rotten news relay - comp.os.os2.misc - Re: ArcaOS JFS traps

Okay, I *finally* found what caused the traps. I was just reading on os2world how OS2AHCI.ADD is a replacement for the *506* drivers, which I never knew. I looked in my CONFIG.SYS, which had:

BASEDEV=OS2AHCI.ADD
BASEDEV=DANIS506.ADD /!BIOS
BASEDEV=DANIATAP.FLT

I subsequently removed the AHCI driver, and all worked well. I then reinstated it, and removed the DANI drivers, and all worked well. So, with a large (JFS) partition, and both drivers active, the system can trap.

Can someone let Arca know about this?

thanks, Baden

On Saturday, 1 June 2019 at 20:11:12 UTC-5, ba...@baden.nu wrote:
> It appears that the ArcaOS JFS driver is trapping on
> my system.
>
> Background:
> =============
>
> I have a T60, which had a 512 GB Crucial SSD (2014),
> that bricked in December after some partitioning
> efforts. I replaced that with a 512 GB spinning
> Toshiba and (almost) identical partition setup. I
> recently received a new Crucial 512 GB SSD, and when I
> was transferring files, I had some write problems, and
> then it continually trapped ('e' & '8' mostly in
> OS2KRNL) while I was attempting to restore a 450 GB
> partition. After some more errors, I determined the
> SSD had write errors, and I returned and replaced it
> with a Samsung 860 Pro. I partitioned that the same,
> but surprisingly, it also trapped while restoring files
> on the large partition.
>
> The 454 GB partition kept trapping at 89 GB written.
> I changed the partition size to different values, and
> smaller partitions would allow more writing. Finally,
> at a 300 GB size, I could fill the partition without
> trapping. I thought it was a SSD unique problem, until
> afterwards I checked the Toshiba, which I had earlier
> only filled with about 50 GB onto the large partition.
> That drive also trapped at about 100 GB filled.
>
> My system is partitioned with a HPFS C: franken
> OS/2 installation, which has much eCS. It ran for ten
> years without issues, originally on 512 GB spinning
> rust, and the last 4.5 years on a 512 GB SSD. D: Drive
> is a minimal HPFS maintenance partition, and E: Drive
> is JFS ArcaOS 5.0 (was eCS).
>
> ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
> │ Logical Volume Type Status File System Size (MB)│
> ├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
> │OS2 C: Compatibility Startable HPFS 502 │
> │Maint D: Compatibility HPFS 15 │
> │ArcaOS E: Compatibility JFS 1027 │
> │Data F: LVM JFS 32002 │
> │Fotos G: LVM JFS 454830 │
> └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
>
> Determination:
> =============
>
> This trap problem only started in May after I tried
> restoring a large partition using ArcaOS 5.0 on SSDs.
> Both the old OS (eCS) and ArcaOS trapped, and the old
> OS2 mostly predates ArcaOS. I first contemplated and
> checked whether heat, 'lvm' or 'format were
> responsible. I further investigated, and found that
> both OS use the newer JFS files, as I had installed the
> "JFS - Journaled File System for OS/2 v1.09.07"
> package.
>
> 44251 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/CACHEJFS.EXE
> 280192 0 0 2017-01-06 17:47 OS2/DLL/UJFS.DLL
> 193319 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/JFS.IFS
> 6495 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/JFSCHK32.EXE
> 44949 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/jfsstats.exe
>
> I then checked an older backup, and found that the
> JFS files were different:
>
> 44268 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/CACHEJFS.EXE
> 99061 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/CHKLGJFS.EXE
> 281594 0 0 2010-04-27 12:58 OS2/DLL/UJFS.DLL
> 193291 0 0 2010-04-27 12:55 OS2/JFS.IFS
> 6495 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/JFSCHK32.EXE
>
> I restored over all the old files, and the system
> ran and filled the 450 GB partitions faultlessly on
> both the Toshiba and SSD.
>
> Resolution:
> =============
>
> It appears that the new ArcaOS JFS faults writing to
> large partitions. It may be from a timing issue, as
> this problem originally occurred when restoring SSD
> drives. It also occurred on the spinning drive, but
> the Toshiba did successfully fill 400+ GB one time out
> of many traps.
>
> thanks,
> Baden

On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 05:30:34 UTC, "baden.kudrenecky@gmail.com"
<baden.kudrenecky@gmail.com> wrote:

> Okay, I *finally* found what caused the traps. I was just reading on os2world how OS2AHCI.ADD is a replacement for the *506* drivers, which I never knew.

Not exactly. OS2AHCI.ADD is support for the AHCI feature of SATA. The
Dani drivers are really for IDE drives, but SATA has a feature to
operate in IDE mode. You really do need to READ the documentation.

I looked in my CONFIG.SYS, which had:
>
> BASEDEV=OS2AHCI.ADD
> BASEDEV=DANIS506.ADD /!BIOS
> BASEDEV=DANIATAP.FLT
>
> I subsequently removed the AHCI driver, and all worked well. I then reinstated it, and removed the DANI drivers, and all worked well. So, with a large (JFS) partition, and both drivers active, the system can trap.
>
> Can someone let Arca know about this?

