El grupo al cual envías entradas es un grupo Usenet. Si envías mensajes a este grupo, cualquier usuario de Internet podrá ver tu dirección de correo electrónico
So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street (literally), an Agfa SnapScan 1236. (Had to cobble up the cable since my SCSI host adapter has a high-density socket but the scanner has the old 25-pin socket.) The cable's a bit ugly, with something of a rat's nest of wires soldered together in the middle, but it works. Scanner works fine.
But since using the scanner, I've found that sometimes--not always--the scanner seems to be causing a hardware fault that causes Windows blue screens. Sometimes I can boot up and do dozens of scans; other times the BSOD appears some time after booting, or when I access the scanner driver.
At first I wasn't sure whether the blue screens were due to the scanner itself or the scanner driver, but I'm pretty sure it's the former, as I never get them when I unplug the scanner.
I'm sure part of the problem can be traced to Windows 2000's rather piss-poor SCSI handling. While it is definitely better than Windows NT, which *really* sucked in that way, it's still problematic.
And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might not be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do many scans with no problems.
I should say that this isn't a critical problem for me. I have another scanner that works about as well (a Microtek using USB) that works about as well; the Agfa just happens to be a bit faster and not as annoyingly noisy. I'm mainly curious why I'm having these problems.
Any guesses? (Educated ones get more points.)
Oh, almost forgot:
o OS: Windows 2000, SP 2 o Advansys SCSI host adapter ("fast/wide"), but I'm using regular old single-ended SCSI II. The Advansys is basically a clone of the old Adaptec 1542, but with two adapters (16 SCSI IDs) on one card. There are two CD-ROM drives (Plextor) on the same bus as the scanner. o Motherboard is an Asus something-or-other, almost 10 years old
-- Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?
<nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote: >So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street >(literally), an Agfa SnapScan 1236. (Had to cobble up the cable since my >SCSI host adapter has a high-density socket but the scanner has the old >25-pin socket.) The cable's a bit ugly, with something of a rat's nest >of wires soldered together in the middle, but it works. Scanner works fine.
>But since using the scanner, I've found that sometimes--not always--the >scanner seems to be causing a hardware fault that causes Windows blue >screens. Sometimes I can boot up and do dozens of scans; other times the >BSOD appears some time after booting, or when I access the scanner driver.
>At first I wasn't sure whether the blue screens were due to the scanner >itself or the scanner driver, but I'm pretty sure it's the former, as I >never get them when I unplug the scanner.
>I'm sure part of the problem can be traced to Windows 2000's rather >piss-poor SCSI handling. While it is definitely better than Windows NT, >which *really* sucked in that way, it's still problematic.
>And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might not be >helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do many scans with >no problems.
>I should say that this isn't a critical problem for me. I have another >scanner that works about as well (a Microtek using USB) that works about >as well; the Agfa just happens to be a bit faster and not as annoyingly >noisy. I'm mainly curious why I'm having these problems.
>Any guesses? (Educated ones get more points.)
>Oh, almost forgot:
>o OS: Windows 2000, SP 2 >o Advansys SCSI host adapter ("fast/wide"), but I'm using regular old >single-ended SCSI II. The Advansys is basically a clone of the old >Adaptec 1542, but with two adapters (16 SCSI IDs) on one card. There are >two CD-ROM drives (Plextor) on the same bus as the scanner. >o Motherboard is an Asus something-or-other, almost 10 years old
1. You should repost in one of the SCSI forums/groups. Try 'comp.periphs.scsi' for a starting point.
2. Can the home-made cable. These are available commercially and are wired properly and will work correctly. SCSI is not the place to cobble a cable together, it is just too sensitive.
3. No terminator? Crap, no wonder it doesn't work. You need to learn the rules for SCSI and follow them exactly.
4. Win 2K does fine with SCSI. It is your cables, card or device.
David Nebenzahl wrote: > So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street
(sigh) SayNoMore. SCSI cables need to have controlled impedances. Even at ASYNC speeds, you can get all sorts of reflections that can cause havoc.
