Primary IDE controller weirdness in Win98
Zvi Netiv
> Hello group:
> This is rather lengthy and complex, so those of you with little time might
> want to skip to a more concise posting ;) But of course any help would be
> greatly appreciated...
> Unfortunately I only noticed this problem Sunday, so I have no idea when it
> started. I did, however add a second HD in the past month, which became the
> primary master HD. But when I first installed it, everything seemed to be
> fine in Device Manager. I first found the problem after installing the 2.1.u
> release of BlackICE Defender today, which has done nothing but crash my
> system repeatedly. But I don't know how that could have contributed to the
> problem I am about to describe.
> The problem is that in Device Manager (System Properties Control Panel) it
> shows a yellow exclamation mark on the Primary IDE controller (dual fifo),
> and a corresponding red "x" on the "GENERIC IDE DISK TYPE46. The properties
> for the Primary IDE controller says (under device status): "This device is
> either not present, not working properly, or does not have all the drivers
> installed. (Code 10). I've tried upgrading the device drivers as it
> suggests, but this makes no difference, because the best drivers are already
> installed (says Windows). I've also tried extracting the ESDI_506.pdr file
> (IDE controller driver) from the Win98 CD to replace the current one, but to
> no avail. The GENERIC IDE DISK TYPE46 properties state (under device status)
> "This device is not working properly because a device it depends on, Primary
> IDE controller (dual fifo), has been dynamically disabled." Not surprising.
> By the way, shouldn't there be two GENERIC IDE DISK TYPE46 entries in Device
> Manager? After all, there are two hard disks in the system. The only other
> disks listed are GENERIC NEC FLOPPY DISK, and IOMEGA ZIP 100. Perhaps these
> are both available only because they are on the secondary IDE.
> The System Properties Performance tab says:
> Compatibility-mode paging reduces overall system performance.
> Drive C is using MS-DOS compatibility mode file system.
> Drive D is using MS-DOS compatibility mode file system.
> I've tried removing the Intel 82371SB PCI Bus Master IDE Controller from
> Device Manager (because Windows won't allow me to remove just the Primary
> IDE controller). Unfortunately, after rebooting and
> redetecting/re-installation of the PCI Bus Master IDE controller, the
> problem persists.
> Windows-Help.com suggests deleting a noide entry in the registry, but no
> such entry exists in mine, so this suggestion doesn't help in my case.
> Although I'm sure these are not all relevant to the current problem, the
> failures listed in bootlog.txt are as follows (I don't know why each appears
> twice):
> [00156161] Loading Vxd = ndis2sup.vxd
> [00156161] LoadFailed = ndis2sup.vxd
> ...
> [00156183] DEVICEINIT = MTRR
> [00156183] DEVICEINITFAILED = MTRR
> ...
> [0015623E] Initing esdi_506.pdr
> [00156241] Init Failure esdi_506.pdr
> [00156241] Initing esdi_506.pdr
> [0015624D] Init Success esdi_506.pdr
> ...
> [00156258] INITCOMPLETE = SDVXD
> [00156258] INITCOMPLETEFAILED = SDVXD
> ...
> [001562B2] Dynamic load device naapi.vxd
> [001562B3] Dynamic load failed naapi.vxd : [001562B4] File not found
> ...
> [001590C8] Loading Vxd = ndis2sup.vxd
> [001590C9] LoadFailed = ndis2sup.vxd
> ...
> [001590F3] DEVICEINIT = MTRR
> [001590F3] DEVICEINITFAILED = MTRR
> ...
> [001591CB] Initing esdi_506.pdr
> [001591CE] Init Failure esdi_506.pdr
> [001591CE] Initing esdi_506.pdr
> [001591DA] Init Success esdi_506.pdr
> ...
> [0015923D] Dynamic load device naapi.vxd
> [0015923D] Dynamic load failed naapi.vxd : [0015923D] File not found
> -----------------------
> From what I've read on other websites, the esdi_506.pdr is probably the key
> issue.
>
> Another suspicious piece of evidence occurs at the start of IOS.log, found
> in the Windows directory:
>
> ESDI head mismatch
> Unit number 02 going through real mode drivers.
> Unit number 03 going through real mode drivers.
> -----------------------
> This file corresponds (timestamp-wise) with bootlog.txt, so I know they are
> related issues, and this is most likely the cause of the problem. But I
> don't know what the solution is. I don't know what "ESDI head mismatch"
> means, and I'm at a loss as to what to do. I've spent the better part of
> Sunday banging my head against the wall trying to sort this out.
