Jump to content

Enable48BitLBA | Break the 137Gb barrier!


Recommended Posts

Two questions:

First, the README for v 4.10.2225 seems to be missing the complete statement regarding supported partition sizes -- can anyone supply the info?

ESDI_506.PDR driver has nothing to do with partitions and their sizes, this driver does low level access to the IDE/ATA disks. It receives sector number and required command (read/write/verify) and executes it. The sector number in Windows 9x is 32-bit number, one sector has 512 bytes and therefore the maximum addressable disk size is 2048 GiB = 2 TiB.

I don't know what is the real maximum partition size in Windows 9x, I have successfuly tried 200 GB. Just Windows scandisk and defrag tools has to be used from Windows Me for partition sizes above 128 GiB.

Second, regarding data corruption above 137GB (please note I may be making fundamental wrong assumptions about how hard disk space is used, as a midlevel user, I'm assuming the space is at least sonewhat based on the physical layout of formatted partitions on a disk) -- is it a "safe" method to avoid this by partitioning a >137GB drive such that the total usable formatted portion of the drive is <137GB? Eg, I have a new 160GB drive, but since I don't need the space I have not installed any 46bit LBA patches/file versions, and it's currently configured (PartitionMagic 4.01) with three partitions, 32/32/62GB for a total of 126GB -- would this type of setup avoid >137 barrier corruption by making any "higher" space unusable?

Yes.

Petr

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Version 4.00.1116 of Win95 ESDI_506.PDR file fixes these problems mentioned in SEVEN Microsoft KB articles:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/153471/EN-US/

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/154435/EN-US/

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/154436/EN-US/

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/154976/EN-US/

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/160800/EN-US/

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/161642/EN-US/

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/171353/EN-US/

If Win95 users are using less than 4.00.1116 of esdi_506.pdr, please update to 4.00.1116 or higher to resolve these problems.

It's important to note that the 48bit LBA edition of esdi_506.pdr v4.00.1111 does NOT fix these problems. The problems were already in existence (before LLXX created the 48bit LBA driver for Win95) and MS fixed them starting with v4.00.1116 of the PDR file.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4.00.1111 for Windows 95 OSR2+ is now available for download. 4.00.1119 should be ready soon.

I wrote my patch by trying to find *all* instances in ESDI_506.PDR where a

relevant command is sent to the HD controller and used the ATA-6 standards

and a manual from one of the largest HDD manufactures (Toshiba, Seagate or

WD, I forget which) to figure out how to patch. All I was looking for in

LLXX's patched file was whether *I* had *missed* code she found and patched.

However, I noticed from her patches (in a well-known location!) that she had

definitely patched *less* code than I did, that's all. If such unpatched

code is executed for a HDD that needs 48-bit LBA, data corruption is pretty

much guaranteed.

Maybe my new code is just more efficient...

REMOVE V4.00.1111 OF ESDI_506.PDR file, IMMEDIATELY! IT is FLAWED with power management bugs, UDMA bugs and other problems that are fixed with version 4.00.1116 of esdi_506.pdr from Q273468 & remideup.exe. Please patch ESDI_506.PDR files versions 4.00.1116 from Q273468 and 4.00.1118 from amdk6upd.exe and REMOVE 4.00.1111 of patched esdi_506.pdr OFF THIS SITE RIGHT AWAY.

<I will delete this post when ESDI_506.PDR 4.00.1111 48Bit LBA driver for Win95 OSR2 has been removed from this thread>

I agree a little side note to this would help :blink:

I think LLXX just made a proof of concept. She is probably working on a 4.00.1119 version already.

erpdude8, should users avoid this "flawed" patch on Windows 95 systems with >137 GB disks, keep using their original driver and get aware of file corruption when they use their systems?

:thumbdown

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have created 137 GB disk as disk D, then filled it (Win95 OSR2.1 ESDI_506.PDR 4.00.1111) to 100 GB by some files with known MD5 sum, and then calculated the MD5 sums in Windows 95 environment - and everything was good.

It would be very good to know any examples of problems above 32 GiB barrier, I still believe that Mictosoft had some reason to write that KB article.

Petr

@erpdude8, see above. I also happen to be using 4.10.2222, the original Win98SE driver with no problems. 4.00.1119 is coming, there are just so many changes between these versions that I can't just copy+paste in a hex editor like I did with the 222*.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I installed the esdi_506.pdr patched file [4.10.2222] then restarted my computer to connect my 250 GB sata drive.