> (literally), an Agfa SnapScan 1236. (Had to cobble up the cable since my > SCSI host adapter has a high-density socket but the scanner has the old > 25-pin socket.) The cable's a bit ugly, with something of a rat's nest > of wires soldered together in the middle, but it works. Scanner works fine.
And you know it works at DC, right. How do you know it works "at speed"?
> But since using the scanner, I've found that sometimes--not always--the > scanner seems to be causing a hardware fault that causes Windows blue > screens. Sometimes I can boot up and do dozens of scans; other times the > BSOD appears some time after booting, or when I access the scanner driver.
> At first I wasn't sure whether the blue screens were due to the scanner > itself or the scanner driver, but I'm pretty sure it's the former, as I > never get them when I unplug the scanner.
> I'm sure part of the problem can be traced to Windows 2000's rather > piss-poor SCSI handling. While it is definitely better than Windows NT, > which *really* sucked in that way, it's still problematic.
I have *7* SCSI busses in my W2K box. I don't see SCSI errors *or* hangs. I'm currently running W2KS SP4 but have run W2K SP4 in the past with comparable performance.
> And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might not be > helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do many scans with > no problems.
Yeah, and if you have sex without a condom your lady friend probably *won't* get pregnant -- MOST of the time. :-/
Do you put 66MHz memory on your 133MHz bus? Do you run with your 5V power supply at 4.4V? Do you overclock your CPU?
(sigh) If you want things to work as they are designed to work, then *use* them as they were designed to be used!
SCSI cables can be incredibly finicky. The Standard even describes *where* certain signals should be located *within* the cable itself for optimum performance. I don't think this is a case of picking nits just because there was nothing on TV that afternoon... (i.e., if they went to this length to codify the standard's requirements, there is a bonfide reason for doing so!)
> I should say that this isn't a critical problem for me. I have another > scanner that works about as well (a Microtek using USB) that works about > as well; the Agfa just happens to be a bit faster and not as annoyingly > noisy. I'm mainly curious why I'm having these problems.
> Any guesses? (Educated ones get more points.)
> Oh, almost forgot:
> o OS: Windows 2000, SP 2
Upgrade to SP4. While you can still find it on MS's website.
> o Advansys SCSI host adapter ("fast/wide"), but I'm using regular old > single-ended SCSI II. The Advansys is basically a clone of the old > Adaptec 1542, but with two adapters (16 SCSI IDs) on one card. There are > two CD-ROM drives (Plextor) on the same bus as the scanner.
If there are "BIOS settings" (like the 1542's SCSIselect) try setting the adapter to run ALL targets in ASYNC mode. But, fix the cable and terminator!
> o Motherboard is an Asus something-or-other, almost 10 years old
> What's the hex number reported on the blue screen. And terminate the > chain. Lots of bsods are driver oriented IRQ_DOES_NOT_EQUAL stuff > accompanied by a hex cod and the culprit modules.
Dunno the hex code (maybe I'll write it down next time it happens), but you nailed the error message. Actually, I think the last time it was something like IRQ_LESS_OR EQUAL, but in any case an IRQ level error.
To answer some replies upstream, I don't give enough of a shit about this to invest anything in a good cable, but thanks for offering. I went for the zero-cost solution, and like I said, it works most of the time. Last night I scanned more than a dozen photos w/no problems.
-- Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?
>> So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street
> (sigh) SayNoMore. SCSI cables need to have controlled impedances. > Even at ASYNC speeds, you can get all sorts of reflections that > can cause havoc.
Yes, I know all that. I simply wanted to see how far I could tempt the angry SCSI gods.
>> (literally), an Agfa SnapScan 1236. (Had to cobble up the cable since my >> SCSI host adapter has a high-density socket but the scanner has the old >> 25-pin socket.) The cable's a bit ugly, with something of a rat's nest >> of wires soldered together in the middle, but it works. Scanner works fine.
> And you know it works at DC, right. How do you know it works > "at speed"?