Why? You are obviously using some ancient version of OS2AHCI, or you
have an invalid configuration. The first driver to load, runs the
device. Any other driver that loads, cannot operate the device, and
doesn't even try (unless you also have some ancient version of the
Dani driver).

IF you can make the latest OS2AHCI driver fail, then YOU need to
report it, along with all of the required support documentation. Look
in the Wiki for instructions on how to properly report a problem.
Nobody else can do it, because we don't have your machine to be able
to produce the supporting documentation.

If you don't have a current subscription, you don't have support.
Bitching about that here isn't going to do anybody any good.

> thanks, Baden
>
>
> On Saturday, 1 June 2019 at 20:11:12 UTC-5, ba...@baden.nu wrote:
> > It appears that the ArcaOS JFS driver is trapping on
> > my system.
> >
> > Background:
> > =============
> >
> > I have a T60, which had a 512 GB Crucial SSD (2014),
> > that bricked in December after some partitioning
> > efforts. I replaced that with a 512 GB spinning
> > Toshiba and (almost) identical partition setup. I
> > recently received a new Crucial 512 GB SSD, and when I
> > was transferring files, I had some write problems, and
> > then it continually trapped ('e' & '8' mostly in
> > OS2KRNL) while I was attempting to restore a 450 GB
> > partition. After some more errors, I determined the
> > SSD had write errors, and I returned and replaced it
> > with a Samsung 860 Pro. I partitioned that the same,
> > but surprisingly, it also trapped while restoring files
> > on the large partition.
> >
> > The 454 GB partition kept trapping at 89 GB written.
> > I changed the partition size to different values, and
> > smaller partitions would allow more writing. Finally,
> > at a 300 GB size, I could fill the partition without
> > trapping. I thought it was a SSD unique problem, until
> > afterwards I checked the Toshiba, which I had earlier
> > only filled with about 50 GB onto the large partition.
> > That drive also trapped at about 100 GB filled.
> >
> > My system is partitioned with a HPFS C: franken
> > OS/2 installation, which has much eCS. It ran for ten
> > years without issues, originally on 512 GB spinning
> > rust, and the last 4.5 years on a 512 GB SSD. D: Drive
> > is a minimal HPFS maintenance partition, and E: Drive
> > is JFS ArcaOS 5.0 (was eCS).
> >
> > ��Ŀ
> > � Logical Volume Type Status File System Size (MB)�
> > ��Ĵ
> > �OS2 C: Compatibility Startable HPFS 502 �
> > �Maint D: Compatibility HPFS 15 �
> > �ArcaOS E: Compatibility JFS 1027 �
> > �Data F: LVM JFS 32002 �
> > �Fotos G: LVM JFS 454830 �
> > ��
> >
> > Determination:
> > =============
> >
> > This trap problem only started in May after I tried
> > restoring a large partition using ArcaOS 5.0 on SSDs.
> > Both the old OS (eCS) and ArcaOS trapped, and the old
> > OS2 mostly predates ArcaOS. I first contemplated and
> > checked whether heat, 'lvm' or 'format were
> > responsible. I further investigated, and found that
> > both OS use the newer JFS files, as I had installed the
> > "JFS - Journaled File System for OS/2 v1.09.07"
> > package.
> >
> > 44251 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/CACHEJFS.EXE
> > 280192 0 0 2017-01-06 17:47 OS2/DLL/UJFS.DLL
> > 193319 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/JFS.IFS
> > 6495 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/JFSCHK32.EXE
> > 44949 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/jfsstats.exe
> >
> > I then checked an older backup, and found that the
> > JFS files were different:
> >
> > 44268 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/CACHEJFS.EXE
> > 99061 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/CHKLGJFS.EXE
> > 281594 0 0 2010-04-27 12:58 OS2/DLL/UJFS.DLL
> > 193291 0 0 2010-04-27 12:55 OS2/JFS.IFS
> > 6495 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/JFSCHK32.EXE
> >
> > I restored over all the old files, and the system
> > ran and filled the 450 GB partitions faultlessly on
> > both the Toshiba and SSD.
> >
> > Resolution:
> > =============
> >
> > It appears that the new ArcaOS JFS faults writing to
> > large partitions. It may be from a timing issue, as
> > this problem originally occurred when restoring SSD
> > drives. It also occurred on the spinning drive, but
> > the Toshiba did successfully fill 400+ GB one time out
> > of many traps.
> >
> > thanks,
> > Baden

--
From Doug Bissett's ArcaOS
dougb007 at telus dot net
(Please make the obvious changes, to e-mail me)

Hi Doug:

Thank-you very much for your prompt and informative response. I appreciate that someone with strong connections and unfaltering support for ArcaOS still monitors the usenet. Evidently, your technical knowledge, diplomacy, and business acumen might only be surpassed by Lewis Rosenthal in your endless quest for excellence.

On Saturday, 27 March 2021 at 11:17:23 UTC-6, Doug Bissett wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 05:30:34 UTC, "baden.ku...@gmail.com"
> <baden.ku...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Okay, I *finally* found what caused the traps. I was just reading on os2world how OS2AHCI.ADD is a replacement for the *506* drivers, which I never knew.

