1090XL remake

[kenames99]

3 hours ago, reifsnyderb said:

Wincupl is the one that doesn't work.  It doesn't create the one file needed for ATMISP.  I discovered this the hard way then found Digital can create the file for ATMISP.  

 

Edit to add:  Wincupl isn't creating the JED file.  I have no idea why not.  The logs don't explain it and there isn't any applicable troubleshooting info out there.

sorry to hear that, it does work for that guy that did the sally replacement board, though not that board. he did a whole computer using the same logic chips you are and seemed to not have a problem. oh well tho, if it doesn't work for you then it doesn't. I do use the xilinx software but older version, like ISE 14 version. vivaldi is getting a bit large.

byteattic guy

 

Ken

 

Edited February 7, 2022 by kenames99
remembered some info

[reifsnyderb]

Ok.  The CPLD program has been ported over to a Xilinx CPLD and the board has been modified for said chip.  I noticed that there is still plenty of space on the chip for additional logic.  (See report pic., below.)  So, I added another jumper so the board can be configured with 4 different settings as follows:

 

1.  64k + 256k:  64k base memory.  The theory here is to shadow PortB and add extra memory.  A stock 600XL will have 320k total.  (Sorry, no Antic banking possible.)

2.  64k + 256k + 1MB:  64k base memory + PortB shadowed (as above) and an additional 1MB available via either Axlon banking (@CFFF) or PIA (@D1FE).  

3.  2 MB Low:  The full 2 MB would be available and this would be the first 2 MB card.  The memory would be accessible via Axlon banking or PIA.

4.  2 MB High:  If a card is using the first 2 MB, this will allow the card to be used to add an additional 2MB of high memory accessible via Axlon or PIA banking.

 

I'll add the logic later but it's pretty straight-forward.

 

So, in theory, 3 cards could possibly work together if the first were to be configured as per #1 and the other 2 as per #3 and #4.

 

I plan to order the boards within a day or so.

 

 

Edited February 8, 2022 by reifsnyderb

[reifsnyderb]

5 Boards ordered.  (Minimum quantity is 5.)

Edited February 9, 2022 by reifsnyderb

[Defender II]

Wow! Awesome progress! Looking forward to some of these boards.

[reifsnyderb]

2 hours ago, Defender II said:

Wow! Awesome progress! Looking forward to some of these boards.

Just building on the shoulders of giants.  Ken, Kurt Vendell, and maybe some others did a huge amount of work to get the 1090 to this point.

Edited February 11, 2022 by reifsnyderb

[Defender II]

Did I read that there plans to do the case to original specs too?

[kenames99]

I know Curt was looking into it. I have no details or specs on the case so I could not do a true to original one.

 

Ken

 

[reifsnyderb]

If somebody has a case that could be measured to make blueprints up that would be fantastic.  That being said, I've been experimenting with memory, CPLD's, etc., and have new ideas for a memory card.  Once I get another project I am working on finished I'll re-visit it.

[kenames99]

hi everyone,

  I apologize for not being more active here but have been very busy. I have built a run of Express cartridges, some ICD style XE to MIO adapters (with 2 cart ports), did some software projects, and then got hot with a bad case of covid. I am now getting over that and hope to get back to this project along with the expansion cards. still have to do the serial/parallel card, the z80 card, and at least one other I don't remember right now. thanks for all you patience with me.

 

Ken

 

[reifsnyderb]

I figure I'll post this here as it's related.  It's a given that if modern cards are made they could be smaller so if modern cards were made there would be a lot of wasted space if the current 1090 board size is kept.  The 1090 board is 235mm deep by 178mm wide.  Another consideration is that PCB manufacturers usually make cheaper boards if they are less than 100mm on a side.  So add-on cards would be cheaper if they were to stick within those dimensions.  Also, the chances of a modern card needing +12 vdc or -12 vdc are pretty much slim to none.  The 1090 current specification for +-12 vdc is also very light so it wouldn't be useful for much more than data lines anyhow.