If you read my post again, you'll see that I've been successful using this cobbled-together cable. Last night I scanned more than a dozen photos with no problems. So I know it works "at speed". (Most of the time, anyhow, with this device.)
The BSOD problem only rears its ugly head occasionally. I know how to solve it (unplug the damn offending cable). I'm simply curious as to why this happens. (Makes this kind of an N. Cook postmortem analysis.)
-- Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?
Meat Plow wrote: > On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl > <nob...@but.us.chickens>wrote:
>>So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street >>(literally), an Agfa SnapScan 1236. (Had to cobble up the cable since >>my SCSI host adapter has a high-density socket but the scanner has the >>old 25-pin socket.) The cable's a bit ugly, with something of a rat's >>nest of wires soldered together in the middle, but it works. Scanner >>works fine.
>>But since using the scanner, I've found that sometimes--not >>always--the scanner seems to be causing a hardware fault that causes >>Windows blue screens. Sometimes I can boot up and do dozens of scans; >>other times the BSOD appears some time after booting, or when I access >>the scanner driver.
>>At first I wasn't sure whether the blue screens were due to the >>scanner itself or the scanner driver, but I'm pretty sure it's the >>former, as I never get them when I unplug the scanner.
>>I'm sure part of the problem can be traced to Windows 2000's rather >>piss-poor SCSI handling. While it is definitely better than Windows >>NT, which *really* sucked in that way, it's still problematic.
>>And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might not >>be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do many scans >>with no problems.
>>I should say that this isn't a critical problem for me. I have another >>scanner that works about as well (a Microtek using USB) that works >>about as well; the Agfa just happens to be a bit faster and not as >>annoyingly noisy. I'm mainly curious why I'm having these problems.
>>Any guesses? (Educated ones get more points.)
>>Oh, almost forgot:
>>o OS: Windows 2000, SP 2 >>o Advansys SCSI host adapter ("fast/wide"), but I'm using regular old >>single-ended SCSI II. The Advansys is basically a clone of the old >>Adaptec 1542, but with two adapters (16 SCSI IDs) on one card. There >>are two CD-ROM drives (Plextor) on the same bus as the scanner. >>o Motherboard is an Asus something-or-other, almost 10 years old
> What's the hex number reported on the blue screen. And terminate the > chain. Lots of bsods are driver oriented IRQ_DOES_NOT_EQUAL stuff > accompanied by a hex cod and the culprit modules.
Isn't the Snapscan internally terminated ? ie only has a single 25 pin data socket.
>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl >> <nob...@but.us.chickens>wrote:
>>> And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might >>> not be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do >>> many scans with no problems.
> Isn't the Snapscan internally terminated ? ie only has a single 25 pin > data socket.
Nope; it has 2 sockets, and no termination switches that I can see, so I'm ASSuming it's unterminated. (Most SCSI devices like this have two sockets for daisy-chaining.)
-- Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?
David Nebenzahl <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote: > On 11/3/2009 2:20 PM Baron spake thus:
>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl >>> <nob...@but.us.chickens>wrote:
>>>> And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might >>>> not be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do >>>> many scans with no problems.
>> Isn't the Snapscan internally terminated ? ie only has a single 25 pin >> data socket.
> Nope; it has 2 sockets, and no termination switches that I can see, so > I'm ASSuming it's unterminated. (Most SCSI devices like this have two > sockets for daisy-chaining.)
With the cable as short as possible and no other devices, that can work acceptably (FSVO "acceptably"). Anything more than a terminated controller at the other end and all bets are off. Add a terminator, preferably active, and it might even be trustworthy.
>>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl >>>> <nob...@but.us.chickens>wrote:
>>>>> And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might >>>>> not be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do >>>>> many scans with no problems.
>>> Isn't the Snapscan internally terminated ? ie only has a single 25 pin >>> data socket.
>> Nope; it has 2 sockets, and no termination switches that I can see, so >> I'm ASSuming it's unterminated. (Most SCSI devices like this have two >> sockets for daisy-chaining.)