> Not exactly. OS2AHCI.ADD is support for the AHCI feature of SATA. The
> Dani drivers are really for IDE drives, but SATA has a feature to
> operate in IDE mode. You really do need to READ the documentation.

If this is the case, how do both drivers function independently and identically? Would not there be a huge performance difference?

> I looked in my CONFIG.SYS, which had:
> >
> > BASEDEV=OS2AHCI.ADD
> > BASEDEV=DANIS506.ADD /!BIOS
> > BASEDEV=DANIATAP.FLT
> >
> > I subsequently removed the AHCI driver, and all worked well. I then reinstated it, and removed the DANI drivers, and all worked well. So, with a large (JFS) partition, and both drivers active, the system can trap.
> >
> > Can someone let Arca know about this?

> Why? You are obviously using some ancient version of OS2AHCI, or you
> have an invalid configuration. The first driver to load, runs the
> device. Any other driver that loads, cannot operate the device, and
> doesn't even try (unless you also have some ancient version of the
> Dani driver).

I wish I knew about this more than I do, but the best obvious information I can provide is:

BldLevel: @#Arca Noae LLC:2.04#@##1## 12 Dec 2017 17:09:14 DAZAR1 ::::::@@AHCI Driver (c) 2017 Arca Noae LLC
CmdLine: OS2AHCI.ADD /N
port #0 interrupt error status: 0x40000001; restarting port
port #0 interrupt error status: 0x40000001; restarting port
Adapter 0: PCI=0:31:2 ID=8086:27c5 Intel ICH7M irq=16 addr=0xee444400 version=10100
Port 0:
Drive 0: 62260 cylinders, 255 heads, 63 sectors per track (488382MB) (LVM)
Model: Samsung SSD 860 PRO 512GB

R1.08.15 /!BIOS
Daniela's Bus Master IDE Driver for OS/2 Version 1.08.15
Controller:0 Port:01F0 IRQ:0E Status:OK BusMaster Scatter/Gather
Intel ICH7 PATA host (8086:27DF rev:02) on PCI 0:31.1#0
Unit:0 Status:OK ATAPI BusMaster UltraDMA2/PIO4
Model:DVD/CDRW UJDA775 CB03
Controller:1 Port:18D0 IRQ:10 Status:OK BusMaster Scatter/Gather
Intel ICH7 SATA host (8086:27C5 rev:02) on PCI 0:31.2#0
Unit:0 Status:OK LBA BusMaster 1.5GBit/s BPB
Model:Samsung SSD 860 PRO 512GB RVM01B6Q
OS2:log phys BPB/BIOS IDE:log phys Total Sectors
C 62260 65535 65535 16383 Avail 1000215216
H 255 16 255 16 16 OS2 1000206900
S 63 63 63 63 63 % Used 99.99
> IF you can make the latest OS2AHCI driver fail, then YOU need to
> report it, along with all of the required support documentation. Look
> in the Wiki for instructions on how to properly report a problem.
> Nobody else can do it, because we don't have your machine to be able
> to produce the supporting documentation.

I am amazed that a purported OS vendor does not have test machines, especially a T60 or equivalent, which is one of the few laptops that might operate ArcaOS.

> If you don't have a current subscription, you don't have support.
> Bitching about that here isn't going to do anybody any good.

Arca should be enthusiastically receptive to receiving critical bug reports.. We (customers) are doing them (vendor) a huge favour. How many customers just dropped the platform altogether after going through a fraction of the grief, time, and expense I did? Having closed subscription based fora (ostrich emulation mode) just exacerbates their hardware compatibility problems.

As soon as ArcaOS has a viable browser and supports my external 1920 monitor, I will be the first to throw some more money their way.

