Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage (
More info?)
Your turn, Leo.
You called my bluf, now I call yours. Let's see your cards.
"Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:2nitmkF1ceoeU1@uni-berlin.de
> "Leo" <Leo@softjoys.ru> wrote in message news:c05abcbe.0408060648.3811b568@posting.google.com...
> > "Folkert Rienstra" <see_reply-to@myweb.nl> wrote in message news:<2n8h37Fujv3qU1@uni-berlin.de>...
> >
> > > If anything, modern HDDs may not store part of the firmware on the
> > > disks anymore now that flash memory gets cheaper/bigger every day.
> > >
> >
> > Can you specify the name even one of ATA HDD
>
> > (not older than 10 years),
>
> What is it with the "not older than 10 years" thing?
> I certainly hope that you are not suggesting that HDs before that
> did not use Firmware and therefor didn't need (flash e)proms.
>
> > which does not store some parts of the firmware on the disk?
>
> I have no idea.
>
> I do know, though, that my older IBM SCSIs (DFHS, DCHS, ca 1993)
> had 2 sets of firmware, a RAM version and a socalled ROS (ROM) version.
> ROS Revision Level = 41
> RAM Load Revision Level = 4G
>
> The firmware came in 2 files, a full version and a ROS only version.
> The ROS only version could be used to only update the ROS firmware.
> The RAM and ROS version parts were distinctly traceable in the full
> firmware file (first half ROS, second half RAM).
> Both would have the same revision level.
>
> Both versions displayed in the identification line when spun-up.
> If the disk was spun-up by the bios instead of PowerON it would
> display only the ROS revision at the time of identification by the bios.
> After spin-up it would display both the ROS and the saved-on-the-
> platters RAM revision which could be different from the ROS revision.
> The whole firmware was only 320KB, the ROS firmware was only 160KB
> (uncompressed). The DFHS/DCHS has a 1 Mbit flash eeprom.
>
> The firmware was flashed in 2 stages. First the drive was spun down and
> the ROS version was uploaded, then the drive would spin-up again and the
> RAM version was uploaded and saved on the platters.
>
> My (slightly) newer IBMs (DMVS, ca '98,'99) have only one firmware,
> it has grown a bit over 50% to 544KB.
> There is only one file, although there are different files depending on
> what size drive you have. It now says Microcode Revision Level = 0260
> It displays this version whether it has spun-up or not. There are no more
> distinct Rom and RAM parts traceable in the firmware file.
> The DMVS has a 4 Mbit flash eprom.
>
> In some 5 years flash eeprom size has grown a lot more than firmware
> and become so affordable to not have a NEED to store the firmware
> partially on the platters to keep the cost down.
> I have no bullet-proof proof that firmware is not on the platters any-
> more with current harddrives but my DMVSs suggest that the full firm-
> ware is now in ROM when it has a 4 Mbit flash eprom to accomodate it.
>
> > SMART modules, defect lists, event logs, adaptive tables, factory
> > process logs, etc. can not be stored in flash.
>
> Uhh, did I say logs, lists and tables? I must have meant firmware.
> You know, code? Even Arnie said "OS". Pity that you misunderstood.
>
> > And WD, as well as the majority of other HDDs, have also some
> > program overlays, loaded from a disk as required.
>
> Required by whom, or what, why?
>
> >
> > Leonid