> With the cable as short as possible and no other devices, that can work > acceptably (FSVO "acceptably"). Anything more than a terminated > controller at the other end and all bets are off. Add a terminator, > preferably active, and it might even be trustworthy.
Yes. Pretty sure the Advansys is auto-terminating.
The thing I was *really* hoping to discover--and it may be my fault for not having been more clear in my original message--is why the Blue Screen of Death, even assuming some sort of SCSI error due to my cobbled-up cable? I mean, shouldn't the OS be able to handle a SCSI error without abandoning ship? That's what I meant by "piss-poor SCSI handing". I can't imagine, for example, that a Sun workstation would be brought to its knees by a bad SCSI cable.
I'm just wondering what's going on there in driver-land, or HAL-land, or wherever the problem may be.
-- Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?
David Nebenzahl wrote: > On 11/3/2009 5:12 PM Warren Block spake thus:
>> David Nebenzahl <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>>> On 11/3/2009 2:20 PM Baron spake thus:
>>>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl >>>>> <nob...@but.us.chickens>wrote:
>>>>>> And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might >>>>>> not be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do >>>>>> many scans with no problems.
>>>> Isn't the Snapscan internally terminated ? ie only has a single 25 pin >>>> data socket.
>>> Nope; it has 2 sockets, and no termination switches that I can see, >>> so I'm ASSuming it's unterminated. (Most SCSI devices like this have >>> two sockets for daisy-chaining.)
>> With the cable as short as possible and no other devices, that can >> work acceptably (FSVO "acceptably"). Anything more than a terminated >> controller at the other end and all bets are off. Add a terminator, >> preferably active, and it might even be trustworthy.
> Yes. Pretty sure the Advansys is auto-terminating.
> The thing I was *really* hoping to discover--and it may be my fault for > not having been more clear in my original message--is why the Blue > Screen of Death, even assuming some sort of SCSI error due to my > cobbled-up cable? I mean, shouldn't the OS be able to handle a SCSI > error without abandoning ship? That's what I meant by "piss-poor SCSI > handing". I can't imagine, for example, that a Sun workstation would be > brought to its knees by a bad SCSI cable.
> I'm just wondering what's going on there in driver-land, or HAL-land, or > wherever the problem may be.
You're assuming a driver will behave when the hardware doesn't. If the hardware tugs on the IRQ line at 50KHz, what should the driver do? Should it be encumbered with enough smarts to *measure* that rate and "diagnose" the problem? Or, should it just "/* CAN'T HAPPEN */" and crash?
Tie the IRQ from your IDE drive to a 50KHz signal and see how *it* responds. You can do the same in a Sun box and see how it (mis)behaves.
I wouldn't be expecting hardened drivers in an OS (like Windows) that freely allows third parties to write drivers, design hardware, etc.
PeterD wrote: > On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl > <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>> So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street >> (literally), an Agfa SnapScan 1236. (Had to cobble up the cable since my >> SCSI host adapter has a high-density socket but the scanner has the old >> 25-pin socket.) The cable's a bit ugly, with something of a rat's nest >> of wires soldered together in the middle, but it works. Scanner works fine.
>> But since using the scanner, I've found that sometimes--not always--the >> scanner seems to be causing a hardware fault that causes Windows blue >> screens. Sometimes I can boot up and do dozens of scans; other times the >> BSOD appears some time after booting, or when I access the scanner driver.
>> At first I wasn't sure whether the blue screens were due to the scanner >> itself or the scanner driver, but I'm pretty sure it's the former, as I >> never get them when I unplug the scanner.
>> I'm sure part of the problem can be traced to Windows 2000's rather >> piss-poor SCSI handling. While it is definitely better than Windows NT, >> which *really* sucked in that way, it's still problematic.
>> And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might not be >> helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do many scans with >> no problems.
>> I should say that this isn't a critical problem for me. I have another >> scanner that works about as well (a Microtek using USB) that works about >> as well; the Agfa just happens to be a bit faster and not as annoyingly >> noisy. I'm mainly curious why I'm having these problems.
>> Any guesses? (Educated ones get more points.)