>
> Can anybody tell me whether this is a hardware or a software problem, and
> what could be done about it? I'm starting to think it's hardware related,
> since nothing I've done with the software so far has helped. Would
> re-installing Windows98 help? I'd like to avoid that if possible).
>
> My system configuration (yes, it's old):
>
> CPU TYPE: INTEL Pentium MMX
> CPU SPEED: 166
> MOTHERBOARD: ASUS P/I-P55T2P4
> OPERATING SYSTEM: Win98
> VIDEO CARD: ATI
> SOUND CARD: SB16
> NETWORK CARD: SMC EtherEZ
> MEMORY SIZE: 64MB
> HARD DISK (C): 10.2 GB Quantum Fireball Plus LM (7200 RPM)
> HARD DISK (D): 3.2 GB Western Digital Caviar
> ZIP-100 (E) and CD-ROM (F) occupy secondary IDE
> I'd really like to get the System Properties Performance tab to read "Your
> system is configured for optimal performance" once again! I miss that.
> Please help!
> Thanks very much for reading this, and for any advice you might have. Let me
> know if more info is required.
There are several things that may cause this problem. The most common
are: hardware mismatch or improper setting, faulty IDE controller,
erroneous Windows "earmarking" of the drive, and a whole range of
improper setting caused by Windows setup.
We have a diagnostic tool named RESQDISK that can help finding the
cause of your problem and rectify it. You'll have to download
http://resq.co.il/download/resq.exe and extract it to a boot floppy in
order to run the utility.
When booted from the floppy, and running RESQDISK, toggle between the
drives (+/-) and check with ^F5 whether both IDE channels are
functional. If both, or one does not function, then change in the
setup one of the drives to "not installed" and check the IDE for the
other. Repeat for either drive.
Follows the interpretation of the results:
If both drives' IDE is non-functional when paired, or stand alone,
then you have a faulty IDE controller, or what's more likely, wrong
settings in your CMOS "Peripherals" setup.
If IDE works fine for a drive when set alone, but not in a pair, then
the drives are either improperly jumpered, or poorly match. There are
combinations of drive brands, or even different models from the same
brand that don't work well in a master/slave combination. Changing
IDE chanels from 'primary slave' to 'secondary master' sometimes help.
If RESQDISK shows that IDE works for both drives in DOS, then the
problem is of Windows. There is a rare condition where the drives
have been improperly ID'd by Windows. Few know that Windows marks
hard drives by writing four bytes in the MBR, starting at offset 220,
identifying the drive to Windows. Wrong parameters sometimes cause
Windows to misidentify the drive and not mounting the IDE driver.
Curing this condition is tricky, although RESQDISK would let you do
it.
If the latter, then I suggest that you disconnect the Iomega drive,
remove the hard drive devices in device manager, and restart Windows.
Windows will find the proper devices.
> reply to kraemz (at) home (dot) com and/or this ng.
Copied and e-mailed for your convenience. Please do NOT send private
e-mail. Follow up only in the newsgroup.
Regards, Zvi
--------------------------------------------------------------------
NetZ Computing Ltd. ISRAEL Tel. +972 3 9386868 Fax +972 3 9386869
InVircible AntiVirus Software, ResQ Disk and Data Recovery Utilities
Homepage: http://www.invircible.com E-mail: Sup...@invircible.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
RAHbert
> "Kraemz" <m...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > Hello group:
>
> > This is rather lengthy and complex, so those of you with little time might
> > want to skip to a more concise posting ;) But of course any help would be
> > greatly appreciated...
Too verbose. It is not a question of time, but you test the reader's
patience.
I suggest you reread your original post and see what words were not
germane to the problem, then rewrite it concisely, sticking to the
facts. Describe your problem, don't write a novel.
--
Cheers,
BobH
"If you want to be a psychological novelist and
write about human beings, the best thing you can
do is to keep a pair of cats." -- Aldous Huxley
Richard L. Gabriel
>The problem is that in Device Manager (System Properties Control Panel) it
>shows a yellow exclamation mark on the Primary IDE controller (dual fifo),
>and a corresponding red "x" on the "GENERIC IDE DISK TYPE46. The properties
>for the Primary IDE controller says (under device status): "This device is
>either not present, not working properly, or does not have all the drivers
>installed. (Code 10).
etc, etc, etc :-)
Kraemz, I ran into a similar problem with two identical Maxtor ULTRA66
13.6Gb 7200rpm drives as primary master & slave. I would get a red
"x" etc on a "generic ide disk type 01" on the primary controller
(yellow "!") also. In this state, the properties showed that both
drives were operating in the "DOS Compatibility Mode", dispite the
fact that the slave device was not listed. Occasionally, it would
suprisingly boot up "correctly" and then there was no Yellow "!", red
"x" etc. Hard Drives were listed as: GENERIC IDE DISK TYPE01 & GENERIC
IDE DISK TYPE02. When this occured, neither drive was in "Dos
Compatibility Mode".