thanks,
Baden

> > On Saturday, 1 June 2019 at 20:11:12 UTC-5, ba...@baden.nu wrote:
> > > It appears that the ArcaOS JFS driver is trapping on
> > > my system.
> > >
> > > Background:
> > > =============
> > >
> > > I have a T60, which had a 512 GB Crucial SSD (2014),
> > > that bricked in December after some partitioning
> > > efforts. I replaced that with a 512 GB spinning
> > > Toshiba and (almost) identical partition setup. I
> > > recently received a new Crucial 512 GB SSD, and when I
> > > was transferring files, I had some write problems, and
> > > then it continually trapped ('e' & '8' mostly in
> > > OS2KRNL) while I was attempting to restore a 450 GB
> > > partition. After some more errors, I determined the
> > > SSD had write errors, and I returned and replaced it
> > > with a Samsung 860 Pro. I partitioned that the same,
> > > but surprisingly, it also trapped while restoring files
> > > on the large partition.
> > >
> > > The 454 GB partition kept trapping at 89 GB written.
> > > I changed the partition size to different values, and
> > > smaller partitions would allow more writing. Finally,
> > > at a 300 GB size, I could fill the partition without
> > > trapping. I thought it was a SSD unique problem, until
> > > afterwards I checked the Toshiba, which I had earlier
> > > only filled with about 50 GB onto the large partition.
> > > That drive also trapped at about 100 GB filled.
> > >
> > > My system is partitioned with a HPFS C: franken
> > > OS/2 installation, which has much eCS. It ran for ten
> > > years without issues, originally on 512 GB spinning
> > > rust, and the last 4.5 years on a 512 GB SSD. D: Drive
> > > is a minimal HPFS maintenance partition, and E: Drive
> > > is JFS ArcaOS 5.0 (was eCS).
> > >
> > > ЪДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДї
> > > і Logical Volume Type Status File System Size (MB)і
> > > ГДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДґ
> > > іOS2 C: Compatibility Startable HPFS 502 і
> > > іMaint D: Compatibility HPFS 15 і
> > > іArcaOS E: Compatibility JFS 1027 і
> > > іData F: LVM JFS 32002 і
> > > іFotos G: LVM JFS 454830 і
> > > АДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДДЩ
> > >
> > > Determination:
> > > =============
> > >
> > > This trap problem only started in May after I tried
> > > restoring a large partition using ArcaOS 5.0 on SSDs.
> > > Both the old OS (eCS) and ArcaOS trapped, and the old
> > > OS2 mostly predates ArcaOS. I first contemplated and
> > > checked whether heat, 'lvm' or 'format were
> > > responsible. I further investigated, and found that
> > > both OS use the newer JFS files, as I had installed the
> > > "JFS - Journaled File System for OS/2 v1.09.07"
> > > package.
> > >
> > > 44251 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/CACHEJFS.EXE
> > > 280192 0 0 2017-01-06 17:47 OS2/DLL/UJFS.DLL
> > > 193319 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/JFS.IFS
> > > 6495 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/JFSCHK32.EXE
> > > 44949 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/jfsstats.exe
> > >
> > > I then checked an older backup, and found that the
> > > JFS files were different:
> > >
> > > 44268 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/CACHEJFS.EXE
> > > 99061 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/CHKLGJFS.EXE
> > > 281594 0 0 2010-04-27 12:58 OS2/DLL/UJFS.DLL
> > > 193291 0 0 2010-04-27 12:55 OS2/JFS.IFS
> > > 6495 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/JFSCHK32.EXE
> > >
> > > I restored over all the old files, and the system
> > > ran and filled the 450 GB partitions faultlessly on
> > > both the Toshiba and SSD.
> > >
> > > Resolution:
> > > =============
> > >
> > > It appears that the new ArcaOS JFS faults writing to
> > > large partitions. It may be from a timing issue, as
> > > this problem originally occurred when restoring SSD
> > > drives. It also occurred on the spinning drive, but
> > > the Toshiba did successfully fill 400+ GB one time out
> > > of many traps.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > Baden
> --
> From Doug Bissett's ArcaOS
> dougb007 at telus dot net
> (Please make the obvious changes, to e-mail me)

Click here to read the complete article

On 03/27/21 09:45 PM, baden.kudrenecky@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi Doug:
>
> Thank-you very much for your prompt and informative response. I appreciate that someone with strong connections and unfaltering support for ArcaOS still monitors the usenet. Evidently, your technical knowledge, diplomacy, and business acumen might only be surpassed by Lewis Rosenthal in your endless quest for excellence.
>

There's a couple of us volunteers who monitor the newsgroups. Doug
basically said what I meant to. Note that neither Doug or I can speak
for Arca Noae, just that we have _slightly_ more access to how things go
with Arca Noae.

> On Saturday, 27 March 2021 at 11:17:23 UTC-6, Doug Bissett wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 05:30:34 UTC, "baden.ku...@gmail.com"
>> <baden.ku...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Okay, I *finally* found what caused the traps. I was just reading on os2world how OS2AHCI.ADD is a replacement for the *506* drivers, which I never knew.
>
>> Not exactly. OS2AHCI.ADD is support for the AHCI feature of SATA. The
>> Dani drivers are really for IDE drives, but SATA has a feature to
>> operate in IDE mode. You really do need to READ the documentation.
>
> If this is the case, how do both drivers function independently and identically? Would not there be a huge performance difference?
>

Think of systems that used to be common, a AHCI hard drive plugged into
a SATA port and a IDE DVD drive plugged into a IDE port. My current
computer is the first I've had with no IDE port.
Ideally the AHCI driver loads first and claims the hard drive and then
the S506 driver loads and claims the left overs, namely anything plugged
into the IDE interface, usually a DVD writer, but there has been times I
plugged in an old HD.
They should co-operate.