 

A couple weeks ago I got to thinking about the 1090 again and spent a little time dabbling with KiCad to see what size board would be practical.  I eliminated the 12 vdc power, reduced the board size to 145mm (wide) by 150mm (about a 50% size reduction overall), moved the power switch to the front, used surface mount components where practical, used PBI reserved pin 37 for a /HALT line, but still kept the card compatibility with the 1090.  (Compatibility would only be broken if /HALT or 12VDC would be required.)  Cards that would work in this board would work in a 1090.  Below is shown what I came up with.  The power switch and LED are the same distance apart as is on the 1050 drive.  Also, I didn't see a model for a red LED so I used a green for the rendering.  I figure that with an adapter, a 130XE could use a 1090 or 1091 as well.  For this rendering I called it a 1091 so as to make it clear it's different.  Reducing the component count not only reduces the size but would reduce the cost of the board.  Quite frankly, the power supply could be eliminated and a USB C connector could be used but it would break card compatibility with the 1090.  The 1090 supplies an unregulated approximate of +10vdc to the boards so each board requires a voltage regulator.

 

 

 

 

  

[+x=usr(1536)]

21 minutes ago, reifsnyderb said:

I figure I'll post this here as it's related.  It's a given that if modern cards are made they could be smaller so if modern cards were made there would be a lot of wasted space if the current 1090 board size is kept.  The 1090 board is 235mm deep by 178mm wide.  Another consideration is that PCB manufacturers usually make cheaper boards if they are less than 100mm on a side.  So add-on cards would be cheaper if they were to stick within those dimensions.  Also, the chances of a modern card needing +12 vdc or -12 vdc are pretty much slim to none.  The 1090 current specification for +-12 vdc is also very light so it wouldn't be useful for much more than data lines anyhow.

All of this is true, but if the intention is to replicate the 1090 then this doesn't do it.  Not saying that the idea is a bad one - it certainly isn't - but it does bring up the question of what the intention behind the project is (to create an as-close-as-possible replica, or just a PBI-connected device) if it's the way to move forward.

 

On a personal note, I'd prefer to see something that is as close to the 1090 as intended by Atari as possible.  Anything else, while neat, would be Just Another Peripheral IMHO.  And by no means am I knocking the idea: from a technical standpoint, it's absolutely correct.  But part of the appeal of a replica 1090 is that it's something that most of us never got to lay hands on - and while more use of the PBI would be cool, it wouldn't be the same as something closer in intent and design to the original.

[xrbrevin]

Lite version?

[+mytek]

1 hour ago, reifsnyderb said:

the chances of a modern card needing +12 vdc or -12 vdc are pretty much slim to none.  The 1090 current specification for +-12 vdc is also very light so it wouldn't be useful for much more than data lines anyhow.

Maxim brought out a line of RS232 interface chips with internal charge pumps that alleviated the need to have higher voltage +/- power supplies. There are also chips that incorporate just the charge pumps where either a minus supply is needed or a higher than 5V supply, which all derive their power from a single polarity +5V supply. So I agree with what you are saying.

 

1 hour ago, reifsnyderb said:

I eliminated the 12 vdc power, reduced the board size to 145mm (wide) by 150mm (about a 50% size reduction overall), moved the power switch to the front, used surface mount components where practical, used PBI reserved pin 37 for a /HALT line, but still kept the card compatibility with the 1090.

Yep that sounds good, but I think it can be even smaller, especially if you went to a switching buck converter for the +5V supply, which would greatly decrease the size of the filter capacitors. Or better still, use an off-the-shelf external 5V supply via a coaxial power jack.

 

2 hours ago, reifsnyderb said:

Another consideration is that PCB manufacturers usually make cheaper boards if they are less than 100mm on a side.

Agreed ?

 

1 hour ago, x=usr(1536) said:

On a personal note, I'd prefer to see something that is as close to the 1090 as intended by Atari as possible.

1 hour ago, xrbrevin said:

Lite version?

Yes I think this should be looked at as an entirely separate project to the 1090. Maybe start a new topic specifically aimed at this 'Lite' version.

