PS2 NTFS as Default File system in OPL. Who can make it happen?

[SkyNet]

Hello Everyone. Recently I bought 2TB hdds from Toshiba and started to play with them. They came preformated with NTFS file system and I was surprised how quickly you can copy files through USB 3.0--130 MB a sec. Pretty much impressive.
But I ran into problems when I wanted to copy my ps2 games into it- bigger than 4 GB--ul format--it was not fun.
So I decided to give a try to e2opl--and its ext2 file system. It was not fun also. I thought my hdd was dead. In Linux- "Discs software"- can only do ext4 format. So I used gparted--but after it hdd speed was slow. I recovered hdd through other means, but I do not want to go through ext2 anymore.

We need to move scene forward in ps2 area. We need "Universal File System" supported in OPL in order we would forever forget about 4GB limitation.
WE need "Universal File System" which will work in Linux, Windows and OPL.
EXT2 is not the best choice, since Linux understands it, but Windows not, even though Microsoft loves Linux
Plus Linux world constantly moves to latest EXT implementations--so is not stable for us to stick to ext2. Like Discs in Linux offers EXT4 formating for my HDD.
Windows supports exFAT and NTFS for my HDD, for some reason fat32 is not even offered.
I do not know how much spread among people exFAT really and what limitations of exFAT.
But Anyway in best case scenario would be best if OPL would support them all, so folks would use the one they like, but to my honest opinion NTFS as Default in OPL would be the best case scenario. REasons:

1. You format your USB-HDD or USB-flash drive to NTFS--and never format it again--Linux, Windows and OPL would perfectly fine understand it. Easy migration between Three, since Linux perfectly fine understands NTFS.

2. We go away from Outdated idea to split games bigger than 4GB into .ul format--just simply copy your game bigger than 4GB to DVD folder on NTFS usb-hdd.

3. Possibly no need for Defragmentation--even if there would be--Windows perfectly fine on system level offers default tools for defragmentation--no need to use third-party software--less chances for viruses.

I have acknowledge that for people with slim ps2--USB-HDD is the easiest option, since smb folder in windows and linux became trickier to adjust to work recently, but 4GB limitation really makes it horrible experience to start with.

I have questions:

1. Which the biggest USB-HDD supported size is for PS2 in OPL?
2. Also everyday we have Daily Builds of OPL--But who can really add support for NTFS in OPL?
3. If in beginning it would only be read only support--I would be ok with it.
4. Is it possible even to support NTFS in theory for OPL?
5. Will be Microsoft ok with it if NTFS would be supported in OPL?

I strongly believe that we need to move scene forward and NTFS must have in OPL.
Who can make it happen? Are developers here on scene know how to do it?

Thank you everybody if you also believe that NTFS is essential for USB in PS2.

 

[jolek]

The biggest external HDD which OPL can handle is up to 2 TB (MBR) with FAT32 file system.
If you have 2 partition only the 1st (primary) will be read.

Almost the same thing is with internal HDD. I mean HDD up to 2 TB. You can format it in wLaunchELF.

There was a discussion about it in the (current) root of this app here (+a note about exFAT):
https://github.com/ps2homebrew/Open-PS2-Loader/issues/110.

Discussion about EXT2 and exFAT:
https://github.com/ps2homebrew/Open-PS2-Loader/issues/238.

 

[Berion]

So I decided to give a try to e2opl--and its ext2 file system. It was not fun also. I thought my hdd was dead. In Linux- "Discs software"- can only do ext4 format. So I used gparted--but after it hdd speed was slow.

Not HDD speed but EXT2 handle by file manager. No one today using EXT2 (it is the same ancient as FAT32) so maybe no one testing it on current environments? Just guessing.

I recovered hdd through other means, but I do not want to go through ext2 anymore.

There is nothing to recover as nothing was broken.

We need "Universal File System" supported in OPL in order we would forever forget about 4GB limitation.
WE need "Universal File System" which will work in Linux, Windows and OPL.

Yes, we need good soul which write from scratch other fs module. Mayne peoples before, including me said that, and many peoples know that. But it is not easy task. It is time consuming and PS2 programming (as I heard ;p) is very hard.

EXT2 is not the best choice, since Linux understands it, but Windows not, even though Microsoft loves Linux

Windows 10 have WSL2 which integrate quite good on command line level. You can install prepared i.e Ubuntu from MS Store and all file systems supported in kernel will open to Windows world.

On older, there are several projects which offering drivers or file managers for read/write data in none supported by default fs.

