16k guys w/ ostrich + tunerpro. Bug?
Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 12,100
Likes: 127
From: SALEM, NH
Car: '88 Formula
Engine: LC9
Transmission: 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 3.89 9"
16k guys w/ ostrich + tunerpro. Bug?
I reported this to Craig and got a valid work around, but I'm curious if anyone else is having this issue.
I load up Tunerpro 4.0 and Ostrick with v10.10 firmware.
I load my16k $58 mask bin into tunerpro. Connect to ostrick, and upload to ostrich. Bin verrifies.
Bin appears to be inserted at $4000, which I would assume means the ostrich is emulating as a 27c256. I think thats normal.
So now I go and download bin from ostrich to tunerpro memory. Bin downloads as 32k instead of 16k. But the tunerpro XDF expects tables to be in the first 16k of the image, so naturally the values are all garbage. If you split the 32k image in half, the propper bin is at the top half. Makes sence.
So to me, it seems the problem is tunerpro downloading the bin from the EMU. Tunerpro needs to know to grab from start address of 4000 instead of 0000. I don't see such an option in tunerpro, and Craig has submitted this to Mark.
I was under the impression however that Mark uses $6e, which is 16k. Soo, I'm thinking this isnt infact a bug, but me being an absolute moron.
Craigs work around was to save the file with an offset, which will save the propper upper 16k of the image in memory, and just re-load it in from disk. Which I'm sure will work, but still it's an extra step.
Soo, any comments?
I load up Tunerpro 4.0 and Ostrick with v10.10 firmware.
I load my16k $58 mask bin into tunerpro. Connect to ostrick, and upload to ostrich. Bin verrifies.
Bin appears to be inserted at $4000, which I would assume means the ostrich is emulating as a 27c256. I think thats normal.
So now I go and download bin from ostrich to tunerpro memory. Bin downloads as 32k instead of 16k. But the tunerpro XDF expects tables to be in the first 16k of the image, so naturally the values are all garbage. If you split the 32k image in half, the propper bin is at the top half. Makes sence.
So to me, it seems the problem is tunerpro downloading the bin from the EMU. Tunerpro needs to know to grab from start address of 4000 instead of 0000. I don't see such an option in tunerpro, and Craig has submitted this to Mark.
I was under the impression however that Mark uses $6e, which is 16k. Soo, I'm thinking this isnt infact a bug, but me being an absolute moron.
Craigs work around was to save the file with an offset, which will save the propper upper 16k of the image in memory, and just re-load it in from disk. Which I'm sure will work, but still it's an extra step.
Soo, any comments?
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 18,432
Likes: 234
From: Chasing Electrons
Car: check
Engine: check
Transmission: check
If you happen to be using the 58RR_V12.ECU file, the filesize parameter is incorrect. This may be causing the problem. It is easy to fix, and is in the first data block of the ECU file:
The entry:
/*fileSize =8000,
Change it to 4000:
RBob.
Code:
/* General */
{
/*ecuId =GM_P4_ECM,
/*fileSize =8000,
/*checkSumAddr =6,
/*checkSumSize =2,
/*checkSumStartAddr =8,
/*checkSumEndAddr =7FFF,
/*Items =177,,
}; /*fileSize =8000,
Change it to 4000:
Code:
/* General */
{
/*ecuId =GM_P4_ECM,
/*fileSize =4000,
/*checkSumAddr =6,
/*checkSumSize =2,
/*checkSumStartAddr =8,
/*checkSumEndAddr =7FFF,
/*Items =177,,
}; Thread Starter
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 12,100
Likes: 127
From: SALEM, NH
Car: '88 Formula
Engine: LC9
Transmission: 4L60E
Axle/Gears: 3.89 9"
Originally posted by RBob
If you happen to be using the 58RR_V12.ECU file, the filesize parameter is incorrect.
If you happen to be using the 58RR_V12.ECU file, the filesize parameter is incorrect.
Thanks.
-- Joe
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Hotrodboba400
Firebirds for Sale
3
Dec 10, 2019 07:07 PM
Hotrodboba400
Firebirds for Sale
0
Sep 2, 2015 07:28 PM
CGCBandit
Aftermarket Product Review
17
Jul 9, 2010 04:16 PM