I started to boot windows and got a BSOD:

Your mulitfunction device (Standard Dual PCI IDE controler) has some child devices useing 32bit drivers and some useing compatiblity mode drivers. this configuration is not supported...

so now my IDE controlers are stuck in 16 bit compatiblity mode. i restored the original esdi_506 file, i disabled my sata controler. is there something i need to do to make my sata drive work correctly?

ok, fixed all my 16 bit issues. now i have a question..

my sata disk doesnt even use the esdi_506.pdr driver. instead it uses a VIA driver that came on my mainboard cd. am i still effected by the 137 GB limit?

clipboard03rw5.th.jpg

Edited by janus zeal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope! No problem for you. I ran 98SE for a while on my Sata 250GB drive with one big partition. The key is using the Sata bios and installing the Sata driver, in my case the Via SataRaid driver.

There are some motherboards that give you a choice in the Bios to run the Sata drives in IDE mode and not using the Sata Raid bios. This is great on XP/2000 as you get to use the newfangled Via IDE driver that is a bit zippier and lets you use Sata hard drives like USB, unplugging them when you want to switch. But that driver doesn't install the new stuff on 9x, only using the Microsoft ESDI driver.

So when using 9x that IDE feature (AMI doesn't have it, Award does) for Sata is bad, even though it still works. The Award bios creates a new IDE chain and Windows treats the Sata drive like an IDE drive.

I suppose one could use the new 48LBA patch and it might work though.

For you, no problem. You've got the Sata/Raid thing going so you're not using the Microsoft ESDI on the drive.

One problem for you. Windows Scan Disk and Defrag could wreck your setup if used on a drive bigger than 137GB. When I had this setup I used MSCONFIG advanced and checked to not run ScanDisk on bad shutdowns.

I also installed Norton Utilities 2002, as its Disk Doctor and Speed Disk ARE compatible with the bigger drives. I'm not sure what you could use as a substitute for ScanDisk if you don't have access to a 9x compatible version of Norton Utilities, but I think that as long as you don't use the full scan option you'd still be okay with Windows ScanDisk. It's the full scan that mucks up big drives.

Executive Software's Diskeeper is a good alternative for a substitute for Windows Defrag.

And certainly get the Windows Me versions of ScanDisk and Disk Defragmenter on there. They're faster than the 98SE one's.

If you install Norton Utilites or a 9x compatible SystemWorks, I'd advise using a custom install and unchecking the Undo Wizard stuff. That's the thing that installs the Norton Protected Recycle Bin. Although that can be emptied and disabled, it still can cause problems. And don't run anything like the System Doctor at startup. It runs in the background and keeps useless tabs on everything, slowing the system down. Disk Doctor and SpeedDisk are great though. That's all I used from the thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok, fixed all my 16 bit issues. now i have a question..

my sata disk doesnt even use the esdi_506.pdr driver. instead it uses a VIA driver that came on my mainboard cd. am i still effected by the 137 GB limit?

clipboard03rw5.th.jpg

It depends on the driver. Most of the newer ones should be fine. The best way is to do the test - copy 137+ Gb of data to the drive and see if any corruption happens.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4.00.1119 for Windows 95OSR2+ is now available.

Comments, test results, etc. are welcome :)

Thank you very much for this Windows 95 OSR2 version.

Now noone has to experience File corruption on any Windows 9x OS (Windows 95 < OSR2 isn't) in combination with Big HDD's anymore!!! :thumbup

P.S. You definetely outperformed Loew's commercial patch. It is not available for Windows 95 ;)

Edited by hp38guser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. You definetely outperformed Loew's commercial patch. It is not available for Windows 95 ;)
What's next... Windows 3.11? I think it had its own direct-access (32-bit mode) HDD driver...

BTW, DOS 7.1 *does* support 48bitLBA via Int13x.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. You definetely outperformed Loew's commercial patch. It is not available for Windows 95 ;)
What's next... Windows 3.11? I think it had its own direct-access (32-bit mode) HDD driver...

BTW, DOS 7.1 *does* support 48bitLBA via Int13x.

xD if you get windows 3.11 to support 137+ GB disks i will use it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just found out the Windows 3.11 DDK (Driver Development Kit) contains the complete source code of the WDCTRL.386 HDD driver. This should make it easy to implement some new features :D

(Google "Windows 3.11 ddk" to find the download.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mini-Windows 3.2 + MS-DOS 7.1 does support 137+Gb disks, so the problem didn't exist in the first place :)

Enable48bitLBA project is now finalised. Someone should stick this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enable48bitLBA project is now finalised. Someone should stick this thread.

I vist the 9x subforum mainly to be able to provide support for other people I know who use 9x. I rarely use it myself anymore..

Still.. Had to step in and say congrats and awsome work.. :thumbup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PM Gape to make it sticky.

as in:

Unofficial Win98 SE Service Pack

Unofficial Win98 SE Service Pack Forum

Forum Led by: Gape

Edited by RJM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...