>> Oh, almost forgot:
>> o OS: Windows 2000, SP 2 >> o Advansys SCSI host adapter ("fast/wide"), but I'm using regular old >> single-ended SCSI II. The Advansys is basically a clone of the old >> Adaptec 1542, but with two adapters (16 SCSI IDs) on one card. There are >> two CD-ROM drives (Plextor) on the same bus as the scanner. >> o Motherboard is an Asus something-or-other, almost 10 years old
> 1. You should repost in one of the SCSI forums/groups. Try > 'comp.periphs.scsi' for a starting point.
> 2. Can the home-made cable. These are available commercially and are > wired properly and will work correctly. SCSI is not the place to > cobble a cable together, it is just too sensitive.
> 3. No terminator? Crap, no wonder it doesn't work. You need to learn > the rules for SCSI and follow them exactly.
> 4. Win 2K does fine with SCSI. It is your cables, card or device.
> That this thing works at all is amazing.
Agreed, on all the above. The OP needs a commercial cable, & should enable the terminator on one of the drives & put it on the end of the cable. He should also make sure that termination is disabled on the scanner & the other drive.
-- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
David Nebenzahl wrote: > On 11/3/2009 2:20 PM Baron spake thus:
>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl >>> <nob...@but.us.chickens>wrote:
>>>> And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might >>>> not be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do >>>> many scans with no problems.
>> Isn't the Snapscan internally terminated ? ie only has a single 25 pin >> data socket.
> Nope; it has 2 sockets, and no termination switches that I can see, so > I'm ASSuming it's unterminated. (Most SCSI devices like this have two > sockets for daisy-chaining.)
Which device is one the end of the cable? Whichever it is, it needs to be terminated, & *every* other device *must* be unterminated. If you fail to do that, you will get unreliable operation. (If you've done all that, the traditional trouble-shooting technique is to sacrifice a goat to the SCSI gods. ;^)
-- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
David Nebenzahl wrote: > On 11/3/2009 8:43 AM D Yuniskis spake thus:
>> David Nebenzahl wrote:
>>> So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street
>> (sigh) SayNoMore. SCSI cables need to have controlled impedances. >> Even at ASYNC speeds, you can get all sorts of reflections that >> can cause havoc.
> Yes, I know all that. I simply wanted to see how far I could tempt the > angry SCSI gods.
The SCSI gods are touchy, & quick to anger.
>> And you know it works at DC, right. How do you know it works >> "at speed"?
> If you read my post again, you'll see that I've been successful using > this cobbled-together cable. Last night I scanned more than a dozen > photos with no problems. So I know it works "at speed". (Most of the > time, anyhow, with this device.)
> The BSOD problem only rears its ugly head occasionally. I know how to > solve it (unplug the damn offending cable). I'm simply curious as to why > this happens.
Simple: You're getting noise on your handshaking lines that's hammering the SCSI I/F, then the OS, which then pukes on it's shoes. Fix the termination & the problem should go away.
-- W . | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because \|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est ---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
In article <hcpm6p$of...@aioe.org>, D Yuniskis <not.going.to...@seen.com> wrote:
> David Nebenzahl wrote: > > So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street
> (sigh) SayNoMore. SCSI cables need to have controlled impedances. > Even at ASYNC speeds, you can get all sorts of reflections that > can cause havoc.
Not always. I've seen (and owned) a number of SCSI peripherals hooked to older Macs with no terminators and no problems. Strings up to three or four units long, hot switching power to devices as needed, no problems. Period.
In one case, I had such a setup that worked perfectly for years under OS 9, but failed totally when I migrated to OS X; fixed it by adding a terminator, but I believe the problem was still software (SCSI timing was faster with OS X and the lack of terminator became an issue solely because reflections didn't have time to die out).
I'd guess that if a particular setup works most of the time, the problem is more likely to be software than hardware. Check for better drivers.
isw wrote: > In article <hcpm6p$of...@aioe.org>, > D Yuniskis <not.going.to...@seen.com> wrote:
>> David Nebenzahl wrote: >>> So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street >> (sigh) SayNoMore. SCSI cables need to have controlled impedances. >> Even at ASYNC speeds, you can get all sorts of reflections that >> can cause havoc.