 

I always felt that the existing 1090 box would have been unwieldy on most peoples desks, especially because of the short interconnect cable requirements. It might have been better to make it more like a MEGA ST case, so at least it would double as a good monitor stand.

 

 

[+MrFish]

As much as I like the idea of replicating the original 1090, I'd be more apt to purchase a smaller, more cost-conscious version; and I don't think a smaller version would be just another PBI device, when it would be modeled after a 1090, just in a smaller form factor.

 

The only negative I can really see for a smaller version is that -- if both versions were made -- then you divide the project into two (probably small) camps, which might not be a good thing for a number of reasons.

 

[reifsnyderb]

In response to the last several posts...

 

A case could be made for the 1091 that would look like a "shrunk" 1090.  But, I do agree, it would not be a true 1090 replica.

 

A smaller "more cost-conscious" version is why I propose a 1091.  Since it is smaller, it would be easier to put on a desk.  Though, admittedly, the short requirement of the PBI cable is rather limiting and inconvenient. 

 

I'd love to scrap the +10 vdc unregulated power and go with an external USB-C power supply.  It would further reduce the size and cost.  But it would break compatibility with the 1090 and create a split into two "camps".  Keeping the +10 vdc unregulated power would mean that unless somebody tries to break compatibility that a card that works on the 1091 would also work on the 1090.  My opinion, is that the 1090 has the "proverbial" chicken and egg type problem.  We need cards for the 1090 and we need the 1090 for cards.  So, having the 1091 support cards that would work in either would be a good thing.  People that want a 1090 for the sake of nostalgia could still use cards made for the 1091. 

 

Unless somebody hacks their XL to use the /HALT signal then makes a custom card for the 1091, there would be no split into two "camps" among XL owners.  It would be possible to make XE cards that would support a hacked XL.  To avoid a split into two "camps", I wouldn't recommend it.  (This, coming from the guy who added that extra signal line with the idea it could be used as a /HALT signal.)

 

A compatibility problem would be a size issue in that cards for the 1090, made as close to original as possible, would be too big for the 1091.  However, I really don't envision people lining up to buy 3 full-sized 64k cards to upgrade their 600xl to 192k.  

 

I thought about posting this as a separate topic.  But since the cards would be compatible, since there really aren't any cards available, and since this would basically be a 1090 "Lite", I was unsure if that would be a good idea.  I don't want there to be a split into two "camps" and was thinking that making this a separate topic could be the start of such a split.  

 

From my perspective, the 1090 board has been recreated.  What we need now are cards to make it useful.  Having a smaller, cheaper, version of the 1090 that is still compatible might also be an advantage as well.  For me, it would be really neat to have my little 600XL upgraded to 320k, 80 columns, RTC, SpartaDOS, and some other stuff with either a 1090 or 1091.

[Mathy]

Hello guys

 

"Smaller size" also means it's easier to take along to an Atari meeting.

 

/HALT is only needed, if a memory upgrade card uses $D30x.  The 1090 predates the XE, probably by a couple of years.  So it probably uses $D6xx to access the memory on an original 1090 memory expansion card.  Not using $D30x inside the 1090(lite) mean you could use $D30x inside the computer for ANTIC and $D6xx inside the 1090(lite) for the CPU, if you don't want to use the same memory for both ANTIC and CPU.

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

 

[reifsnyderb]

3 hours ago, Mathy said:

Hello guys

 

"Smaller size" also means it's easier to take along to an Atari meeting.

 

/HALT is only needed, if a memory upgrade card uses $D30x.  The 1090 predates the XE, probably by a couple of years.  So it probably uses $D6xx to access the memory on an original 1090 memory expansion card.  Not using $D30x inside the 1090(lite) mean you could use $D30x inside the computer for ANTIC and $D6xx inside the 1090(lite) for the CPU, if you don't want to use the same memory for both ANTIC and CPU.