Plus Linux world constantly moves to latest EXT implementations--so is not stable for us to stick to ext2. Like Discs in Linux offers EXT4 formating for my HDD.

It is stable. However, EXT4 is also ancient (this is the same stuff as NTFS, it's time slowly going to end) and currently BTRFS is the fs choice for system and or user data (or BTRFS for system and XFS for user).

Windows supports exFAT and NTFS for my HDD, for some reason fat32 is not even offered.

Because DiskPart, Disk Managment and formatting support build-in Explorer are all piece of junk, which doesn't follow even MS standards. Normal tools like i.e GParted (Linux) and several disk tools (like i.e AIOMEI Backup-something; Windows) support all devices because device mass storage media type doesn't matter.

Large drives are to large for small clusters (their needed count is larger than FAT32 fs table can handle).

I do not know how much spread among people exFAT really and what limitations of exFAT.
But Anyway in best case scenario would be best if OPL would support them all, so folks would use the one they like, but to my honest opinion NTFS as Default in OPL would be the best case scenario. REasons:

NTFS is bloated, slow and needs huge driver.
exFAT is quite good choice, for sure a lot better as this fs is a lot faster than all NTFS versions.

However, the best choice would be F2FS if we talking about simplicity and speed but it's support is not by default in many Linux distributions, and of course not in Windows at all by any software.

Three, since Linux perfectly fine understands NTFS.

No, ntfs-3g doesn't fully support NTFS as this was achieved by reverse engineering.

Possibly no need for Defragmentation--even if there would be--Windows perfectly fine on system level offers default tools for defragmentation--no need to use third-party software--less chances for viruses.

You don't need to use defragmentation tools other that Windows build-in for FAT32. And defragmentation is mandatory today and tomorrow because of USB speed in PS2 (below USB v1.1).

Will be Microsoft ok with it if NTFS would be supported in OPL?

As long as custom implementation and none commercial project, yes. But exFAT has been opened ~year ago.

 

[SkyNet]

Thank you guys for information. I really appreciate it.

As far as I understand from thread at github/ opl, only ext2 was implemented , and ntfs and exfat were both discarded?

So it means that we stay so far with fat32 and ext2 on usb obstruction layer?

Is exFAT became opensource in order to become more popular and more adopted?

If to compare fat32 and exfat, both can be corrupted if do gamereset on gamepad?

So maybe exfat would be better choice than ntfs? Plus exfat is successor to fat32.

I think that to add support for linux fs makes not big sense since people behind linux dostros like to implement constantly new versions of fs, we need something more constant and supported for long time.

Is microsoft planning to discontinue ntfs in near future? Or replace it?

How long it would take to write drivers for ntfs and exfat and would they fit in ram ? Is it possible to keep driver on hdd if opl size would be big with it inside opl?

I have three ps2 fat and all three have i.Link port. Just wonder if i missed something on scene, which file systems support OPL on firewire s400 drives?

 

[sandungas]

 

[jolek]

ext2 was implemented only for test. It is not in an official beta stage.

If you want to test i.Link... you can do it with PS2ESDL:
https://www.psx-place.com/threads/playstation-2-external-storage-device-games-loader-ps2esdl.19184/.
Additionally look for "Plugins" tab to download the plugin to suport i.Link.

Try to test both version (0.821 & 0.825), because some games might be unplayable with 0.825 and conversely.

 

[Berion]

As far as I understand from thread at github/ opl, only ext2 was implemented , and ntfs and exfat were both discarded?

exFAT or NTFS cannot been discarded while never implemented.

If one day someone will write USB module for i.e exFAT support, it will be added or even replace old ones (we would no longer need FAT12, FAT16 and FAT32, just like we would no longer need segments+index support). But reality today is that we have what we have and is better than nothing (oh, and faaaar way better than in days of USB Extreme/Advance).

So it means that we stay so far with fat32 and ext2 on usb obstruction layer?

I'm not Nostradamus but answer current situation is yes for sure. We just don't have anyone who could spend so much time to write from scratch filesystem driver. Doesn't help also that C is no longer popular language and PS2 environment is not friendly beast.

Is exFAT became opensource in order to become more popular and more adopted?

Documentation is open. So everyone can based on to write driver which would fully support this filesystem, while earlier only developers who paid the license and write NDA can have access to in addition source samples (like i.e Samsung, LG etc.) and everyone who took the code based on reverse engineering. In example, after docs open, programmers from Linux kernel working on it to move it from fuse crippled implementation to full support, in addition in kernel.

