Searching \ for '[PIC:] PIC connected to Multimedia Card' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/devices.htm?key=pic
Search entire site for: 'PIC connected to Multimedia Card'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC:] PIC connected to Multimedia Card'
2003\11\25@232150 by Gordon Williams

picon face
Thanks Brent,  that wiped the mmc clean with all zeros.  I was then able to
reformat it using W2K.

The size of the FAT decreased from 16 to 12 sectors, number of sectors per
track and number of heads are also different than what the card came with.

Anyone know if this is important?

Regards,

Gordon Williams

{Original Message removed}

2003\11\26@005447 by David Duffy

flavicon
face
Gordon Williams wrote:

>Thanks Brent,  that wiped the mmc clean with all zeros.  I was then able to
>reformat it using W2K.
>
>The size of the FAT decreased from 16 to 12 sectors, number of sectors per
>track and number of heads are also different than what the card came with.
>
>Anyone know if this is important?
>
>

Isn't that the old FAT12 (floppy drive) format vs FAT16?
David...

--
___________________________________________
David Duffy        Audio Visual Devices P/L
U8, 9-11 Trade St, Cleveland 4163 Australia
Ph: +61 7 38210362   Fax: +61 7 38210281
New Web: http://www.audiovisualdevices.com.au
___________________________________________

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email spam_OUTlistservTakeThisOuTspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2003\11\26@114557 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
> Gordon Williams wrote:
>
> >Thanks Brent,  that wiped the mmc clean with all zeros.  I was
> then able to
> >reformat it using W2K.
> >
> >The size of the FAT decreased from 16 to 12 sectors, number of
> sectors per
> >track and number of heads are also different than what the card
> came with.
> >
> >Anyone know if this is important?
> >
> >
>
> Isn't that the old FAT12 (floppy drive) format vs FAT16?
> David...

       I don't believe so, FAT12 is not supposed to be supported for a volume that
big. I believe the op is referring to the size of the FAT in sectors. It
sounds like he's using a larger cluster size, which results in a smaller
number of FAT sectors. TTYL

----------------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email .....listservKILLspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2003\11\26@141015 by Gordon Williams

picon face
Hi All,

When the 16meg mmc came it was formatted with FAT12 and when I reformatted
it, the only option in W2K is FAT12.  I was hoping that the format was
FAT16, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

What determines which FAT is used is the number of clusters: FAT12< 4085;
FAT16< 65525; everything above FAT32.

I'm still trying to get my head around the format, but it goes like this for
my 16Meg card.
BootSector is 1 Sector long (512 bytes, Sector 0)
FAT1 is 12 Sectors long
FAT2 is 12 Sectors long
RootDir (starting is sector 25) is 512 entries * 32 bytes/entry = 32 sectors
long
Data starts in sector 57 (cluster 2) and goes up to cluster 3913 with 8
sectors/cluster. Therefore free space is (3913-1)*8sectors/cluster * 512
bytes/sector= 16,023,552 bytes.  Note that 3913 clusters is less than 4085
so it is FAT12.

The spec says there can be 1,2,4,...128 sectors/cluster. (I'm using 8 right
now) Bytes/cluster should not exceed 32K (I have 8*512= 4K bytes).

The largest mmc card that is available is 128Meg.  To see if it will fit in
a FAT12 format, maybe we can work backwards.  If we have 64 sectors/cluster,
ie 32K bytes/cluster (max. allowed) then we would have roughly 128 Meg/32K
or 4K clusters (4096 clusters).  This doesn't include any room for Boot,
FAT1, FAT2 and RootDir, so with maybe a small amount of wastage, the < 4085
cluster limit for FAT12 can be met.

Does anyone have a large mmc card and can tell me what format is being used?

I guess if I could reduce the number of sectors/cluster to 1,2 or 4, this
would push me above the 4085 threshold and mean that a FAT16 format could be
used.  I guess the FAT1 and FAT2 tables would have to be larger.  W2K
doesn't seem to support FAT16 format.  Any recommendations?

Interestingly, on my 16Meg mmc only 16052736 bytes of the 16,056,320 bytes
are used.  The 3584 bytes are surplus and wasted.  I guess that has occurred
because of the numbers chosen for FAT1 and FAT2 size, RootDir size,
SectorsPerCluster etc.

Regards,

Gordon Williams


{Original Message removed}

2003\11\26@170030 by Paul Hutchinson

picon face
>Does anyone have a large mmc card and can tell me what format is
>being used?

I don't have a multimedia card but, my 512Meg CF card is FAT16.

Win2k definitely supports FAT16. When you format in Win9X/2K the OS chooses
FAT12 if the volume is <16Meg, FAT16 if between 16M and 2G and, FAT32 for
volumes >2G.

I don't use WinXP but, according info @ Microsoft, there is an advanced menu
option in the XP format dialog that lets you manually select the FAT type.

Paul

{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email listservspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2003 , 2004 only
- Today
- New search...