Re: Strange 8255 behavior

From: groepaz_at_gmx.net
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 18:59:31 +0200
Message-ID: <7297746.YrIoIWfVVZ@rakete>
Am Dienstag, 12. Juni 2018, 18:54:18 CEST schrieb Gerrit Heitsch:
> On 06/12/2018 05:44 PM, groepaz@gmx.net wrote:
> > Am Dienstag, 12. Juni 2018, 17:05:20 CEST schrieb Mia Magnusson:
> >> Den Sun, 10 Jun 2018 15:50:50 -0500 skrev Segher Boessenkool
> >> 
> >> <segher@kernel.crashing.org>:
> >>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 10:17:17PM +0200, Gerrit Heitsch wrote:
> >>>> On 06/10/2018 09:46 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>>>> On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 06:42:02PM +0200, Gerrit Heitsch wrote:
> >>>>>> On 06/10/2018 05:36 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>>>>>> http://siliconpr0n.org/map/mos/6526/mz_mit20x/
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> The ports are the low half of the pins (PA on the left, PB on
> >>>>>>> the right).
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> (I have a .xcf if anyone is interested, marked quite a few
> >>>>>>> signals, but I haven't done the port stuff very much.  It's
> >>>>>>> about 400MB).
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> That looks quite different from the one I posted. Looks like MOS
> >>>>>> did quite a bit of redesign between the NMOS 6526 and the HMOS
> >>>>>> 8521 (which still got labeled 6526). Might explain the little
> >>>>>> differences in the way they behave.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> No, this is an actual 6526r4.  This is an 8521r1:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> http://oms.wmhost.com/misc/MOS_6526A_CIA.jpg
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> (and this is an 8520r4, the CIA used in amigas; it has a different
> >>>>> TOD clock, and as you can see it's different from 8521 in other
> >>>>> ways, too. But clearly 8520 and 8521  are more related.  The
> >>>>> lineage is almost certainly 6526 -> 8520 -> 8521:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> http://siliconpr0n.org/map/mos/8520/mz_mit20x/ ).
> >>>> 
> >>>> Yes, but the 8521 is a drop in replacement for the 6526 (I have a
> >>>> C64 Board with a 8521R0 on U2) and later revisions of that chip
> >>>> have been labeled as '6526' again, probably to avoid confusing the
> >>>> customers. You can tell them apart by the datecode or by the '206A'
> >>>> or '216A' next to the datecode.
> >>> 
> >>> _Almost_ drop-in replacement, yes.  But the die photos are really easy
> >>> to tell apart (an 8521 does not say "6526" on the die, it says
> >>> "8521").
> >> 
> >> I can't remember which versions, but at least some version of the CIAs
> >> can only be used as one of the two CIA's in a C64. Using it as the
> >> other CIA causes keyboard problems.
> > 
> > no, both can be (and are commonly) used in either position
> > 
> >> And when using it as the CIA that
> >> generally works causes interrupt failure in the common diagnostic cart
> >> (the one that's not called dead test, not sure if it has a better name
> >> than diagnostic).
> > 
> > that is correct - some of those diagnostic tests fail with the "new" CIA
> 
> Only if they don't take the 'new' behaviour into account.

of course - and they obviously dont :)

-- 

http://hitmen.eu                 http://ar.pokefinder.org
http://vice-emu.sourceforge.net  http://magicdisk.untergrund.net

It doesn't matter who votes. What matters is who counts the votes. 
<Josef Stalin>
Received on 2018-06-12 20:00:06

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.