If to compare fat32 and exfat, both can be corrupted if do gamereset on gamepad?

File system corruption occurring by many circumstances. BTW: I never heard of such bug in OPL. ;p

So maybe exfat would be better choice than ntfs? Plus exfat is successor to fat32.

Far more better.

I think that to add support for linux fs makes not big sense since people behind linux dostros like to implement constantly new versions of fs, we need something more constant and supported for long time.

Only in Windows world there is file system which stays for decades in unchanged form (last time when NTFS was expanded was in Windows Vista). Hard to say if this is good or bad, everything have pros and cons.

Is microsoft planning to discontinue ntfs in near future? Or replace it?

They already made successor but still is unfinished and some tools are unfinished. It is called ReFS and will replace NTFS one day. Premiere have on... Windows 8 Server.

However, all apps from MS will support FAT32, exFAT and all NTFS version for long long time. They are to popular and to widely used on all devices across the world to remove support for them just like that.

 

[SkyNet]

Hey Jolek, I think about investing in near future into firewire cables and firewire hdd enclosures in order to test i.Link compatibility and operability, I am sure that i.Link is underestimated by scene(Apple abondoned it in favor of thunderboolt, but I know how good usb 2.0 productivity on xbox360 external hdd is--it is awesome, so I am sure that similar interface from Apple and Sony can also do miracles and stutter which present with usb 1.0 is non-existent,

at least it should have better performance than usb 1.0 since it is accordibgly to wikipedia s400 version(400 megabit/sec half duplex( 393.216 Mbit/s)-- 49.152 MB/s)) which ps2 supports--the same as usb 2.0, or actually almost twice as good since usb 2.0 most of the time has around 20MB a sec.

I think that i.Link is a "Game-Changer". Also I think that OPL should have in settings possibility to have i.Link as tab next to USB, Ethernet and so on.

The thing is that wirefire cables are pretty cheap on amazon, but enclosures 50 dollars. But if its worth it--then no question.

Berion I just wonder how happend so that USB driver used in OPL already has support for FAT32? Even FAT32 needs to be written by someone into driver as far as I understand?

I know that we all are busy with jobs and families, and have no time for everything, but what if we here on web-site would make advertisment:

Wanted OPL USB PS2 exFAT Driver developer. After job is done everybody who visits site could donate 1 dollar, so it would be like freelance job for person who can do it ?

Just idea. Trying to find solution.

Like for example there are change it or kickstarter web-sites which surprisingly get money if idea is good.

 

[Berion]

Games compatibility is lower than OPL because it was stopped development many years ago, while OPL is constantly work on. What I want to say is do not put to much faith in this app.

It happen that someone was wrote it. ^^ Start from FAT12 and FAT16 (which probably is still in code) and end with current form. In those days, exFAT was obscure fs with uncertain future and FAT32 was supported everywhere by everything, free from licensing and well documented (on top of that, MS was very aggressive for companies which implementing exFAT by their own way).

Better idea would be open bounty in one of the popular portals where everyone can donating. In that way ReSharp has born (module for PlayStation TV forcing output native resolution scaled by nearest neighbour algo to displaying clean image instead of blurry shit).

If You asked me, I would love to see dropping old FAT family support for exFAT, for external mass storage devices. In 2021 it is obvious thing. And dropping HDL/OPL raw partitions for PFS file system support for internal storage (if this doesn't lowering game compatible; Sjeep made raw access for a reason, maybe this reason was to fit driver as small as possible or maybe just PFS in those in those days wasn't stable, I dunno, I'm not a programmer). But there is no one who could or want do this so at least be happy what You already have. ^^

 

[SkyNet]

Is it possible to port i.Link driver from ps2esdl into OPL?

 

[Berion]

Everything is possible. ^^ But this change, from simple logic point of view, require changes in UX, and if UX then also in skinning system which makes all earlier skins broken.

 

[jolek]

PS2 has USB 1.1 ports:
https://www.psx-place.com/threads/common-misconceptions-about-the-ps2-scene.20485/.

I never used IEEE 1394 to be honest, I do not even know if FireWire and i.LINK are compatible with each other.
Try to check it.

The main problem with i.LINK was its support...
Not many people seems to use it, it was more like a curiosity...
I have never seen any bug report or something similar at least at an old PS2ESDL thread:
https://web.archive.org/web/2016081...al-storage-device-games-loader-ps2esdl-63375/.

