[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

IDE disks won't interoperate



Situation:

I have a 6Gb 2.5" drive from a laptop, that won't boot in the laptop and
has been replaced by a 10Gb drive. (The old disk is Hitachi DK228A-65,
and the new is DK23BA-10.)

The laptop repairers copied the Windows partition but couldn't handle
the ext2 partitions.  I need to get those partitions onto the new laptop
disk.

I mounted the old 6Gb drive in a desktop pc (running woody, with kernel
2.4.18-k7) as /dev/hdd and copied the files from the ext2 partitions
onto another disk.

Then I put the 10Gb disk onto /dev/hdd, intending to copy back on to
it.  However, the machine won't boot with it there; I get complaints
about lost interrupts.  (The drive is correctly jumpered as a slave,
according to the instructions printed on it.)

From dmesg:
    ide0: BM-DMA at 0xf000-0xf007, BIOS settings: hda:DMA, hdb:DMA
    ide1: BM-DMA at 0xf008-0xf00f, BIOS settings: hdc:DMA, hdd:pio
hda: QUANTUM FIREBALLlct10 10, ATA DISK drive
hdb: Conner Peripherals 1080MB - CFS1081A, ATA DISK drive
hdc: IDE/ATAPI CD-ROM 50XS, ATAPI CD/DVD-ROM drive
ide0 at 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6 on irq 14
ide1 at 0x170-0x177,0x376 on irq 15
hda: 20044080 sectors (10263 MB) w/418KiB Cache, CHS=19885/16/63, UDMA(33)
hdb: 2114180 sectors (1082 MB), CHS=2097/16/63, DMA

On booting, if /dev/hdd is present, the BIOS may complain:

Primary IDE channel no 80 conductor cable installed
Secondary IDE channel no 80 conductor cable installed

and refuse to boot.  Last time, I got round this by auto-detecting each
of the four drives, but the BIOS settings seem to get lost.  If I boot
without the drive; then put it back in and boot again, it shows as 2Gb
instead of 10Gb and needs to be autodetected again.  (At the moment it
won't boot at all with that drive in.)

Can anyone suggest what the problem is and how I can get round it.

-- 
Oliver Elphick <olly@lfix.co.uk>
LFIX Limited

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: