7501/8501 R/W gate in

From: Francesco Messineo <francesco.messineo_at_gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2020 15:57:22 +0200
Message-ID: <CAESs-_zECXrt9YUnYy3x1Lj4mtJHMfu5_1S3VPJ1+shx5bdzOg_at_mail.gmail.com>
Hi all,
maybe this has been discussed before, but I really can't get all
informations together.
We all know the 7501 is a crippled 6510 (I say crippled because they
needed to get rid of either NMI or PHI2 pins to have this gate-in
signal fit in the 40 PIN dip package, while adding also an additional
port bit I/O, which is fine).

Now, reading the 264 timing and documentation (it's on zimmers), it appears
that gate_in is a latch enable for the R/W signal, meaning R/W will be
held in its
previous state when gate is low.
This gate_in input is driven by MUX output from the TED chip. Basically MUX is
a signal for driving the DRAM address multiplexers, it's high in the /
RAS address
phase to the DRAMs and low in the /CAS address phase. So by gating R/W with
MUX, they prevented it to change during the later phase of a CPU Cycle.
Now my questions:
1) why on earth would R/W change halfway a CPU cycle (phi2 high), that
can't happen as far as I know on a 6502/6510 system
2) How can a 6510 (that doesn't have any gate_in input) work apparently fine
as a 7501 replacement (there're people doing that, it's documented).
3) Why on a C64 there was no need for this R/W latch? What main difference
exist between a C64 DRAM access and a C16 DRAM access (that I don't get)?
4) Why they didn't simply latch the R/W signal externally if
absolutely needed and just re-use a 6510 die with an additional port
pin bonded out and just leave out only one of PHI2 or NMI)?
Ok I guess only a few people in the world could answer to 4), but how about
the other? What am I missing?

Thanks in advance
Frank IZ8DWF
Received on 2020-08-30 16:00:02

Archive generated by hypermail 2.3.0.