On Mon, Feb 18, 2019 at 2:24 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On 2/18/19 4:35 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > > It would be interesting if you can post the exact sizes in blocks of the > SIMH image, and the real disk you copied it to. That would help confirm my > guess that it's a size issue. > > If it's a size issue then one of them is doing it wrong because the > size of an RA81 constant. > > Looking at the SIMH code: /* type sec surf cyl tpg gpc RCT LBNs RA81 51(+1) 14 1258 14 1 2856 891072 */ #define RA81_SECT 51 /* +1 spare/track */ #define RA81_SURF 14 #define RA81_CYL 1258 /* 0-1247 user */ #define RA81_TPG RA81_SURF #define RA81_GPC 1 #define RA81_XBN 2436 /* cyl 1252-1254? */ #define RA81_DBN 2436 /* cyl 1255-1256? */ #define RA81_LBN 891072 /* 51*14*1248 */ #define RA81_RCTS 2856 /* cyl 1248-1251? */ #define RA81_RCTC 1 #define RA81_RBN 17472 /* 1 *14*1248 */ I am presuming that (without actually checking) that these are the numbers returned to RSTS when it queries the disk; if these numbers are different then the h/w, then that could be an issue. I am a bit curious about "+1 spare/track" - I wonder if the h/w reports 51 or 52? -- Charles