Compiling ACPI v2.0 driver for Windows XP SP3 and Windows 2003 SP2 (x32/x64)

[reboot12]

OK, I'm back.

The time of creating an image on the NVMe disk by cloning or copying the block is identical and the same as on the ThinkPad for SATA HDD disk - 1.5 min ???

This means that the acpi.sys or USB drivers and even the destination disk type (HDD, NVMe) does not matter and it depends only from the controller chip in-build in USB stick.

I use WinHex 15.8

@Dietmar

Try test with older smaller USB stick like me 1GB

Edited July 20, 2024 by reboot12

[Dietmar]

@reboot12

With smaller USB stick, there is never a difference via "Copy Block" vs "Clone whole disk".

The answer is, as ChatGPT tells: The internal logic of an USB stick changes time by time the "LBA to real adress" on stick

Dietmar

EDIT: I just check your times for copy. The Kingston has 64 GB.

64*1.5 min= 96 min. This is EXACT my time, that the "Clone whole disk" of my Kingston stick needs, 11MB/s.

But with "Copy Block" exact only 24 min.

It is even more crazy: For a whole image of my System WD harddisk with 2TB, via "Copy Block" I need only 3 hours.

So, the transferspeed of this nice WD 2TB harddisk is 185 MB/s on a really loong run.

Here you see at once the "good and fast modern world" ^^..

 

 

 

Edited July 20, 2024 by Dietmar

[reboot12]

I do not use such large pendrive as yours - the latest I have is Kingston DataTraveler USB 3.0 16GB

I connected it to the USB 3 port and did the test:

• Clone Disk ~10 min clone_16GB.img
  
• Copy Block ~3 min - incredible (no display copy speed) copy_16GB.img
  

Both files exactly same checksum:

How is this possible? Clone USB > NVMe but Copy Block from RAM to NVMe ???

Edited July 20, 2024 by reboot12

[Dave-H]

Isn't this getting a bit off-topic for this thread guys?

[Dietmar]

@Dave-H

I think about, where to post this yesterday evening.

But I think, this is really important,

and so I decided to post here, because I know, that a lot of people read here,

sorry,

Dietmar

 

[reboot12]

2 minutes ago, Dietmar said:

But I think, this is really important,

Does this mean that Copy Block speed from USB depends on the modified acpi.sys ???

[Dietmar]

@reboot12

No. It is a fundamental problem of a modern medium, that is not a harddisk.

The real speed of data transfer is not much more than 10MB/s on them on a loong run, even they show crazy high values.

 This is true also for Win10.

The only exception from this is the Intel Optane storage, which was cut. This storage medium OPTANE even dont need TRIM

Dietmar

 

[reboot12]

But I test same USB 3 16GB on ThinkPad X61 (original acpi.sys WinXP SP2 64-bit) and clone and copy block speed is same ~11 min

Only on Intel Gen 8 Copy Block is faster than Clone

[Dietmar]

@reboot12

It is not because of the compi hardware. The problem is the medium itself. Winhex "decides", if RAW copy is possible or not.

But @Dave-H is correct, it is a little bit off topic here

Dietmar

[reboot12]

2 minutes ago, Dietmar said:

It is not because of the compi hardware. The problem is the medium itself. Winhex "decides", if RAW copy is possible or not.

Yea, what does this have to do with this topic and modified acpi.sys ???

[Dietmar]

Here comes pic from XP SP2 bit64 on GPT harddisk on pur UEFI with working(!) graphik,

nice work from Gelip @reboot12

waaoohh..

Dietmar

 

 

Edited July 21, 2024 by Dietmar

[Dietmar]

@reboot12

For the UEFI XP SP2 bit64 12900k cpu,

you also need to install the modded hal.dll and intelppm.sys for XP SP2 bit64

Dietmar

PS: Here they are. Now, really everything works for pure UEFI boot on GPT on the Gigabyte z690 UD DDR4 board

for XP SP2 bit64. I installed those files by hand.

https://ufile.io/95vlrwgr

Edited July 22, 2024 by Dietmar

[reboot12]

3 hours ago, Dietmar said:

you also need to install the modded hal.dll and intelppm.sys for XP SP2 bit64

Yea, I know - also for Intel Gen 8:

https://www.betaarchive.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=477539#p477539

Intel Gen 9:

 

Edited July 22, 2024 by reboot12

[Jakob99]

Hi! Using a modded ACPI.sys from @K4sum1, which I think came from here, I was able to get XP 64-bit to install on my Dell Inspiron 3542 laptop with Intel Haswell, but with one glaring exception; The touchpad is not detected at all. Like, I cannot use it and need to use USB mouse. Looking at the touchpad properties in device manager under 7 (where it works fine), shows ACPI something something under hardware/compatible IDs, meaning, something in the modded ACPI.sys or whatever is not telling the computer to activate the touchpad under XP. The touchpad is Synaptics, and it works on Windows 7 and later just fine. I should note that in 7, it is registered as a PS/2 touchpad, but in 8 and later, it is registered as I2C touchpad, with no setting in the BIOS to change the touchpad mode (unlike other laptops such as Acer). No way XP is trying to register it as an I2C touchpad, lol.

I was wondering if anybody here had a solution in getting the touchpad detected (I don't care about the Synaptics driver right now, only the basic Microsoft PS/2 driver). I should also note that it tells me to plug my laptop into the charger, even though it is. This also does not happen under 7 and later.

[reboot12]

@Jakob99

There are drivers ported for the I2C touchpad:

Ported drivers for XP x86/x64

They are old in the link. Ask @George King about new ones - I have DP_Ported_DriversCollection_v44.7z from him but not tested I2C: