description for jumper settings on the label, it just has three pins (of five) noted as MA, SL or CS.

Mystery solved..and thanks to you guys.

Now I can get back to my original quest...determining how large a drive EZ-BIOS (should I decide to use it) can handle.

Thanks...Joe
 
I don't have a copy of EZ-Drive. A Google search seemed to turn up the fact that EZ-BIOS was also shipped with Western Digital drives. Maybe the two are the same - both made by Micro House?

Today I tried testing EZ-BIOS. I took a 20GB WD drive and tried to boot. Although the BIOS could identify the drive (with CHS parameters for an 8GB drive), the boot process hung. Setting the 20GB drive to Type 1 manually allowed me to boot to the EZ-BIOS diskette where the drive is then correctly identified.

I then set up with a 340MB WD as master and the 20GB WD as slave.

The EZ-BIOS software also wants to partition the drive and load an OS after EZ-BIOS is installed. I figured once EZ-BIOS was installed, I could use the regular FDISK utility to partition the drive and then do a SYS C: from my Win98 boot disk. That doesn't appear to be the case.

If after installing EZ-BIOS I simply exit and reboot using a Win98 diskette, I can partition, format and SYS C: without issue. However, when I reboot from the hard drive, I get the message:

NO PT,
insert a disk

I assume PT means Partition Table but could be wrong. Only if I allow EZ-BIOS to partition and install the system files can I boot off the hard drive. I don't quite understand why this is so. I figure once EZ-BIOS loads during the boot process, I should be able to access the hard drives as if EZ-BIOS were not there.

So far, it looks like EZ-BIOS will let me get to a drive of 20GB. I don't have anything between the 20GB and a 120GB (which EZ-BIOS cannot handle it appears) so I don't know where I take my testing from here. My plans to install some of these large (120GB plus) drives into my 486 to P1 machines may not be possible.

Joe
 
You may or may not have seen this:

ATA Specification (for IDE disks) - the 137 GB limitAt most 65536 cylinders (numbered 0-65535), 16 heads (numbered 0-15), 255 sectors/track (numbered 1-255), for a maximum total capacity of 267386880 sectors (of 512 bytes each), that is, 136902082560 bytes (137 GB). In Sept 2001, the first drives larger than this (160 GB Maxtor Diamondmax) appeared.
BIOS Int 13 - the 8.5 GB limitAt most 1024 cylinders (numbered 0-1023), 256 heads (numbered 0-255), 63 sectors/track (numbered 1-63) for a maximum total capacity of 8455716864 bytes (8.5 GB). This is a serious limitation today. It means that DOS cannot use present day large disks.
The 528 MB limitIf the same values for c,h,s are used for the BIOS Int 13 call and for the IDE disk I/O, then both limitations combine, and one can use at most 1024 cylinders, 16 heads, 63 sectors/track, for a maximum total capacity of 528482304 bytes (528MB), the infamous 504 MiB limit for DOS with an old BIOS. This started being a problem around 1993, and people resorted to all kinds of trickery, both in hardware (LBA), in firmware (translating BIOS), and in software (disk managers). The concept of `translation' was invented (1994): a BIOS could use one geometry while talking to the drive, and another, fake, geometry while talking to DOS, and translate between the two.
The 2.1 GB limit (April 1996)Some older BIOSes only allocate 12 bits for the field in CMOS RAM that gives the number of cylinders. Consequently, this number can be at most 4095, and only 4095*16*63*512=2113413120 bytes are accessible. The effect of having a larger disk would be a hang at boot time. This made disks with geometry 4092/16/63 rather popular. And still today many large disk drives come with a jumper to make them appear 4092/16/63. See also over2gb.htm. Other BIOSes would not hang but just detect a much smaller disk, like 429 MB instead of 2.5 GB.
The 3.2 GB limitThere was a bug in the Phoenix 4.03 and 4.04 BIOS firmware that would cause the system to lock up in the CMOS setup for drives with a capacity over 3277 MB. See over3gb.htm.
The 4.2 GB limit (Feb 1997)Simple BIOS translation (ECHS=Extended CHS, sometimes called `Large disk support' or just `Large') works by repeatedly doubling the number of heads and halving the number of cylinders shown to DOS, until the number of cylinders is at most 1024. Now DOS and Windows 95 cannot handle 256 heads, and in the common case that the disk reports 16 heads, this means that this simple mechanism only works up to 8192*16*63*512=4227858432 bytes (with a fake geometry with 1024 cylinders, 128 heads, 63 sectors/track). Note that ECHS does not change the number of sectors per track, so if that is not 63, the limit will be lower. See over4gb.htm.
The 7.9 GB limitSlightly smarter BIOSes avoid the previous problem by first adjusting the number of heads to 15 (`revised ECHS'), so that a fake geometry with 240 heads can be obtained, good for 1024*240*63*512=7927234560 bytes.
The 8.4 GB limit Finally, if the BIOS does all it can to make this translation a success, and uses 255 heads and 63 sectors/track (`assisted LBA' or just `LBA') it may reach 1024*255*63*512=8422686720 bytes, slightly less than the earlier 8.5 GB limit because the geometries with 256 heads must be avoided. (This translation will use for the number of heads the first value H in the sequence 16, 32, 64, 128, 255 for which the total disk capacity fits in 1024*H*63*512, and then computes the number of cylinders C as total capacity divided by (H*63*512).)
The 33.8 GB limit (August 1999) The next hurdle comes with a size over 33.8 GB. The problem is that with the default 16 heads and 63 sectors/track this corresponds to a number of cylinders of more than 65535, which does not fit into a short. Many BIOSes couldn't handle such disks. (See, e.g., Asus upgrades for new flash images that work.) Linux kernels older than 2.2.14 / 2.3.21 need a patch. See IDE problems with 34+ GB disks below.
The 137 GB limit (Sept 2001)As mentioned above, the old ATA protocol uses 16+4+8 = 28 bits to specify the sector number, and hence cannot address more than 2^28 sectors. ATA-6 describes an extension that allows the addressing of 2^48 sectors, a million times as much. There is support in very recent kernels.
The 2 TiB limitWith 32-bit sector numbers, one can address 2 TiB. A lot of software will have to be rewritten once disks get larger.
Hard drives over 8.4 GB are supposed to report their geometry as 16383/16/63. This in effect means that the `geometry' is obsolete, and the total disk size can no longer be computed from the geometry, but is found in the LBA capacity field returned by the IDENTIFY command. Hard drives over 137.4 GB are supposed to report an LBA capacity of 0xfffffff = 268435455 sectors (137438952960 bytes). Now the actual disk size is found in the new 48-capacity field.