EDIT: It seems that Algol made an i.LINK list:
https://www.psx-place.com/threads/n...opl-who-can-make-it-happen.32401/#post-274117.

 

[psydefx]

And dropping HDL/OPL raw partitions for PFS file system support for internal storage (if this doesn't lowering game compatible; Sjeep made raw access for a reason, maybe this reason was to fit driver as small as possible or maybe just PFS in those in those days wasn't stable, I dunno, I'm not a programmer).

this would be sweet

 

[Algol]

Bonjour vous tous et bonne année 2021.

Il y a bien longtemps, j'ai créé une liste de compatibilité pour le HB "PS2ESDL-0821 OB". Les jeux testés sont de format PAL presque exclusivement. Ils ont été testé assez longtemps pour que les paramètres indiqués soient sûrs. Les tests ont portés sur des clefs USB2, voire sur un DD dans un boitier avec adaptateur USB2, voire aussi un boitier iLink (adaptateur FireWire pour APPLE).

Les résultats de mes tests sont dans la liste. Voici le lien :
==> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkthiKwj1VJMdFZSelJhOUVIMTQ3dE9WaU5IN09ZYWc#gid=0

Cordialement.

Algol "le papy".


Hello everyone and happy new year 2021.

A long time ago, I created a compatibility list for the HB "PS2ESDL-0821 OB". The games tested are almost exclusively in PAL format. They have been tested long enough for the stated parameters to be safe. The tests focused on USB2 keys, or even on a HDD in a box with USB2 adapter, or also an iLink box (FireWire adapter for APPLE Computers).

The results of my tests are in the list. Here is the link :
==> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AkthiKwj1VJMdFZSelJhOUVIMTQ3dE9WaU5IN09ZYWc#gid=0

Cordially.

 

[SkyNet]

Hey Jolek, Firewire(Apple) and i.Link(Sony) are just different names for the same thing. They just used in the beginning different connectors, Sony used 4wire connector without power supply, and apples version had 6 wires, so additional two wires used to power on connected device, so it was s400 version also. Then appeared FireWire 800 which had different connector, but you still can connect s400 to s800 through cable. Then appeared s1600 and s3200 and then apple decided to switch to thunderbolt.

Sony used i.Link in cameras.
Whats interesting is that two of my laptops from 2007 have i.Link ports.

Looks like game compatibility through i.Link was very good back then, and where it did not work it could be any reason, either not defragmented or maybe just i.Link was too fast. If speed can really achive 49MB a sec--it is very close to internal hdd. Even on internal Hdd I suppose some games had issues, or am I wrong and all games work perfectly fine from internal hdd on ps2?
Hey Algol, thank you for testing, looks very interesting. If work on ps2esdl would go on, maybe compatability would grow even higher?

The question is: How to add i.Link driver into official OPL Builds? Open subject on github/opl?

I understand that skins possibly could become not compatible,but I think that support for i.Link is more valuable and important(USB, Ethernet, HDD, SMB, i.Link),
plus skins are possible to remake eventually. At least old skins can work on old opl builds-nobody takes it away.

I just do not think that it is right that we want to use usb--which is slow, and here we have i.Link which offeres higher speed and we ignore it. I think we should add to OPL everything we can for loading games, and people will choose what suits them best to use.

there actually plenty of firewire stuff on amazon. It even possible to add firewire port to any pc through pci card...

I just wonder, we use ethernet only for shared folder--Samba protocol, but I believe that network protocols change, lets say Samba will become obsolete, which I think version 1.0 already is--Do we have backup plan which other protocol we could use for network play over ethernet?
Could we use DLNA or other servers in order to share ps2 games over ethernet cable?
In other words could we add more network protocols in order to be on safe side or at least in order people could chose protocol which suits them best?
Just wonder which protocols support latest NAS devices? Do they still support Samba?

Found one beast NAS which supports 64TB HDD in 4 bays--could store everything, music, films even Linux for ps2 and plus games of course and all through ethernet cable...

 

[Berion]

BTW: I don't think You will achieve full iLink speed. It is better than USB 1.1 but not so much as specifications tells. There is other factors from which transfer depending, not controller on input alone. I have read somewhere about it but forgot the place (psx-scene.com maybe?).

I have PS2 with this port but don't have cable or pendrive for it, so I don't know for sure, never tested this @sp193 app.

 

[jolek]

The question is: How to add i.Link driver into official OPL Builds? Open subject on github/opl?

You can add feature request here:
https://www.psx-place.com/threads/open-ps2-loader-requests-suggestions-ideas.29712/.