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

 

The 1090 spec. uses $D1FE for memory banking.  The instructions for the 1090's RAM card show that $D1FE has 0-3 written to it to select the bank with one RAM card.  If installed, 16-19 is written to $D1FE to select the bank on the 2nd RAM card.  The bank is deselected by setting $D1FE to $80.  The 1090 spec. allows for a 3rd RAM card to be used for the base memory.

 

It would be possible to address 4MB by using $D1FE as 256 bank addresses like what Axlon does with $CFFF.

 

However, I don't know of any software that uses $D1FE to select the bank and since the 1090 wasn't released I doubt anything would have used it.

 

I am working on a PBI card that shadows $D301 and uses the usual PORTB banking for 256k of extended memory as well as 64k of base memory.  I also have a card for the 1090 I am working on that would do the same.  This card would be compatible with the 1091.

 

The XL doesn't have a /HALT line on the PBI.  The XE has a /HALT line on it's ECA.

 

1090_64K_ram_card_owners_guide.pdf

Edited June 16, 2022 by reifsnyderb

[kenames99]

11 hours ago, reifsnyderb said:

In response to the last several posts...

 

A case could be made for the 1091 that would look like a "shrunk" 1090.  But, I do agree, it would not be a true 1090 replica.

 

A smaller "more cost-conscious" version is why I propose a 1091.  Since it is smaller, it would be easier to put on a desk.  Though, admittedly, the short requirement of the PBI cable is rather limiting and inconvenient. 

 

I'd love to scrap the +10 vdc unregulated power and go with an external USB-C power supply.  It would further reduce the size and cost.  But it would break compatibility with the 1090 and create a split into two "camps".  Keeping the +10 vdc unregulated power would mean that unless somebody tries to break compatibility that a card that works on the 1091 would also work on the 1090.  My opinion, is that the 1090 has the "proverbial" chicken and egg type problem.  We need cards for the 1090 and we need the 1090 for cards.  So, having the 1091 support cards that would work in either would be a good thing.  People that want a 1090 for the sake of nostalgia could still use cards made for the 1091. 

 

Unless somebody hacks their XL to use the /HALT signal then makes a custom card for the 1091, there would be no split into two "camps" among XL owners.  It would be possible to make XE cards that would support a hacked XL.  To avoid a split into two "camps", I wouldn't recommend it.  (This, coming from the guy who added that extra signal line with the idea it could be used as a /HALT signal.)

 

A compatibility problem would be a size issue in that cards for the 1090, made as close to original as possible, would be too big for the 1091.  However, I really don't envision people lining up to buy 3 full-sized 64k cards to upgrade their 600xl to 192k.  

 

I thought about posting this as a separate topic.  But since the cards would be compatible, since there really aren't any cards available, and since this would basically be a 1090 "Lite", I was unsure if that would be a good idea.  I don't want there to be a split into two "camps" and was thinking that making this a separate topic could be the start of such a split.  

 

From my perspective, the 1090 board has been recreated.  What we need now are cards to make it useful.  Having a smaller, cheaper, version of the 1090 that is still compatible might also be an advantage as well.  For me, it would be really neat to have my little 600XL upgraded to 320k, 80 columns, RTC, SpartaDOS, and some other stuff with either a 1090 or 1091.

hi,

  I said earlier in this thread (you may have missed it) I am working on the original cards. the 80 column card is somewhat working and still getting debugged. I got sidetracked with a big project that needed my full attention for some weeks, then about 4 weeks ago I got hit hard with covid! man am I ever sick of being sick but finally getting over it.

 

  I think the +10v could be scaled down to 7 to 7.5 volts and still maintain compatibility, just have to stay above the 7805 dropout voltage, in all atari's designs that is what it is used for. so a tabletop power supply or a closed frame supply could be used and +12 and -12 could be derived on card if needed, IMHO. smaller size is nicer to the final budget on any project.

 

  I am not trying to be a purist, I just started doing this for Curt, I am just real sorry he did not get to see this through. Re-create the 1090XL in it's original form, get the chassis and cards out there for those that want them. the design is open so anyone can do as they wish, just mind the license and contribute your changes or redesigns back to the community.