> Not always. I've seen (and owned) a number of SCSI peripherals hooked to > older Macs with no terminators and no problems. Strings up to three or
How old were the Macs? Were they using (ancient) 5380 SCSI HBA's?
> four units long, hot switching power to devices as needed, no problems. > Period.
> In one case, I had such a setup that worked perfectly for years under OS > 9, but failed totally when I migrated to OS X; fixed it by adding a > terminator, but I believe the problem was still software (SCSI timing > was faster with OS X and the lack of terminator became an issue solely > because reflections didn't have time to die out).
> I'd guess that if a particular setup works most of the time, the problem > is more likely to be software than hardware. Check for better drivers.
>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl >>> <nob...@but.us.chickens>wrote:
>>>> And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might >>>> not be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do >>>> many scans with no problems.
>> Isn't the Snapscan internally terminated ? ie only has a single 25 >> pin data socket.
> Nope; it has 2 sockets, and no termination switches that I can see, so > I'm ASSuming it's unterminated. (Most SCSI devices like this have two > sockets for daisy-chaining.)
Yes that is what I would go on. Single socket for self terminated and two sockets if un-terminated.
> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:20:47 +0000, Baron > <baron.nos...@linuxmaniac.nospam.net>wrote:
>>Meat Plow wrote:
>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl >>> <nob...@but.us.chickens>wrote:
>>>>So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street >>>>(literally), an Agfa SnapScan 1236. (Had to cobble up the cable >>>>since my SCSI host adapter has a high-density socket but the scanner >>>>has the old 25-pin socket.) The cable's a bit ugly, with something >>>>of a rat's nest of wires soldered together in the middle, but it >>>>works. Scanner works fine.
>>>>But since using the scanner, I've found that sometimes--not >>>>always--the scanner seems to be causing a hardware fault that causes >>>>Windows blue screens. Sometimes I can boot up and do dozens of >>>>scans; other times the BSOD appears some time after booting, or when >>>>I access the scanner driver.
>>>>At first I wasn't sure whether the blue screens were due to the >>>>scanner itself or the scanner driver, but I'm pretty sure it's the >>>>former, as I never get them when I unplug the scanner.
>>>>I'm sure part of the problem can be traced to Windows 2000's rather >>>>piss-poor SCSI handling. While it is definitely better than Windows >>>>NT, which *really* sucked in that way, it's still problematic.
>>>>And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might not >>>>be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do many scans >>>>with no problems.
>>>>I should say that this isn't a critical problem for me. I have >>>>another scanner that works about as well (a Microtek using USB) that >>>>works about as well; the Agfa just happens to be a bit faster and >>>>not as annoyingly noisy. I'm mainly curious why I'm having these >>>>problems.
>>>>Any guesses? (Educated ones get more points.)
>>>>Oh, almost forgot:
>>>>o OS: Windows 2000, SP 2 >>>>o Advansys SCSI host adapter ("fast/wide"), but I'm using regular >>>>old single-ended SCSI II. The Advansys is basically a clone of the >>>>old Adaptec 1542, but with two adapters (16 SCSI IDs) on one card. >>>>There are two CD-ROM drives (Plextor) on the same bus as the >>>>scanner. o Motherboard is an Asus something-or-other, almost 10 >>>>years old
>>> What's the hex number reported on the blue screen. And terminate the >>> chain. Lots of bsods are driver oriented IRQ_DOES_NOT_EQUAL stuff >>> accompanied by a hex cod and the culprit modules.
>>Isn't the Snapscan internally terminated ? ie only has a single 25 >>pin data socket.
> Don't know. Most of the scanners I've owned had a chain port where a > terminator would be installed if its the last device.
I've used both. Usually if its a 25 pin or single socket on the scanner, its internally terminated. If there are two sockets, its probably not and requires terminating.
