Full height HDD (IMI 5012H) with a LoTech XT-CF (v2)

[maelstrm]

Hello Federation,

I'm attempting to save some files from a FH 10MB drive that shipped with this 5160. I have a working setup with an XT-CF card, in that I can boot to MS DOS from the CF card (MS-DOS 6.22) when there is no other hard drive controller present. However, when I put the original controller back into the machine, it boots from the XT-CF normally. But the FH drive is not seen by DOS. I can remove the XT-CF card and boot from the FH drive. But the version of DOS (PC DOS 2.x I think) on the FH drive won't detect the XT-CF card. The actual CF card is 32MB and has a single partition formatted on a Pentium 1. The CF card will boot the 5160 if no other drive controllers are present. The original drive controller is an IBM branded 1501492.

tl'dr Neither controller can see the other controller's drive. But both drives will boot the system. Can these two co-exist in the same system? I just need to back everything up from the FH drive.

 

[maelstrm]

I need to add that using a floppy right now is not an option. I am working on getting a 3.5 drive working as a 720K drive. But I was really hoping to just do an xcopy /e and grab everything onto a CF card.

 

[jafir]

Do you have a serial port on the 5160 and a laplink/null modem cable? If so you might be able to use something like fastlynx to backup your files, since 10mb isn’t very much.

 

[maelstrm]

Do you have a serial port on the 5160 and a laplink/null modem cable? If so you might be able to use something like fastlynx to backup your files, since 10mb isn’t very much.

Yes I do. I was hoping to use the CF card though, seems like that'd be easier. But if I can't get them to work together I'll try the laplink.

 

[modem7]

Can these two co-exist in the same system?

Well, there is always the possibility of incompatibility, but per the top section of [here], I have my "IBM branded 1501492" coexisting with a particular make-model of XT-IDE card.

LoTech XT-CF (v2)

Confirm for us that of the following two cards, the one you have is the first one.

* Lo-tech XT-CFv2
* Lo-tech XT-CF-lite rev.2

The second one's default base (starting) address of the BIOS ROM is C8000, and that will conflict with the IBM controller.

And if you have the first one, is its base (starting) address of the BIOS ROM set to C8000 (instead of its default of D0000) ?

 

[maelstrm]

I have the rev. 2 card. Moving the jumper to change the address results in the CF card not being found even without the original MFM controller connected. But am I correct in my understanding that changing the address also requires a reflash?

 

[modem7]

I have the rev. 2 card.

So, the XT-CF-lite rev.2

Moving the jumper to change the address results ...

Moving? The Lo-tech web site indicates that the jumper at position 1 is either present ('closed') or absent ('open'):


NOTE: The "C800h" above really should be C8000h. The "D800h" above really should be D8000h. Abrieviated forms have been used.

But am I correct in my understanding that changing the address also requires a reflash?

There are two 'types' of 'addresses' involved:
- The address at which the ROM starts at. ('ROM Base Address' in the table above.)
- The I/O port address at which the IDE interface starts at. ('IO Port Base Address' in the table above.)

Only if you change the second one does the XTIDE Universal BIOS (a.k.a. XUB) need to be reconfigured.

 

[maelstrm]

Ok that clears things up for me. I was conflating the ROM Base Address and the IO Port Base Address and another problem I'm having with an Ethernet card. But we'll leave that for another time.

I moved J1 to open and the XT-CF card is able to boot. Next I will try booting it with the MFM controller present in the system.

 

[maelstrm]

That did it! Saving files now.

 

[pearce_jj]

NOTE: The "C800h" above really should be C8000h. The "D800h" above really should be D8000h. Abrieviated forms have been used.

The listed addresses are simply segment addresses, which are 16-byte aligned. I think this was always the convention for option ROMs.

 

[modem7]

The listed addresses are simply segment addresses, which are 16-byte aligned. I think this was always the convention for option ROMs.

Yes. Just educating the OP (if required) because the abbreviated form isn't used in places like IBM's memory maps.

 

[maelstrm]

I'm all for getting educated on this stuff. This place is incredibly helpful and I'm grateful for all the information. Thank you!