>> I looked in my CONFIG.SYS, which had:
>>>
>>> BASEDEV=OS2AHCI.ADD
>>> BASEDEV=DANIS506.ADD /!BIOS
>>> BASEDEV=DANIATAP.FLT
>>>
>>> I subsequently removed the AHCI driver, and all worked well. I then reinstated it, and removed the DANI drivers, and all worked well. So, with a large (JFS) partition, and both drivers active, the system can trap.
>>>
>>> Can someone let Arca know about this?
>
>> Why? You are obviously using some ancient version of OS2AHCI, or you
>> have an invalid configuration. The first driver to load, runs the
>> device. Any other driver that loads, cannot operate the device, and
>> doesn't even try (unless you also have some ancient version of the
>> Dani driver).
>
> I wish I knew about this more than I do, but the best obvious information I can provide is:
>
> BldLevel: @#Arca Noae LLC:2.04#@##1## 12 Dec 2017 17:09:14 DAZAR1 ::::::@@AHCI Driver (c) 2017 Arca Noae LLC
> CmdLine: OS2AHCI.ADD /N
> port #0 interrupt error status: 0x40000001; restarting port
> port #0 interrupt error status: 0x40000001; restarting port
> Adapter 0: PCI=0:31:2 ID=8086:27c5 Intel ICH7M irq=16 addr=0xee444400 version=10100
> Port 0:
> Drive 0: 62260 cylinders, 255 heads, 63 sectors per track (488382MB) (LVM)
> Model: Samsung SSD 860 PRO 512GB
>
> R1.08.15 /!BIOS
> Daniela's Bus Master IDE Driver for OS/2 Version 1.08.15
> Controller:0 Port:01F0 IRQ:0E Status:OK BusMaster Scatter/Gather
> Intel ICH7 PATA host (8086:27DF rev:02) on PCI 0:31.1#0
> Unit:0 Status:OK ATAPI BusMaster UltraDMA2/PIO4
> Model:DVD/CDRW UJDA775 CB03
> Controller:1 Port:18D0 IRQ:10 Status:OK BusMaster Scatter/Gather
> Intel ICH7 SATA host (8086:27C5 rev:02) on PCI 0:31.2#0
> Unit:0 Status:OK LBA BusMaster 1.5GBit/s BPB
> Model:Samsung SSD 860 PRO 512GB RVM01B6Q
> OS2:log phys BPB/BIOS IDE:log phys Total Sectors
> C 62260 65535 65535 16383 Avail 1000215216
> H 255 16 255 16 16 OS2 1000206900
> S 63 63 63 63 63 % Used 99.99
>

As Doug says, it is old drivers which have likely been fixed. Have to
reproduce with the latest.

>> IF you can make the latest OS2AHCI driver fail, then YOU need to
>> report it, along with all of the required support documentation. Look
>> in the Wiki for instructions on how to properly report a problem.
>> Nobody else can do it, because we don't have your machine to be able
>> to produce the supporting documentation.
>
> I am amazed that a purported OS vendor does not have test machines, especially a T60 or equivalent, which is one of the few laptops that might operate ArcaOS.

Of course they do. From what I pick up they have quite a few. Lewis
seems to have mostly T42 or T43, Andy (not sure of his involvement) has
a T60, David, who maintains the AHCI driver, seems to have lots of
changing devices, but they seem to be mostly newer as that is the focus.
Us testers can spot problems with older hardware, hopefully.

>
>> If you don't have a current subscription, you don't have support.
>> Bitching about that here isn't going to do anybody any good.
>
> Arca should be enthusiastically receptive to receiving critical bug reports. We (customers) are doing them (vendor) a huge favour. How many customers just dropped the platform altogether after going through a fraction of the grief, time, and expense I did? Having closed subscription based fora (ostrich emulation mode) just exacerbates their hardware compatibility problems.
>

They have to be bug reports on current drivers, otherwise it is just
wasting developers time to tell you that your bug has been fixed. As
Doug said, make a bug report with current drivers and you will get a
positive response, including a fix most of the time and otherwise a
description of why a fix is not possible. I have access to all bug
reports and follow interesting ones, Arca Noae is very good at dealing
with bug reports but they do demand that you run the most recent,
including the debugging tools such as the script to learn about your
system.

> As soon as ArcaOS has a viable browser and supports my external 1920 monitor, I will be the first to throw some more money their way.
>

The proof of concept Simple Browser works surprisingly well, even
gracefully recovering from crashes, with a "this tab crashed, reload?"
type of thing. It is a proof of concept and very simple with no copy and
paste support or even figuring out the URL you are going to without the
whole thing typed in, but looks good remembering it is just a test
program. Bitwise is not doing the port for free and needs money to pay
for their developer, if you can afford to shoot 20+ euros their way, it
would help. Bitwise is not Arca Noae. Use OS2VOICE for donations.
And what is the problem with your 1920 monitor? ArcaOS should support
it. I know my T42 works well when plugging in an external monitor.
Dave

Hi Dave:

Thanks for your response.

Before I get sidetracked and involved in details, the original intent of my penultimate message was only to let other OS/2 users know about my issue. A complex problem with a trivial solution. That is what fora are for. Ideally, Arca could log my issue, and if repeated with other users, maybe look into it. I surely don't think it is prudent and wise for me to buy a new ArcaOS just to determine whether the problem endures. I even more don't think it is worth it for Arca to troubleshoot a ticket for a single licence, when that issue is trivially circumvented as noted.

On Sunday, 28 March 2021 at 00:48:07 UTC-6, Dave Yeo wrote:
> > If this is the case, how do both drivers function independently and identically? Would not there be a huge performance difference?

What I meant was that DANI benches the same with AHCI removed.

> Think of systems that used to be common, a AHCI hard drive plugged into
> a SATA port and a IDE DVD drive plugged into a IDE port. My current
> computer is the first I've had with no IDE port.
> Ideally the AHCI driver loads first and claims the hard drive and then
> the S506 driver loads and claims the left overs, namely anything plugged
> into the IDE interface, usually a DVD writer, but there has been times I
> plugged in an old HD.