>> David Nebenzahl <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>>> On 11/3/2009 2:20 PM Baron spake thus:
>>>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 00:27:20 -0800, David Nebenzahl >>>>> <nob...@but.us.chickens>wrote:
>>>>>> And the fact that I don't have a terminator on the scanner might >>>>>> not be helping, either. But as I said, when it works I can do >>>>>> many scans with no problems.
>>>> Isn't the Snapscan internally terminated ? ie only has a single 25 pin >>>> data socket.
>>> Nope; it has 2 sockets, and no termination switches that I can see, so >>> I'm ASSuming it's unterminated. (Most SCSI devices like this have two >>> sockets for daisy-chaining.)
>> With the cable as short as possible and no other devices, that can work >> acceptably (FSVO "acceptably"). Anything more than a terminated >> controller at the other end and all bets are off. Add a terminator, >> preferably active, and it might even be trustworthy.
>Yes. Pretty sure the Advansys is auto-terminating.
>The thing I was *really* hoping to discover--and it may be my fault for >not having been more clear in my original message--is why the Blue >Screen of Death, even assuming some sort of SCSI error due to my >cobbled-up cable?
Corrupted data including an invalid length, causing overwriting of the buffers. First step is terminat the scanner, terminators should be easy to find and probably free if you ask nicely. Try a local computer repair shop that has been in business for over 10 years, likely they have abox of 'em and don't know what to do with it. Pay shipping and I'll send you one. Without termination (and probably without a good cable) it will continue to be spastic...
>I mean, shouldn't the OS be able to handle a SCSI >error without abandoning ship? That's what I meant by "piss-poor SCSI >handing". I can't imagine, for example, that a Sun workstation would be >brought to its knees by a bad SCSI cable.
>I'm just wondering what's going on there in driver-land, or HAL-land, or >wherever the problem may be.
> Your LESS_OR_EQUAL and depending on the hex string is more likely a > driver stomping on memory space allocated by another program/driver > running in the background.
It puked again and I wrote down the offending module, which was asc3550.sys. Looked at this file (with Notepad) and found it was the Windoze SCSI handler. So now I know *where* it's fucking up, anyhow.
-- Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?
> On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 06:59:18 -0800, "William Sommerwerck" > <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I used to run SCSI under W2K, using an Adaptec card, on an ASUS P4T >> board. Never had any problems.
>> If you want to buy the cable I had made for my scanner (it's a long >> custom model made by a Redmond cable company), let me know.
> Yep, any true SCSI fan has a big box of cables and adapters for every > possible combination! Someday I'll toss 'em...
I was hoping to be able to find one at my favorite recycled-goods store (Urban Ore in Berkeley), which has a *ton* of all kinds of cables, kind of a snake pit all tossed together. I sorted through it and *almost* found what I needed (50-pin high-density to 25-pin D), but no go. I was surprised, as there are so many oddball cables in there.
I'm not sweating it. I just unplug the damn scanner when I'm not using it. That's the $0 solution here.
-- Who needs a junta or a dictatorship when you have a Congress blowing Wall Street, using the media as a condom?
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 11:23:47 -0800, David Nebenzahl
<nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote: >On 11/4/2009 3:14 AM Meat Plow spake thus:
>> Your LESS_OR_EQUAL and depending on the hex string is more likely a >> driver stomping on memory space allocated by another program/driver >> running in the background.
>It puked again and I wrote down the offending module, which was >asc3550.sys. Looked at this file (with Notepad) and found it was the >Windoze SCSI handler. So now I know *where* it's fucking up, anyhow.
Not exactly. That's the AdvanSys Ultra-Wide PCI driver, not the SCSI drivers that come with W2K.
There's really not enough info yet to properly assign the blame. Try putting a SCSI terminator on the end of your do it thyself cable and see if it blue screens the same way. Also, try the terminator at the AdvanSys card. It's not a definitive test, but it might give a clue.
