Jump to content

chue

+AtariAge Subscriber
  • Posts

    661
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by chue

  1. Perhaps some clues here: https://github.com/ChuckyGang/DiagROM/blob/master/DiagRom Codes.txt Looks to me like chipmem errors, but I could be wrong.
  2. Definitely clean the heads and clean and lubricate the drive rails. I use a cotton swab and 90% alcohol to clean; light oil on the rails of the drive head.
  3. Maybe you can put a fan on it and see if that makes a difference. A bit of moving air should be fine - if the errors go away, then you know it is the chips running hot.
  4. The website seemed to have gone offline and so I checked archive.org, and found that it has a new home at whtech: (source: https://web.archive.org/web/20231024143202/http://shawweb.myzen.co.uk/stephen/TI.htm)
  5. In preparation for the RAM chips arriving in the mail, I desoldered RAM chips U22 and U25. I put some sockets in and then put back the old chips. I ran @Fritz442's chip tester and got an unexpected result. Instead of getting stuck bits "42" or "24" I got "06" instead. It turns out I desoldered the wrong chip (U26). So I went back and socketed U25. It wasn't easy desoldering the RAM in my unheated garage where the temps were below freezing. In the process I ended up damaging some caps near the sockets, but was able to replace them. Here's the final result with 3 new caps (a half-sized yellow one, and two brown) and the 3 socketed chips (U22, U25, U26): According to the schematics, all the small yellow caps near the RAM are 10nF. The Larger blue ones are 10uF, 25V. Also, as replacements for the two 4116s I used two 4164s. The 4164s require the mod in the following thread: And here are the RAM test results:
  6. I was able to get the disk image on the Nano, and then from there save it to the minimem. When run from the minimem, it seems to confirm the 2 stuck bits. However, I am unsure how to interpret the "Chip Test" results:
  7. Looks good for me. All my unit tests passed
  8. Hello @Fritz442, thank you. I have both modules, but no disk storage. I think I will not be able to run your application. There may be a way to get the application onto my nanoPEB, and then onto the Minimem. It's been a while since I've used the nano, so I'm unsure if that is possible.
  9. I wrote a Mini Memory BASIC program that writes 00 and FF to each of the ranges (2000, A000). It then immediately reads back the value - if the written and read values are different, it prints them to the screen. It does this for 64 bytes at the beginning of each range. 10 DIM NVAL(2) 20 DIM MSTART(2) 30 NVAL(1)=0 40 NVAL(2)=255 50 MSTART(1)=8192 60 MSTART(2)=-24576 70 FOR K=1 TO 2 80 PRINT "TESTING";MSTART(K) 90 FOR I=MSTART(K)TO MSTART(K)+64 100 FOR J=1 TO 2 110 CALL LOAD(I,NVAL(J)) 120 CALL PEEK(I,P) 130 IF P=NVAL(J)THEN 150 140 PRINT I;":";NVAL(J);"<> ";P 150 NEXT J 160 NEXT I 170 NEXT K 180 PRINT "DONE" I ran it several times and got errors when writing "00" to differing addresses, so the errors don't happen consistently. No errors occurred when writing "FF". At this point I might just start desoldering RAM chips, but will need to order some replacements. I will start by replacing the 3rd chip from the right in the bottom row of chips in the 32k expansion card, hopefully this is bit 3. If that doesn't work I'll replace the 3rd from the left. It's 50-50 at the moment. Finally I'll look at replacing any related buffer chips.
  10. Unfortunately I do not have an extra card. However, I do have a nanopeb which I should try running these tests on. It would rule out errors in the TI and in the testing software. I think eventually I will have to test the buffer chips in the cable and in the RAM card. I do think the flex cable is ok. Continuity seems ok on all pins, so I don't think there are breaks in the cable. I agree it does seem to show two bits stuck, and only on the even byte. Here's the other half of the test which writes 1s to each bit position: The other interesting thing is that when I tested with EasyBug, the one stuck bit did not show itself when I wrote to the even byte. It only manifested when I wrote to the odd byte. For example, I would write "00" to A000, and then read back the value - it was zero. Then I wrote "00" to A001. Reading back A001 showed 00, but reading back A000 showed "04". I assume this has something to do with the fact that the processor does not write bytes - it can only write words, so when writing a byte it does a word read, update, and word write. My next step will be to try this and report back, I just have to get some time to do it.
  11. I actually found one on AA. It was in BASIC and I manually typed it in. When I ran it it showed 8 bad chips. It’s possible I mistyped something. Edit: I used this one:
  12. I did do some debugging with EasyBug - I confirmed that Cxxx and Exxx show different data. When I write to one range, it does not show up in the other range. Additionally, I wrote 00 and FF values to two consecutive bytes in each of these ranges: 2000, C000, A000, and E000: The FFs were written and read ok, but when writing 00s, there looks like a single bit is stuck on 1 in the 2000 and A000 ranges. At this point this looks like one bad RAM chip, does that make sense?