Or try at GitHub:
https://github.com/ps2homebrew/Open-PS2-Loader/issues.
You should be able to choose between a FR and an issue:

I just wonder, we use ethernet only for shared folder--Samba protocol...

SMB:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Message_Block.
Samba:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samba_(software).

OPL uses obsolete SMBv1, there is a plan\FR to also supports SMBv2 or SMBv3:
https://github.com/ps2homebrew/Open-PS2-Loader/issues/86.
Unfortunately there wasn't any breakthrough since 30\08\2020 in this matter.

Additionally from what I remember there is a test build of wLaunchELF with a SMBv2 support:
https://www.psx-place.com/threads/smblaunchelf.32434/.
Unfortunately this version does not launch ELF files, but you can copy\menage files through network.
More info:
https://github.com/ps2homebrew/wLaunchELF/issues/44#issuecomment-687723843.

 

[bucanero]

OPL uses obsolete SMBv1, there is a plan\FR to also supports SMBv2 or SMBv3:
https://github.com/ps2homebrew/Open-PS2-Loader/issues/86.
Unfortunately there wasn't any breakthrough since 30\08\2020 in this matter.

the author of libsmb2 was working on doing a PS2 port ... I remember he told me about it when I did the PS3 port of his library. He was also building a "mini" version to to keep the memory usage at a minimum.

and that reminds me that now that we have the libraries for PS3, we still need to integrate them with any of the file managers, so you could browse and copy files directly from your shared folders.

 

[SkyNet]

Hey Berion its probably because how sony designed ps2? Like why in a world sony would add not usb 2.0 but 1.1? They either wanted to save cost of building system or they just been ok with 1.1? I know that sony started design ps2 probably in 1998 or 97 and most likely usb 2.0 didi not exist yet? I see, it was introduced in 2001.

But at same time ps2 slim which was introduced i think in 2004 did not have usb 2.0 either.

I wish Sony would have ethernet port installed in PS2 fat initially, then things would be completely different, and plus if sony would make progressive scan mandotory in every game if console connected through component cable--would make more sense, interlace video for interlace cable and progressive video for progressive cable. Threy needed to take it into account when designing--but now its too late. Its a history already...

I think the problem with i.Link not full spec performance could be related to how ps2 built--its not like personal computer which has hdd and from hdd os could pump from swap file everything and anything--ps2 works like Preprogrammed game controler--as soon as it gets commands--it executes them, but 32mb of ram makes it probably capable acheive portion of what firewire could do...

Hey Jolek thank you for links, I think it will come in really handy. How much more advanced SMB3 is comparable to SMB1? Does it improve productivity and security?

What about other protocols and servers? Does it make sense and is it even possible to use in addition to smb other protocols? Can ps2 even use other protocols?
Is Samba really unique and NASs always will support Samba? I just wonder how much longivity Samba will have? Because when you buy NAS you want to make sure it will serve a good service to ps2 .

Hey Bucanero I think its a very good idea. How much time passed since he started his work on porting? Who knows maybe its alreay comes to finishing stages? Would be awesome to be able to use latest version of samba on ps2.

Created thread at GitHub:
FireWire/i.Link Driver for loading games though i.Link port on PlayStation 2 in OPL. · Issue #350 · ps2homebrew/Open-PS2-Loader (github.com)

Lets hope that we will have even more advanced OPL.

 

[Berion]

From Sony point of view, USB 2.0 was pointless while have higher cost and 1.1 (it doesn't reach that speed anyway and it is not exactly USB 1.1 if I remember correctly, or my information is outdated) is sufficient for all external devices they plan to support (EyeToy, wheels, keyboard, mouse etc.). They chose Memory Cards for game saves while flash drives already be popular back in time (because they put on them ridiculous price; I bought Kingstone DataTraveler 512MiB with ~4MiB/s write for the cost of 8MiB PS2MC, slow as hell to the end. ).

For NAS, depend of cost and installed OS, You have various of protocols and standards supported by them. Samba was made by Microsoft as I remember and now have few revisions, and due to attack kind some last time, they removed SMBv1 support in Windows 10, so the rest of producers follow this path. I.e Apple have their own standards and for most peoples on Linuxes, NFS and/or SFTP is the choice for data transfer over network. For streaming purposes there are also few. SMB is ancient but simple and well tested.

There is also one another approach for games storage. SDXC on Memory Card Adaptor but I don't follow this stuff. @TnA should have known more about it or @wisi (if my memory doesn't fault me ;p).