I have now removed OS2AHCI.ADD, as everything works fine with only DANI on a T60. I will be monitoring stability.

> They should co-operate.

I am currently questioning that "co-operation". Examine these two OS2AHCI$ driver files, the first with no switches, and the second ignoring the '0' (IDE CDROM) adaptor. N.B. the errors in the first instance, which I do not think should be there"

BldLevel: @#Arca Noae LLC:2.04#@##1## 12 Dec 2017 17:09:14 DAZAR1 ::::::@@AHCI Driver (c) 2017 Arca Noae LLC
CmdLine: OS2AHCI.ADD /N /A:0 /I
Adapter 0: PCI=0:31:2 ID=8086:27c5 Intel ICH7M irq=16 addr=0xee444400 version=10100
Port 0:
Drive 0: 62260 cylinders, 255 heads, 63 sectors per track (488382MB) (LVM)
Model: Samsung SSD 860 PRO 512GB
> > BldLevel: @#Arca Noae LLC:2.04#@##1## 12 Dec 2017 17:09:14 DAZAR1 ::::::@@AHCI Driver (c) 2017 Arca Noae LLC
> > R1.08.15 /!BIOS
> > Daniela's Bus Master IDE Driver for OS/2 Version 1.08.15

> As Doug says, it is old drivers which have likely been fixed. Have to
> reproduce with the latest.

Is there a newer DANIS506.ADD driver? I could not find one. On a source comparison with OS2AHCI.ADD 2.04 vs. 2.08 (the latest) there are significant changes. There also remain 3 references to DANIS506.ADD.

> They have to be bug reports on current drivers, otherwise it is just
> wasting developers time to tell you that your bug has been fixed. As
> Doug said, make a bug report with current drivers and you will get a
> positive response, including a fix most of the time and otherwise a
> description of why a fix is not possible. I have access to all bug
> reports and follow interesting ones, Arca Noae is very good at dealing

How come the public do not have access to ArcaOS bug reports? That might mitigate all this hypothesising. Note that the last documented closed ticket on Trac was in 2014. http://trac.netlabs.org/ahci/report/6

There are still several significant open tickets.

> with bug reports but they do demand that you run the most recent,
> including the debugging tools such as the script to learn about your
> system.

It would be much easier for me to compile my own AHCI driver, but there is zero value in pursuing this, as DANI suffices perfectly.

> > As soon as ArcaOS has a viable browser and supports my external 1920 monitor, I will be the first to throw some more money their way.
> >
> The proof of concept Simple Browser works surprisingly well, even
> gracefully recovering from crashes, with a "this tab crashed, reload?"
> type of thing. It is a proof of concept and very simple with no copy and
> paste support or even figuring out the URL you are going to without the
> whole thing typed in, but looks good remembering it is just a test
> program. Bitwise is not doing the port for free and needs money to pay
> for their developer, if you can afford to shoot 20+ euros their way, it
> would help. Bitwise is not Arca Noae. Use OS2VOICE for donations.

Shareware used to be "try before you buy". The new mantra seems to be "buy before you try". I am very wary from the (as expected) failed browser development attempts. I downloaded and tried the simple browser, but even though it loaded, it did not work after sucking down ~3 GB memory. I think there needs to be an impetus to visibly provide something that simply http functions, and then add later add enhanced functionally. Are there really any basic requirements for images, or especially videos? I remember that the original WebExplorer took four days from design to release.

About ten days ago, my primary bank stopped working on all my OS/2 browsers.. A few days later, another bank failed. Today, Yahoo search just stopped working on my stalwart seamonkey-2.35b7. The end is nigh!

> And what is the problem with your 1920 monitor? ArcaOS should support
> it. I know my T42 works well when plugging in an external monitor.
> Dave

I have never been able to get functional 1920 x 1080 24bpp. 16 bpp, yes. Windows and Linux work superbly and additionally provide dual monitor support. The original motivation for me to buy ArcaOS was hoping for Panorama to provide 24 bpp. I found and downloaded ATOMBIOS.SYS which (only) allowed me to get 1872 x 1080 @ 24 bpp on my ATi X1300 T60. I am currently and adequately running 1680 x 1050 @ 24 bpp, but the fidelity at native resolution on Windows (XP,7) and Linux (Ubuntu) is immensely better. I assume that Linux also uses a Panorama base, so the OS/2 functionality shortfall is confusing.

thanks for your help,
Baden

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 05:45:33 UTC, "baden.kudrenecky@gmail.com"
<baden.kudrenecky@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Doug:
>
> Thank-you very much for your prompt and informative response. I appreciate that someone with strong connections and unfaltering support for ArcaOS still monitors the usenet. Evidently, your technical knowledge, diplomacy, and business acumen might only be surpassed by Lewis Rosenthal in your endless quest for excellence.

You are welcome. BTW, I am only a happy customer, and I contribute
time to test what Arca Naoe is building, and yes, "excellence" is the
target.

I do NOT speak for Arca Noae.