To make a long story short, putting the second drive on the Secondary
as master (or as secondary slave if another device is present there)
fixes things. The HD are detected in Win98 as Generic Ide Disk Type01
& Generic IDE Disk type80. Note the "type80".
Apparently two identical ULTRA66 Maxtors are not happy as Master &
Slave on my Primary IDE Port. My MB is a recent (Oct 99 Dell) but it
seems to run as ULTRA33 Mode2. It is possible that applying a U66 to
U33 patch could also fix the problem, but I have not tried that as
things are now running perfectly.
Curiously, Maxtor "Help" Email suggested that there may have been a
drive compatibility problem :-) !!!
Hope that this helps...Just put the second drive on the Secondary IDE
Port....and of course, properly jumper all drives :-) , and BIOS
detect each setup change.
Richard
sni...@angelfire.com
out the Windows 98 Install CD and reinstall it.
I not saying deleting anything. In fact don't delete anything. Just start the
installation process off of the Window 98 install cd and reinstall it right over
your current installtion.
The only things that will be changed is you will be set back to DirectX 5 and
Internet Explorer 4.0. Nothing else significant will be changed. All previously
installed programs will still be installed and working if they were working
before.
Why I think this approach is best instead of just reinstalling the BUS MASTERING
drivers is because I don't think you're going to be able to fix them without
some serious deleting of keys in the registry. And this is one problem that
Windows has always been able to fix better then people trying to fix it and the
only way to get windows to fix it itself, is to reinstall it.
Now the only way the reinstallation of Windows won't fix this is if...
A) You have installed BUS MASTERING drivers other then what comes with Windows
98. There will be an .INF file for these in the Windows\INF or Windows\INF\Other
directory. Find it and delete it.
B) The Settings in your BIOS for your Hard Drives are incorrect. Either the
Cylinders, Heads, Sectors or the Gigs they total are wrong or the PIO mode is
set wrong. And DISABLE the UltraDMA in the BIOS if possible. It will still be on
in Windows so you will be running everything in DMA mode instead of UltraDMA
mode. I find this usually is better even though I do know and agree with that
DMA mode is 16 MB/s and UltraDMA is 32 MB/s. Try it both ways yourself after
everything is again running right and you should see that DMA mode makes
everything run smoother and that UltraDMA mode is a bit more choppy.
C) The Master & Slave Jumpers on the hard drives and cdrom drives themselves are
set wrong. If this is so make the c drive master on the primary channel and the
d drive master on the secondary channel and the 1st cdrom/burner drive slave on
the primary channel and the 2nd cdrom/burner drive slave on the secondary
channel.
Oh and if you do reinstall Windows and your video is perfectly readable but the
colors are wrong then just reinstall the video drivers off of cd too.
The goes too for your sound card, modem or any other piece of hardware, scanner
or printer, that doesn't work after the reinstallation of windows.
The whole reason why they wouldn't work is that when windows redetected your
hardware during the reinstalltion it decided to use it's drivers over your
drivers, which it may do according to it's logic, and for any piece of hardware
it doesn't have any of it's own drivers for, even though it has your drivers for
it, it just doesn't use your drivers and doesn't install it. So all you have to
do is install it yourself. This is mostly just finding the correct cd, letting
it autorun, and keep hitting next and ok till you get to finish and the computer
reboots. It's 99% of the time just that simple.
Hope this helped.
Snipley
Kraemz
news:39449511...@news.intra.bt.com...
> Does your BIOS recognised the new hard disc on boot up?
> if not then you may need to set it up manually
>
Yes, BIOS recognizes everything just fine.
Ironically, if I hadn't looked at Device Manager yesterday, I'd have never
known anything was wrong. Well, maybe slightly degraded system performance.
I had simply attributed any sluggishness to my one-year-old installation of
Win98--probably due for a re-install anyway with the amount of software
installs/uninstalls I do in a year, but now is just not a good time!