You may not be able to achieve 120 GB with your BIOS regardless of the overlay. I was using an overlay on my 386 for a 8.4 GB HD split up into 4 equal partitions. The system worked okay and even gave you a choice to boot from a CD. But, I didn't like it, seemed to much like a crutch. So, I went up in the rafters and found an old ISA SIIG controller and installed same. I went for type 47 and let the mobo BIOS do an automatic setup, which it did, finding the drive parameters with no problems. Of course all data was lost the drive had to be re-partitioned and formatted. On the other hand, I have a Gigabyte 486 mobo with on-board floppy/HD, supports LBA and 48 -bit addressing, and gets me all the way to 137 GB. I don't think I've every had a parallel IDE larger than 80 GB. For your next project you may want to find a late (last model) 486 mobo with at least 1 PCI slot and then you can go for broke.
 
You may not be able to achieve 120 GB with your BIOS regardless of the overlay. I was using an overlay on my 386 for a 8.4 GB HD split up into 4 equal partitions. The system worked okay and even gave you a choice to boot from a CD. But, I didn't like it, seemed to much like a crutch. So, I went up in the rafters and found an old ISA SIIG controller and installed same. I went for type 47 and let the mobo BIOS do an automatic setup, which it did, finding the drive parameters with no problems. Of course all data was lost the drive had to be re-partitioned and formatted. On the other hand, I have a Gigabyte 486 mobo with on-board floppy/HD, supports LBA and 48 -bit addressing, and gets me all the way to 137 GB. I don't think I've every had a parallel IDE larger than 80 GB. For your next project you may want to find a late (last model) 486 mobo with at least 1 PCI slot and then you can go for broke.

First of all, thanks to Stone for the EZ-Drive download. I'll try that soon (I dismantled the caseless test machine yesterday).

Tom,
I did see the above limitation descriptions and printed them out along with the other web pages mentioned in an earlier post in this thread. The issue I was trying to determine was just how large a drive EZ-BIOS can handle - that info seems to be nowhere. Based on the fact the EZ-BIOS display only allows for five digits in the capacity field (in MB), it would seem the upper limit is (at most) 99,999MB or 99.99GB. Since that is not one of the "barriers" and I can get to a 20GB drive, the next level is 33.8GB. Then beyond that is 137GB. My initial test with the 120GB drive seemed to fail.

I actually do have a 40GB and 80GB drive installed in newer machines which I plan to replace with either a 120GB or a 250GB drive (I have to test both). If I free those drives, I can then test them with EZ-BIOS.

In reading your comment above, if your IDE controller allows 48 bit addressing you can go to 144PB (post #13). The 137GB limit should only apply to 28 bit addressing (2^28 * 512) if I understand correctly.

Thanks...Joe
 
Last edited:
EZ-BIOS is a part of EZ-DRIVE, which also includes a partitioning and formatting wizard. The latest version put out by Western Digital was 9.03W and I don't recall it being limited to one brand of drive in terms of installing EZ-BIOS.
 
