Re: Hardware emulation of 6509 using 6502?

On 11/15/2017 05:29 AM, Steve Gray wrote:
> Thanks for the offer Mike. I've ordered a few off ebay so I should get 
> them by 2019 ;-)

Make sure to test them thoroughly. I had people claim that they received 
fakes or defective ones. The ones I ordered were OK except the datecodes 
were suspicious.

  Gerrit




> If you can bring one to the meeting that would be great, and I'll return 
> when mine arrive.
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Mike Stein <mhs.stein@gmail.com>
> *To:* cbm-hackers@musoftware.de
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 7, 2017 5:44 PM
> *Subject:* Re: Hardware emulation of 6509 using 6502?
> 
> I should have at least one 65C02 in stock that I'm not using; could 
> bring it to the meeting next week or drop it off if you're in a hurry.
> m
> 
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Steve Gray <mailto:sjgray@rogers.com>
>     *To:* cbm-hackers@musoftware.de <mailto:cbm-hackers@musoftware.de> ;
>     Michał Pleban <mailto:lists@michau.name>
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, November 07, 2017 4:53 PM
>     *Subject:* Re: Hardware emulation of 6509 using 6502?
> 
>     I have an MCUMALL GQ-4X programmer, which I think has JTAG support
>     but I've never tried it. Yup, I'm in Canada.
>     I guess I need to get a 65C02 as well unless you can supply one Jim.
>     Anyway, still willing to give it a shot.
> 
>     Steve
> 
> 
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* Jim Brain <brain@jbrain.com <mailto:brain@jbrain.com>>
>     *To:* Michał Pleban <lists@michau.name <mailto:lists@michau.name>>;
>     cbm-hackers@musoftware.de <mailto:cbm-hackers@musoftware.de>
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, November 7, 2017 4:46 PM
>     *Subject:* Re: Hardware emulation of 6509 using 6502?
> 
>     You can reprogram the CPLD once it is soldered, but one has to have
>     a JTAG programming device (which is not in everyone's toolbox) to do
>     so. If you were in the US, just swapping boards to you would be no
>     big deal, but your location makes this a bit tougher (Steve is in
>     Canada, I think, which is not a ton better, and Andre, not sure, but
>     sure it is not USA :-)
> 
>     I stack up prototype board designs, since at this time, the cost of
>     the board (USD$5.00) is dwarfed by the shipping cost ($30), and
>     shipping can be shared among boards. I have 2 other designs, and
>     working on a third. Once I have it, I will send off for the units.
>     Anyone who can take a look at the schematic and see if I need to
>     push more 6509 or 6502 signals into the CPLD *need being an
>     operative word. I can see some value in pushing a few more high
>     order address lines into the CPLD, to allow more granularity in
>     banking, but I want to be mindful of making too much change and then
>     having to debug those changes along with the original goals.
> 
>     Jim
> 
>      > On November 7, 2017 at 2:24 PM Michał Pleban <lists@michau.name>
>     wrote:
>      >
>      >
>      > Hello!
>      >
>      > Jim Brain wrote:
>      >
>      > > Is there any way for someone to write some test code that would
>     exercise
>      > > the various conditions to ensure I have the Verilog correct?
>      >
>      > First of all, can you re-program the CPLD on the PCB, or do you
>     need to
>      > do before you solder it? In other words, do you have to make it
>     right in
>      > one go, or can you correct errors in circuit?
>      >
>      > Generally, if you put the thing in the machine and it boots, this
>     is a
>      > good sign that it is partially working. Then you can observe
>     whether it
>      > boots instantly or after some delay - if it boots instantly it means
>      > that it didn't find RAM in bank 1 which would imply that LDA (xx),Y
>      > operations don't work.
>      >
>      > Regards,
>      > Michau.
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      > Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
>     Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
> 
> 
> 
> 


       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list