  13. I have done a little surgery on the flex cable. I actually found 2 cut lines, one on each edge of the flex cable. These were lines for pins 1 (CRU) and 44 (8V). The 8V line was showing continuity previously, because it is also tied to another 8V line (pin 42). So the good news is that the TI boots now with the RS232 card installed. I will probably test that later on. The bad news is that this didn't change the RAM issue; this makes sense since the broken lines had nothing to do with any address/ data lines. More on the RAM issue in the following post.
  14. All of my unit tests pass with the 1.26 patches. Here's just comparing the size for one of my test apps: patch / size 1.25 "A" / 6528 bytes 1.25 "B" / 7552 bytes 1.26 / 6784 bytes Much better in terms of size with the latest release. No I don't assume anything in terms of register usage. Normally I save any registers I use, and then restore them afterwards. I thought that the crt0 files might hard code the stack register, but in looking at a couple of mine (crt0.asm, crt0.c) they both use the alias "sp" instead of any register.
  15. Thanks. I confirmed it is pin 1. In the schematic, pins 42 and 44 are 8V and are tied together, at least on the PEB side. I checked for continuity on both sides of the cable to see if I could locate pins 42 and 44. Indeed I see continuity on the left side (where I've marked pins 42 and 44 below): So my next step will be to see if I can fix the wire that goes between the two pin 1's.
  16. I did something that I said I would never do, which is purchase a Peripheral Expansion Box. It came with 4 TI branded cards: 32K RAM, RS232, Disk Controller, and Flex Cable card. Initially the TI would not boot with all 4 cards in the PEB. So I took out the RS232 card and then the TI would boot. I was able to see the 32K RAM in XB; however, when I ran @jedimatt42's 32K RAM tester half the RAM appeared bad. Here's what I've done since: - Removed all the cards and cleaned all the contacts on the cards themselves, the PEB, the flex cable, and the TI. - Measured the voltages in the PEB using the Molex cable. I get these voltages, which seem ok: +5.00, +11.71 - Inserted just the 32K and flex cable card; I reran the RAM diagnostic above and get the same result. - The flex cable has several small rips (tears) in it and so I took it apart to test for continuity. All lines in the cable show continuity, except one - the yellow arrows below indicate the potentially faulty line: So my question at the moment is, should this line in the cable show continuity?
  17. Thank you @khanivore for your work on TMS9900 GCC! I had downloaded the 1.25 patches from the dev branch yesterday; today I pulled down the latest 1.25 patches from main. In comparing the two I see that in one of my projects the compiled output went from 6528 bytes (yesterday's 1.25 patch) to 7552 bytes (today's 1.25). In another of my projects targeting the 8K cartridge ROM space, the output was smaller than 8K yesterday but today is larger. I still need to investigate where the size difference comes from, but just wanted to post this feedback.
  18. Since we are talking about UV erasers, I once used a toothbrush UV sanitizer. I didn't have an EPROM UV eraser at the time, and decided to try my luck with my sanitizer. Works like a charm.
  19. Just to close on the above, these are code issues on my end and not issues in the compiler.
  20. I will just put out another data point here. I have about 40 unit tests that I've written in the past that test various things: my own TI code, @Tursi's libTi99, as well as gcc tms9900 compiler output. Almost all of my unit tests pass with yesterday's release (patch gcc-4.4.0-tms9900-1.23.patch). I saw a couple of issues, during testing: The first being background/ foreground colors not being set as expected, and the second being unexpected output on one of my unit tests. I still need to investigate, but thought I'd post what I've found so far. The GCC version I built with is 13.2.1, and I am running Fedora Linux 39 x64. Great work so far with the GCC updates, @khanivore!
  21. Nice! Is that like when you go in for surgery and then 3 months later they find a scalpel inside of you?
  22. Reading the javascript that was injected into your home page (and doing a little debugging), it seems this page will generally only pop up if the user came from google or bing. Also, once you get the popup, it won't happen for another 24 hours, unless you do what you did and clear the browser cache. To reproduce, - Clear the browser cache - Do a google search for "Stuart Conner ti 99", and then in the search results click on your home page. The "offers" page should come up after a random amount of time (probably not more than 10 seconds). Edit: just to add - it seems something is injecting advertisements into your site - maybe your website hoster?
  23. A couple of my personal favorites: Volfied - Next gen "Qix", I'm unsure if it's a sequel, or a clone of Qix. Another World / Out of this World - Not sure how to classify this one. A little bit like Prince of Persia maybe? One of the great games of all time, IMO James Pond Robocod - Platformer 3 Stooges - Another one that's difficult to describe. Storyline: do various tasks as the stooges to save the orphanage Most if not all of these were released on other platforms.
  24. You and me both. Otherwise my only hope is for @FarmerPotato to finish his Geneve 2020. (No pressure Mr Potato)
  25. 20% off on eBay now, I am sure restrictions apply. Use code: HOLIDAYSAVES20 edit: likely USA only but I am unsure
×
×
  • Create New...