Hi all. I have a 386 that I'm trying to get up and running. XUB works in the original 8-bit card, but when I move the drive (in this case a IDE to SD card adapter) to the 16-bit card (SIIG si-1132), and reflash the Rom with the AT settings and typical IDE base addresses, I can't seem to get it to recognize the drive. Is there a way to detect what base address the IDE interface is on, on the 16-bit card?
- VCF SoCal - February 17 - 18, Hotel Fera, Orange CA
- VCF East - April 5 - 7, Infoage Museum, Wall NJ
- VCF South West - June 14 - 16, Davidson-Gundy Alumni Center at University of Texas at Dallas
- VCF West - Aug 2 - 3, Computer History Museum, Mountain View, CA
- VCF Midwest - App. Sept 2024, Waterford Banquet, IL
-
Please review our updated Terms and Rules here
386 computer, XT-IDE BIOS, can't find IDE address?
- Thread starter RWIndiana
- Start date
Looks like on the SI-1132+ (perhaps the same?) IDE has to be primary (1f0), secondary (170), or disabled: https://www.minuszerodegrees.net/manuals/SIIG/SIIG SI-1132+ Users Manual.pdf
Perhaps make sure it isn't disabled? And that there isn't anything else conflicting like onboard IDE, or an MFM controller card.
Perhaps make sure it isn't disabled? And that there isn't anything else conflicting like onboard IDE, or an MFM controller card.
modem7
Veteran Member
Also, if you need the XUB to control a different type of controller, you need to change the controller/device setting in the XUB. Example screen shot at [here].
But a question is, why do you need the XUB to control the SI-1132? The SI-1132 is a controller designed for AT-class systems. In your 386, why can't you just attach the {IDE-to-SD adapter + SD} combination to the SI-1132, then set up the drive type in the CMOS SETUP, then possibly redo the partitioning and high-level format?
But a question is, why do you need the XUB to control the SI-1132? The SI-1132 is a controller designed for AT-class systems. In your 386, why can't you just attach the {IDE-to-SD adapter + SD} combination to the SI-1132, then set up the drive type in the CMOS SETUP, then possibly redo the partitioning and high-level format?
I will tinker with it more tomorrow and report back. Yes I think it's the same card. All the jumpers look to be at default settings. I know it works when used without the XUB, with system BIOS. Perhaps the XUB didn't like the SD card? I will try other drives tomorrow as well.
I am considering this, but I seem to be limited in sizes of drives I can choose in BIOS. I don't feel confident with setting parameters manually, but maybe I will play around with it.
On the XUB front, it was my fault for not trying other drives. The siig was not playing nice with the Sd card, so I'm not sure what's going on there, or why it works in XT mode on the XT-IDE. 1F0h is the correct address for the siig.
One last question... As my 386 BIOS is limited to a 500mb hard drive, would it be preferable to use OnTrack to see the whole (4.3GiB in this case) drive, or stick the XUB into the system somewhere? I'm leaning towards XUB still, maybe because that seems easier.
Pros/Cons?
Thanks!
Pros/Cons?
Thanks!
OnTrack will cost you some conventional memory and can make it awkward to read the drive if you move it to another machine to read it (such as your "bridge" machine loading files onto it). You also have to set your boot order to "C: then A:" so that the OnTrack MBR always loads first, and then gives you a chance to boot from floppy, as booting directly from floppy will make the C: drive invisible.
XT-IDE Unversal BIOS takes up upper memory address space, costing you some UMBs if you are going to run EMM386 and DOS=UMB. Or in other words, less memory will be available for you to DEVICEHIGH/LOADHIGH things into. Also, if your BIOS doesn't support shadowing arbitrary option ROMs (as opposed to system and video BIOS only) XT-IDE Universal BIOS will execute slowly.
On my 386 machines I choose to just live with the 504MB limit, as it's roomy enough, and it doesn't hurt anything to use a larger drive and treat it as 504.
Assuming you are using the FAT16 file system, your partitions are limited to 2GB, and large FAT16 partitions become quite inefficient. For 1GB-2GB partitions, space is allocated in 32KB chunks, so there is a lot of waste. With a 504MB partition, space is allocated in 8KB chunks.
These points are all valid as long as the system BIOS can reliably drive the IDE device, which may not be true on old mainboards and new drives. In particular, I've had issues with CF cards which went away when I switched to XUB.
Regarding the "XUB will execute slow if your system cannot shadow arbitrary ROMs" - isn't that something a memory manager such as EMM386 or QEMM can do? In that case, XUB will likely outperform the system BIOS as well.
Regarding the "XUB will execute slow if your system cannot shadow arbitrary ROMs" - isn't that something a memory manager such as EMM386 or QEMM can do? In that case, XUB will likely outperform the system BIOS as well.