On 3/3/2018 6:51 AM, Michał Pleban wrote: > Hello! > > Jim Brain wrote: > >> Is there a way to create more debug info on this test, so I can see what >> you expected, and what you received? > I updated the test repository. > > * The "read back" test it now divided into four subtests, each testing a > different access method. > > * The test now reports what value was received, and what it expected to see. > > Interestingly, 3 of the 4 sub-tests of "read back" now fail in VICE (!). > > Regards, > Michau. > > Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list My unit also fails on the last 3 tests (direct 1 succeeds). If I try Mia's suggestion to direct the bank to 0xf during reads of $0/$1, the ram test fails. If I use $e, the ram test succeeds, and indirect 1 then works. Direct and Indirect 2 always fail. I verified that all tests work with the 6509 installed. Jim -- Jim Brain brain@jbrain.com www.jbrain.com Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2018-03-04 07:00:03
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.