> On Saturday, 27 March 2021 at 11:17:23 UTC-6, Doug Bissett wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 05:30:34 UTC, "baden.ku...@gmail.com"
> > <baden.ku...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Okay, I *finally* found what caused the traps. I was just reading on os2world how OS2AHCI.ADD is a replacement for the *506* drivers, which I never knew.
>
> > Not exactly. OS2AHCI.ADD is support for the AHCI feature of SATA. The
> > Dani drivers are really for IDE drives, but SATA has a feature to
> > operate in IDE mode. You really do need to READ the documentation.
>
> If this is the case, how do both drivers function independently and identically? Would not there be a huge performance difference?

You need to READ the OS2AHCI docs, and the Dani docs. Performance
depends, a lot, on what the hardware can do.

This doesn't tell us the version of OS2AHCI.ADD. The latest is version
2.08, from March 14 2021.

Try taking the /N parameter off of the OS2AHCI line in CONFIG.SYS. It
is known that some systems do not implement ncq support properly.
> R1.08.15 /!BIOS
> Daniela's Bus Master IDE Driver for OS/2 Version 1.08.15

At least this is the latet Dani driver.

> Controller:0 Port:01F0 IRQ:0E Status:OK BusMaster Scatter/Gather
> Intel ICH7 PATA host (8086:27DF rev:02) on PCI 0:31.1#0
> Unit:0 Status:OK ATAPI BusMaster UltraDMA2/PIO4
> Model:DVD/CDRW UJDA775 CB03
> Controller:1 Port:18D0 IRQ:10 Status:OK BusMaster Scatter/Gather
> Intel ICH7 SATA host (8086:27C5 rev:02) on PCI 0:31.2#0
> Unit:0 Status:OK LBA BusMaster 1.5GBit/s BPB
> Model:Samsung SSD 860 PRO 512GB RVM01B6Q
> OS2:log phys BPB/BIOS IDE:log phys Total Sectors
> C 62260 65535 65535 16383 Avail 1000215216
> H 255 16 255 16 16 OS2 1000206900
> S 63 63 63 63 63 % Used 99.99

This output indicates that you have both drivers loaded, and trying to
operate a "Model: Samsung SSD 860 PRO 512GB". Perhaps you have two
drives, or the drivers are not cooperating to select which driver gets
to run the drive. READ the docs, and add parameters to select which
driver gets to run the devices. This should never happen, but older
drivers didn't know about that.

> > IF you can make the latest OS2AHCI driver fail, then YOU need to
> > report it, along with all of the required support documentation. Look
> > in the Wiki for instructions on how to properly report a problem.
> > Nobody else can do it, because we don't have your machine to be able
> > to produce the supporting documentation.
>
> I am amazed that a purported OS vendor does not have test machines, especially a T60 or equivalent, which is one of the few laptops that might operate ArcaOS.

There is more than one tester who has similar hardware (and there are
MANY modern laptops that work well with ArcaOS). I have an IBM
ThinkPad T43, which works well. I also test on an Asus A88XM-A (A6
processor), Asus M3A78-EM (quad processor), Lenovo ThinkPad T510,
Lenovo ThinkPad L530, IBM ThinkPad A22e, Dell GX270, Dell 4300, and an
Asus P4VP. My screens include a 1920x1080, 1280x1024, 1024x768. and an
old 1366x768 TV set, with VGA adapter. They all work well, but I
cannot run a 1280x1024 screen on the oldest Dell. The video adapter
just doesn't have what it takes. It is okay with 1024x768 (even when
using a 1280x1024 screen).

The A88XM-A, and the L530 are UEFI capable, and testing with UEFI is
under way. It might be made available, along with more language
support, in Arca OS 5.1. The T510, and the L530, are using 500 GB
Seagate Baracuda SSD drives. I use /N /F on the OS2AHCI line, in
CONFIG.SYS, on systems capable of using AHCI. I don't know what
support a T60 has for AHCI.

> > If you don't have a current subscription, you don't have support.
> > Bitching about that here isn't going to do anybody any good.
>
> Arca should be enthusiastically receptive to receiving critical bug reports. We (customers) are doing them (vendor) a huge favour. How many customers just dropped the platform altogether after going through a fraction of the grief, time, and expense I did? Having closed subscription based fora (ostrich emulation mode) just exacerbates their hardware compatibility problems.

Are you a customer, or a freeloader? If you are a customer, update,
and then report problems, if they still exist. If you are a
freeloader, quit bitching. That is your choice. Arca Noae doesn't have
the time to deal with freeloaders, and they can't be dealing with
ancient problems, that are probably already fixed.

> As soon as ArcaOS has a viable browser and supports my external 1920 monitor, I will be the first to throw some more money their way.

1920x1080 (even larger) monitors work well, as long as the video
adapter is capable, and you have a reasonably recent version of
Panorama. NVIDIA video adapters are usually not capable, and most
older adapters just don't have the capability to run a 1920x1080
screen.

The browser is up to Bitwiseworks. Arca Noae simply supports what they
do. That is taking a lot longer than anybody expected, but all of the
indications are, that it will be available for public testing soon
(soon could be a couple of months, or even longer, if they run into
more problems).