 

  Feel free to ask any questions or make suggestions or just state your own opinion.

 

Thanks

Ken

 

[reifsnyderb]

20 minutes ago, kenames99 said:

hi,

  I said earlier in this thread (you may have missed it) I am working on the original cards. the 80 column card is somewhat working and still getting debugged. I got sidetracked with a big project that needed my full attention for some weeks, then about 4 weeks ago I got hit hard with covid! man am I ever sick of being sick but finally getting over it.

 

  I think the +10v could be scaled down to 7 to 7.5 volts and still maintain compatibility, just have to stay above the 7805 dropout voltage, in all atari's designs that is what it is used for. so a tabletop power supply or a closed frame supply could be used and +12 and -12 could be derived on card if needed, IMHO. smaller size is nicer to the final budget on any project.

 

  I am not trying to be a purist, I just started doing this for Curt, I am just real sorry he did not get to see this through. Re-create the 1090XL in it's original form, get the chassis and cards out there for those that want them. the design is open so anyone can do as they wish, just mind the license and contribute your changes or redesigns back to the community.

 

  Feel free to ask any questions or make suggestions or just state your own opinion.

 

Thanks

Ken

 

 

It's good to hear you are better.  I remember you mentioned working on the 80 column card.  That's quite a project by itself and I'd love to get my hands on one as an 80 column card in a 1090 makes a lot of sense.

 

I don't know what would be a common power supply to use for 7.5 or so volts.  There are some power supplies that are off-the-shelf that could be used.  But they'd make the case even bigger.  So I just opted to use a "standard" 9 VAC Atari power supply.

 

Actually, I like the purist approach, too.  I just figured a more compact version may be a possibility as it would be cheaper.  

 

The 1091 was derived from the 1090 so I am attaching the .zip file with the 1091 files for anyone who wants them.

 

 

1091XL R2.zip

 

 

 

 

 

[Mathy]

Hello Bryan

 

14 hours ago, reifsnyderb said:

It would be possible to address 4MB by using $D1FE as 256 bank addresses like what Axlon does with $CFFF.

 

However, I don't know of any software that uses $D1FE to select the bank and since the 1090 wasn't released I doubt anything would have used it.

 

Doesn't the MIO do the same?  BTW yes, $D1FE to select the bank, $D6xx is the window where the memory bank becomes available.

The fact that no software uses it shouldn't be a reason not to use it.  We never had ATRs, flashcard disk drive emulation, FujiNet, etc., etc. until somebody imagined that it would be nice to have them and created them.

 

14 hours ago, reifsnyderb said:

The XL doesn't have a /HALT line on the PBI.  The XE has a /HALT line on it's ECA.

 

I know.  And if the 1090(lite) doesn't use $30x, we can still have ANTIC use different banks of memory than the CPU.  One could use the memory inside the computer and the other could use the memory inside the 1090(lite).

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

 

[reifsnyderb]

46 minutes ago, Mathy said:

Hello Bryan

 

 

Doesn't the MIO do the same?  BTW yes, $D1FE to select the bank, $D6xx is the window where the memory bank becomes available.

The fact that no software uses it shouldn't be a reason not to use it.  We never had ATRs, flashcard disk drive emulation, FujiNet, etc., etc. until somebody imagined that it would be nice to have them and created them.

 

 

I know.  And if the 1090(lite) doesn't use $30x, we can still have ANTIC use different banks of memory than the CPU.  One could use the memory inside the computer and the other could use the memory inside the 1090(lite).

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

 

The Altirra Hardware Ref. Manual shows that the MIO uses $D600 - $D6FF for RAM.  I am not sure for what purpose.

 

With $D1FE, the bank is between $4000 and $7FFF as per the documentation I posted earlier.  Once the timing issues are worked out, creating a card that uses $D1FE and banks memory into $4000 - $7FFF should be fairly easy as it can be just a modified Axlon card with it's own voltage regulator.  (Use $D1FE instead of $CFFF for the bank.)  A conflict would have to be considered if banking is enabled on PORTB and through $D1FE at the same time.  (Though, if the PBI device shadows PORTB, it would be able to be "aware" of this.)  Over 4MB of RAM could then be addressed.