Kraemz
anyway. My own eyes glazed over when proofreading (which probably should
have given me pause), but I figured it was the late hour of my post more
than anything else.
Your point is well taken, however, and I'll endeavour to keep it brief next
time.
I am grateful to all those tenacious readers who made it through my initial
posting!
I will update this thread once I've had a chance to try some of the many
suggestions.
Kraemz
to avoid a lot of follow-up posts asking for additional information. Since I
was unsure what exactly would be "germane" to the problem, I decided to err
on the verbose side to avoid as many irrelevant responses as possible.
When I'm frustrated by something like this, I tend to want to resolve it
ASAP. I was only trying to be as descriptive as possible to narrow down the
responses. In this type of situation, I think it's better to give too much
information than not enough.
RAHbert <cas...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:3944DEDA...@prodigy.net...
>
> > "Kraemz" <m...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello group:
> >
> > > This is rather lengthy and complex, so those of you with little time
might
> > > want to skip to a more concise posting ;) But of course any help would
be
> > > greatly appreciated...
Ken Blake
news:Wpa15.52$25....@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
> Sorry Bob, (and sorry group, if I've tried your patience)
but I was hoping
> to avoid a lot of follow-up posts asking for additional
information. Since I
> was unsure what exactly would be "germane" to the problem,
I decided to err
> on the verbose side to avoid as many irrelevant responses
as possible.
>
> When I'm frustrated by something like this, I tend to want
to resolve it
> ASAP. I was only trying to be as descriptive as possible
to narrow down the
> responses. In this type of situation, I think it's better
to give too much
> information than not enough.
Be aware that many of us read a lot of messages here every
day. If a message is long and appears to be rambling, my
eyes tend to glaze over, and I just go on to the next one.
Too long a message--too much information--and you may lose a
lot of your audience.
--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup.
> RAHbert <cas...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:3944DEDA...@prodigy.net...
> >
> > > "Kraemz" <m...@nowhere.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello group:
> > >
> > > > This is rather lengthy and complex, so those of you
with little time
> might
> > > > want to skip to a more concise posting ;) But of
course any help would
> be
> > > > greatly appreciated...
Steve
ESDI Head Mismatch probably means that the BIOS parameters for the number of
Heads that your drive has does not match the number of heads that the
partition table on the drive thinks it should have.
By any chance did you ever go into the BIOS and re-detect your drives or
change any of the drive parameter settings when you added the second HDD?
You could try fiddling with these (but note the current settings first!).
If they are very wrong for drive C: it will not boot! Also do not write any
files whilst you are in this mode or you may screw up the drive even more!
It sound like it is the second drive that is the problem. You did set the
Master and Slave links correctly didn't you?
Try using LBA mode or changing the number of heads using in translation mode
for each drive.
If your BIOS has it, change the drive parameter table to 'Auto' - this tells
the BIOS to look at the partition table on each drive and to work out what
type of translation is needed to make it work under DOS.
I have a utility which will test whether the BIOS parameters match the DOS
parameters, but it is at work, so please email me if you want it.
cheers
Steve
Kraemz <m...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:5r_05.198791$55.43...@news2.rdc1.on.home.com...
> Hello group:
>
> This is rather lengthy and complex, so those of you with little time might
> want to skip to a more concise posting ;) But of course any help would be
> greatly appreciated...
>
> Unfortunately I only noticed this problem Sunday, so I have no idea when
it
> started. I did, however add a second HD in the past month, which became
the
> primary master HD. But when I first installed it, everything seemed to be
> fine in Device Manager. I first found the problem after installing the
2.1.u
> release of BlackICE Defender today, which has done nothing but crash my
> system repeatedly. But I don't know how that could have contributed to the
> problem I am about to describe.
>
> The problem is that in Device Manager (System Properties Control Panel) it
> shows a yellow exclamation mark on the Primary IDE controller (dual fifo),
> and a corresponding red "x" on the "GENERIC IDE DISK TYPE46. The
properties
> for the Primary IDE controller says (under device status): "This device is
> either not present, not working properly, or does not have all the drivers
> installed. (Code 10). I've tried upgrading the device drivers as it
> suggests, but this makes no difference, because the best drivers are
already
> installed (says Windows). I've also tried extracting the ESDI_506.pdr file
> (IDE controller driver) from the Win98 CD to replace the current one, but
to
> no avail. The GENERIC IDE DISK TYPE46 properties state (under device
status)
> "This device is not working properly because a device it depends on,
Primary