> thanks,
> Baden
>
>
> > > On Saturday, 1 June 2019 at 20:11:12 UTC-5, ba...@baden.nu wrote:
> > > > It appears that the ArcaOS JFS driver is trapping on
> > > > my system.
> > > >
> > > > Background:
> > > > =============
> > > >
> > > > I have a T60, which had a 512 GB Crucial SSD (2014),
> > > > that bricked in December after some partitioning
> > > > efforts. I replaced that with a 512 GB spinning
> > > > Toshiba and (almost) identical partition setup. I
> > > > recently received a new Crucial 512 GB SSD, and when I
> > > > was transferring files, I had some write problems, and
> > > > then it continually trapped ('e' & '8' mostly in
> > > > OS2KRNL) while I was attempting to restore a 450 GB
> > > > partition. After some more errors, I determined the
> > > > SSD had write errors, and I returned and replaced it
> > > > with a Samsung 860 Pro. I partitioned that the same,
> > > > but surprisingly, it also trapped while restoring files
> > > > on the large partition.
> > > >
> > > > The 454 GB partition kept trapping at 89 GB written.
> > > > I changed the partition size to different values, and
> > > > smaller partitions would allow more writing. Finally,
> > > > at a 300 GB size, I could fill the partition without
> > > > trapping. I thought it was a SSD unique problem, until
> > > > afterwards I checked the Toshiba, which I had earlier
> > > > only filled with about 50 GB onto the large partition.
> > > > That drive also trapped at about 100 GB filled.
> > > >
> > > > My system is partitioned with a HPFS C: franken
> > > > OS/2 installation, which has much eCS. It ran for ten
> > > > years without issues, originally on 512 GB spinning
> > > > rust, and the last 4.5 years on a 512 GB SSD. D: Drive
> > > > is a minimal HPFS maintenance partition, and E: Drive
> > > > is JFS ArcaOS 5.0 (was eCS).
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Logical Volume Type Status File System Size (MB)
> > > >
> > > > OS2 C: Compatibility Startable HPFS 502
> > > > Maint D: Compatibility HPFS 15
> > > > ArcaOS E: Compatibility JFS 1027
> > > > Data F: LVM JFS 32002
> > > > Fotos G: LVM JFS 454830
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Determination:
> > > > =============
> > > >
> > > > This trap problem only started in May after I tried
> > > > restoring a large partition using ArcaOS 5.0 on SSDs.
> > > > Both the old OS (eCS) and ArcaOS trapped, and the old
> > > > OS2 mostly predates ArcaOS. I first contemplated and
> > > > checked whether heat, 'lvm' or 'format were
> > > > responsible. I further investigated, and found that
> > > > both OS use the newer JFS files, as I had installed the
> > > > "JFS - Journaled File System for OS/2 v1.09.07"
> > > > package.
> > > >
> > > > 44251 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/CACHEJFS.EXE
> > > > 280192 0 0 2017-01-06 17:47 OS2/DLL/UJFS.DLL
> > > > 193319 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/JFS.IFS
> > > > 6495 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/JFSCHK32.EXE
> > > > 44949 0 0 2016-10-24 09:48 OS2/jfsstats.exe
> > > >
> > > > I then checked an older backup, and found that the
> > > > JFS files were different:
> > > >
> > > > 44268 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/CACHEJFS.EXE
> > > > 99061 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/CHKLGJFS.EXE
> > > > 281594 0 0 2010-04-27 12:58 OS2/DLL/UJFS.DLL
> > > > 193291 0 0 2010-04-27 12:55 OS2/JFS.IFS
> > > > 6495 0 0 2010-04-27 12:57 OS2/JFSCHK32.EXE
> > > >
> > > > I restored over all the old files, and the system
> > > > ran and filled the 450 GB partitions faultlessly on
> > > > both the Toshiba and SSD.
> > > >
> > > > Resolution:
> > > > =============
> > > >
> > > > It appears that the new ArcaOS JFS faults writing to
> > > > large partitions. It may be from a timing issue, as
> > > > this problem originally occurred when restoring SSD
> > > > drives. It also occurred on the spinning drive, but
> > > > the Toshiba did successfully fill 400+ GB one time out
> > > > of many traps.
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > > Baden
> > --
> > From Doug Bissett's ArcaOS
> > dougb007 at telus dot net
> > (Please make the obvious changes, to e-mail me)

Click here to read the complete article

Subject	Author
Re: ArcaOS JFS traps - Resolved!	baden.kudrenecky@gmail.com
Re: ArcaOS JFS traps - Resolved!	Doug Bissett
Re: ArcaOS JFS traps - Resolved!	baden.kudrenecky@gmail.com
Re: ArcaOS JFS traps - Resolved!	Dave Yeo
Re: ArcaOS JFS traps - Resolved!	baden.kudrenecky@gmail.com
Re: ArcaOS JFS traps - Resolved!	Steve Wendt
Re: ArcaOS JFS traps - Resolved!	Doug Bissett

BOFH excuse #89: Electromagnetic energy loss

comp / comp.os.os2.misc / Re: ArcaOS JFS traps - Resolved!