 

$D600 - $D7FF can be used for parallel device RAM and Atari reserved different address ranges for different devices.  I wouldn't recommend using RAM from $D600 - $D7FF for general use as that could be used by another device and could be switched out when the device is changed out through $D1FF.    

 

1090_hardware_tech_spec-11MAY84.pdf

 

Antic banking happens when /HALT is low.  If the PBI device isn't aware of when /HALT is low, I am not clear as to how Antic banking could still work. 

 

I am not sure of your reference to $30x.

 

 

 

 

[Mathy]

Hello Brian

 

1 hour ago, reifsnyderb said:

The Altirra Hardware Ref. Manual shows that the MIO uses $D600 - $D6FF for RAM.  I am not sure for what purpose.

 

That's not how I understand it, but I'm not sure.

 

1 hour ago, reifsnyderb said:

I wouldn't recommend using RAM from $D600 - $D7FF for general use as that could be used by another device and could be switched out when the device is changed out through $D1FF.    

 

Not from $D600-$D7FF.  There's a small window of 256 bytes somewhere between $D600 and $D6FF where the MIO accesses RAM.  The BlackBox uses a similar window of 256 bytes to access its memory.

 

1 hour ago, reifsnyderb said:

Antic banking happens when /HALT is low.  If the PBI device isn't aware of when /HALT is low, I am not clear as to how Antic banking could still work. 

 

If you use $D301 on an XE compatible computer (130XE or similarly expanded computer), you can set bit 5 to select ANTIC banking.  Memory controlled by $D301 would be accessed by ANTIC only.

If you use $D1FE to control memory inside the 1090(lite), that memory could be accessed by the CPU (and ANTIC).

There is no /HALT on the PBI, but there is a /HALT signal in the computer!  We can use it to give ANTIC access to the extended memory IN the computer while the CPU accesses memory outside the computer.  Nice side effect would be that computers with more than 64kB inside can still access that extra memory inside the computer.  If the 1090(lite) duplicates $D301, all extra memory inside the computer is not accessible.

 

1 hour ago, reifsnyderb said:

I am not sure of your reference to $30x.

Oops, typo.  That should be $D30x.

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

 

[_The Doctor__]

not sure how a voltage doubler would work out at the lower voltages.... I thought he said his cards etc would be 1090 compatible, if it does what the 1090 does and more the it's the 1090e for enhanced maybe....

[reifsnyderb]

8 hours ago, Mathy said:

Hello Brian

 

 

That's not how I understand it, but I'm not sure.

 

 

Not from $D600-$D7FF.  There's a small window of 256 bytes somewhere between $D600 and $D6FF where the MIO accesses RAM.  The BlackBox uses a similar window of 256 bytes to access its memory.

 

 

If you use $D301 on an XE compatible computer (130XE or similarly expanded computer), you can set bit 5 to select ANTIC banking.  Memory controlled by $D301 would be accessed by ANTIC only.

If you use $D1FE to control memory inside the 1090(lite), that memory could be accessed by the CPU (and ANTIC).

There is no /HALT on the PBI, but there is a /HALT signal in the computer!  We can use it to give ANTIC access to the extended memory IN the computer while the CPU accesses memory outside the computer.  Nice side effect would be that computers with more than 64kB inside can still access that extra memory inside the computer.  If the 1090(lite) duplicates $D301, all extra memory inside the computer is not accessible.

 

Oops, typo.  That should be $D30x.

 

Sincerely

 

Mathy

 

Ok.  This is something to explore.

[reifsnyderb]

1 hour ago, _The Doctor__ said:

not sure how a voltage doubler would work out at the lower voltages.... I thought he said his cards etc would be 1090 compatible, if it does what the 1090 does and more the it's the 1090e for enhanced maybe....

I think I've got the 360k card worked out.  Once I get it finished up and in hand I'll test it in my 1090 reproduction board.