EZ-BIOS is a part of EZ-DRIVE, which also includes a partitioning and formatting wizard. The latest version put out by Western Digital was 9.03W and I don't recall it being limited to one brand of drive in terms of installing EZ-BIOS.

The Maxblast software I have (with EZ-BIOS 9.06) also has the partitioning and formatting software included. I believe EZ-BIOS was made by Micro House. I don't believe the Maxblast utility I have is limited to Maxtor drives - it is probably just a front-end to the EZ-BIOS software to walk you through the physical installation of a Maxtor drive. Once you get to the EZ-BIOS configuration, my guess is it is drive independant.

I am still mystified as to why I cannot boot off the hard drive unless I load the initial OS boot code from within EZ-BIOS.

Joe
 
In reading your comment above, if your IDE controller allows 48 bit addressing you can go to 144PB (post #13). The 137GB limit should only apply to 28 bit addressing (2^28 * 512) if I understand correctly.

Thanks...Joe

First, your BIOS must be able to support support LBA 48-bit, regardless of the controller. There are some utilities out there that will check for that. in my case, I don't think I could get over 137 on my 486 setup unless I could load XP w/SP1. You are correct about your theory, but in practice it might be hard to accomplish without an overlay for the ISA/VLB system that doesn't have a PCI slot available. But, I know you are into to the overlay thing and it's a different ball game. FWIW, I have used ONTRACK Disk Manager ver. 9.57 which goes back to about 2002. They merged with Kroll Data Recovery and I think they're located in Eden Prairie, MN. If you want to try it, let me know.

Tom
 
I have to set up my test environment again, but until I do I have a question.

If you have multiple hard drives in a machine, I assume EZ-BIOS needs to control every drive, even if that drive can be handled by the BIOS. During my testing I set up a WD 340MB (master) and a WD 20GB and only wanted EZ-BIOS on the 20GB drive. When I turned on EZ-BIOS for the slave drive, I also got it on the master drive.

I can see where it would need to be installed on the MBR of the master drive. What I wonder is whether the 340MB drive could be accessed without EZ-BIOS if I installed it in another machine.

The reason I ask is this. Assume you want to copy data off a EZ-BIOS controlled hard drive to a drive not controlled by EZ-BIOS, and want to do so on the same machine. You would need a drive which the native BIOS could handle and which EZ-BIOS did not alter the geometry. You could then take that HD and move it to another machine and if necessary run the EZ-BIOS utility and remove any EZ-BIOS code from the MBR.

Thanks...Joe
 
The DDO is only placed on the BOOT drive. It wouldn't get read on a slave drive because it only gets read when the system is booted and since you're not booting from the slave it doesn't serve any purpose to have a DDO on it. In short, a DDO only is installed on one drive of a two drive system.
 
Doesn't look like I will be able to determine the upper limit of EZ-BIOS software. I do know it can get me to at last a 20GB drive.

The problem is you must first get past the motherboard BIOS before you can start to load EZ-BIOS either from it's install disk or from the hard drive. The next biggest drive I have after the 20GB drive is a 40GB drive and the machine will not boot with this drive attached, not even if I set the BIOS to Type 1.

Joe
 
There are other options to get around this obstacle. Try this one first:

First disconnect the ribbon cable from your 40GB drive.

Turn the power on and go into CMOS.

Select the Used Defined type and enter: 1023x16x63.

Save this setting.

Turn the power off and reconnect the cable.

See if the system boots and if it does... well, you know what to do from there.

If it doesn't, there is still another option to try.

Oh, BTW, what is the drive make and model of this 40GB drive?
 
There are other options to get around this obstacle. Try this one first:

First disconnect the ribbon cable from your 40GB drive.

Turn the power on and go into CMOS.

Select the Used Defined type and enter: 1023x16x63.

Save this setting.

Turn the power off and reconnect the cable.

See if the system boots and if it does... well, you know what to do from there.

If it doesn't, there is still another option to try.

Oh, BTW, what is the drive make and model of this 40GB drive?

I'll give that a try. The 40GB drive actually resides in another machine so I have to take it out again. It is a Western Digital drive - I have to remove it to see the model number. It is set for Cable Select but I removed the jumper before I tested it in my P1-90 (I learned my lesson about WD drive jumper settings). :)

I also have a 120GB (white label) and 250GB (WD) sitting idle at the moment but I am sure EZ-BIOS will be unable to access them.

Thanks...Joe
 
The 40GB drive actually resides in another machine so I have to take it out again.
I guess you're aware that putting a DDO on this (or any) drive will remove everything that is currently on it.

I also have a 120GB (white label) and 250GB (WD) sitting idle at the moment but I am sure EZ-BIOS will be unable to access them.
:) :) :)
 
Back
Top