In article <hcra2f$k6...@aioe.org>, D Yuniskis <not.going.to...@seen.com> wrote:
> isw wrote: > > In article <hcpm6p$of...@aioe.org>, > > D Yuniskis <not.going.to...@seen.com> wrote:
> >> David Nebenzahl wrote: > >>> So I made up a SCSI cable for the scanner I got off the street > >> (sigh) SayNoMore. SCSI cables need to have controlled impedances. > >> Even at ASYNC speeds, you can get all sorts of reflections that > >> can cause havoc.
> > Not always. I've seen (and owned) a number of SCSI peripherals hooked to > > older Macs with no terminators and no problems. Strings up to three or
> How old were the Macs? Were they using (ancient) 5380 SCSI HBA's?
Everything from the venerable Mac II to Blue & White G3s (well, not *everything*, but a pretty good sample). Disk and tape drives (several brands), scanners, film printers, couple of weird things I don't recall, but *all* of it worked, with no terminators (well, just the one inside the Mac). I just never had a problem, and after I found accidentally that it worked, I'd hot-swap peripherals whenever I needed to -- just make sure the disks were unmounted.
And then... Didn't change anything except to install OS X 10.3 on the Blue & White, and the SCSI chain just vanished -- the Mac couldn't find it at all. Stuck a terminator on the far end, and it all worked again.
Granted, my experience is with Macs, but in that context, in nearly 20 years, I never found SCSI to be very mysterious or tempermental, much less felt the need to go looking for a goat...
> (Had to cobble up the cable since my SCSI host adapter has a high-density > socket but the scanner has the old 25-pin socket.)
Twenty five pin SCSI cabling is, ah, not the most desireable thing to have. It's a Macintosh thing and thankfully not very common elsewhere.
> The cable's a bit ugly, with something of a rat's nest of wires soldered > together in the middle, but it works. Scanner works fine.
You can often get away with some truly impressive stuff on lower speed SCSI setups. I've seen an IBM PS/2 Model 65 that came to me with termination enabled on both hard drives and it *worked* when I got it. I suspect it worked for many years, as it was a Netware server well into the late 90s and quite possibly the early 2000s.
I cleaned the large amount of dust out and it stopped working with SCSI related errors at POST. Fixing the double termination solved it. The errors were baffling until I examined the drives and said "there is no way that can be right".
But if you can, don't use a hacked up, homemade SCSI cable. Cables exist to do what you want and they can still even be found. Price might be an issue, but if you can wait and shop around...it will be less of one.
The following old discussion (short link) http://lnk.nu/groups.google.com/12aa is probably mostly humorous in nature, but it does point out one truth in dealing with SCSI, credited to a John Woods:
"SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat to your SCSI chain now and then."
> I'm sure part of the problem can be traced to Windows 2000's rather > piss-poor SCSI handling. While it is definitely better than Windows NT, > which *really* sucked in that way, it's still problematic.
I've never noticed a particularly serious problem with either. But then again, I've always run brand name equipment from Adaptec, BusLogic, LSI Logic, IBM and Mylex. The few times I've run into less well known SCSI adapters, I have found something that was troublesome.
Well, CD burning was an adventure, but I think it had more to do with what hardware revision of a given IBM MCA SCSI adapter was expected by the Windows NT driver.
> o OS: Windows 2000, SP 2
Some reason why you're not using the latest service pack and post SP4 rollup? You probably should be, unless some situation with software precludes your doing so.
> o Advansys SCSI host adapter ("fast/wide"), but I'm using regular old > single-ended SCSI II. The Advansys is basically a clone of the old Adaptec > 1542, but with two adapters (16 SCSI IDs) on one card.
I guess I'd question how good of a clone it really is. After you fix the cable, that is. The nature of the card (as you describe it) sounds very odd to me.
> There are two CD-ROM drives (Plextor) on the same bus as the > scanner.
Is termination set properly? Don't rely on autotermination to get it right--set it yourself! The devices at each end of the SCSI chain should be terminated. In most cases, the SCSI adapter is electrically in the middle of the internal and external buses. So, you'd terminate the last device on the internal cable and the scanner, leaving the host adapter unterminated.
|
