VOGONS


First post, by jwt27

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I'm using a Promise Ultra133TX2 controller now, so far it seems to work quite well. There's one thing I don't really like though: it takes 6k of low memory for itself.

With the Promise card installed, MEM reports 634k total conventional memory instead of 640k. Segments 9E80 to 9FFF are occupied by the controller card, and most of it seems empty. I thought the int13 handler might be stored there, but int 13 points to an address in F000.

So my question is, is there anything I can do about this? Would it be possible to move this up into UMBs?

Reply 1 of 5, by JayCeeBee64

User metadata
Rank Retired
Rank
Retired

Looks like you're stuck. Promise did this (shadowing option ROM into conventional memory) for speed and convenience.

Here's an old thread at Storage Review from someone that wanted to do something similar:

http://forums.storagereview.com/index.php/top … cation-request/

I also own an Ultra66 and Ultra100 TX2 PCI controllers, and both do the same thing; I just live with it. You could try a different PCI controller as well (I believe Silicon Image controllers don't do this type of shadowing).

Ooohh, the pain......

Reply 2 of 5, by jwt27

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Thanks! That's a very interesting link. I didn't really expect to see other people concerned about this, since these controller cards were released when dos pretty much died out already. Too bad it seems impossible to reclaim this memory though... 🙁

I would imagine if there's some way to find out if there are any parts of code that refer to this memory region, you should be able to relocate it and then update the referring instructions. If the controller itself is hardwired to expect its bios in this location, then things might become difficult.

Of course I could live with 6kb less, but I'm kinda concerned about things like the cad program discussed in your link. That's just one program, who knows what else might be hardcoded to expect this region empty?

And yes, I tried a Silicon Image once. Never could figure out how to use the drivers, and UIDE just crashed right on startup. These Promise cards seem much more reliable so far.

Reply 4 of 5, by JayCeeBee64

User metadata
Rank Retired
Rank
Retired
jwt27 wrote:

I would imagine if there's some way to find out if there are any parts of code that refer to this memory region, you should be able to relocate it and then update the referring instructions. If the controller itself is hardwired to expect its bios in this location, then things might become difficult.

I haven't seen anyone do a low level mod like that before. The only one I know of is to convert the Ultra100 card into a Fastrak RAID card:

http://www.weethet.nl/english/hardware_promiseultra100.php

Of course I could live with 6kb less, but I'm kinda concerned about things like the cad program discussed in your link. That's just one program, who knows what else might be hardcoded to expect this region empty?

I did try out AutoCAD 12 and 3D Studio 3 (both DOS CAD programs) at one time and they were buggy with Promise cards installed. Haven't experienced problems with other DOS software or games so far.

And yes, I tried a Silicon Image once. Never could figure out how to use the drivers, and UIDE just crashed right on startup. These Promise cards seem much more reliable so far.

I agree, Promise cards just work (even in old 486/Pentium PCs). My personal nemesis is HighPoint, always had problems/issues (hardware conflicts, bad drivers, corrupted data) and refuse to use them because of that.

Ooohh, the pain......

Reply 5 of 5, by jwt27

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
JayCeeBee64 wrote:

I did try out AutoCAD 12 and 3D Studio 3 (both DOS CAD programs) at one time and they were buggy with Promise cards installed. Haven't experienced problems with other DOS software or games so far.

Well great. I actually use autocad 13 from time to time...

JayCeeBee64 wrote:

I agree, Promise cards just work (even in old 486/Pentium PCs). My personal nemesis is HighPoint, always had problems/issues (hardware conflicts, bad drivers, corrupted data) and refuse to use them because of that.

Thanks. My 440BX mainboard has one of these on-board (ATA 100). I did intend to try it someday... sounds like it's better if I didn't 😀

smeezekitty wrote:

Are you really going to miss 6K though?

Not directly. But I'm worried about compatibility. And I'm sure programs that rely on this area to be empty will just crash randomly instead of throwing nice detailed error messages pointing to the controller card.