|I tested the new procedure, and...|
Message #27 Posted by Vieira, Luiz C. (Brazil) on 25 Nov 2005, 3:25 p.m.,
in response to message #26 by Diego Diaz
Hi Diego, Meindert, all that are following this MLDL adventure.
I followed all Diego's suggestions and actually changed some of my MLDL2000 `preferences`, so I could go ahead with the experiment exactly the same. In time: there is no problem at all rearranging ROM images in the FLASH memory, once you know what you are doing. I sent Diego a copy of what I have already stored in FLASH memory, and I agreeded with moving four images form where they were in order to locate the HEPAX 1D ROM images in the same address suggested. The four ROM images I had in 240, 241, 242 and 243 were moved to lower addresses. As a matter of easy arrangement, a fifth ROM image was also moved.
All set, 16KRAM available and `preprogrammed`, calculator OFF in all MLDL accesses and changes, after first HEPDIR I saw the same C2, C3, C4 and C5 entries again, and the 2,160.0000 at the end (free registers, O.K.). If HEPAX reports 2.610 free registers, the C2, C3... entries do not occupy space, so there is no trouble for me.
I checked all non-zero words (added/changed) and found:
X092 04E (X= 9, A, B)
X093 00F (X= 9, A, B)
I repeated the entire process with a 41CV halfnut and got the same results.
Then I changed SR references and removed the SRAM references from banks 2 and 3 at pages 8, 9, A and B, so I executed HEPDIR again and I received a NONEXISTENT. Then I tried [CAT] 2 and none of the HEPAX 1D functions were there, HEPAX 1D identification neither.
One point: I am counting banks 0, 1, 2 and 3, as they appear in the MLDL2000 Manager windows. Is there a chance that you, Diego, is counting banks 1, 2, 3 and 4? In this case, should I leave intact the references to banks 0 and 1 in a 0, 1, 2 and 3 counting for each SRAM, or should I leave references to banks 1 and 4 in a 1, 2, 3 and 4 counting? Or any other arrangement? In my case, as I am counting as MLDL2000 Manager shows, I left banks 0 and 1 with the original reference SRAM. And as I was considering other possibilities, I decided to remove all but the first bank reference. So I had only bank 0 of each SR activated and tried again: no HEPAX showing up. I restored previous references to all four banks and tried again. No HEPAX. Then I closed MLDL2000 manager, disconnect the HP41 and tried: there he is, HEPAX functions back again after [CAT] 2.
HEPDIR gives C2, C3, C4 and C5 as the four unique entries yet, each with a right-justified space, and ends with correct 2.610 available registers. I decided to go ahead finished all steps to set 32KRAM the way it is shown here, and after HEPDIR I got:
These look like ‘ghost entries’, or something like references to the possible file types. You see, when HEPAX cannot identify a file type, it shows the file ID as ??, right? PR refers to Program file, and DA refers to Data, the S meaning Secure file. No Key assignment file references, however, neither ASCII (ALPHA string), nor Write All.. Except for these particular entries in HEPDIR, everything else seems fine. After saving three small programs as for testing purposes, the first `ghost` entry (C2) disappeared, and the reported remaining register was reduced to 5,203 (fair enough to hold the new data). One interesting fact: although these ‘ghost´ entries do not count as used bytes, HEPDIRX ‘sees’ each of them as they appeared: C2 when X=1, C3 when X=2, and so. After loading the three small programs, C3 became entry #1, C4 became entry #2, etc.
And yes, after [HSAVEP], each of the three programs appear in [CAT] 2, after [XFA]. I ordered a MEMORY LOST and recovered each of them back to main memory. Interesting: I saw [HSAVEP] and [HPURFL], but I did not see [HGETP]. After wondering about how to bring the programs back, I decided to see the functions repertoire in HEPAX to see which of them could be used. Then I saw the three labels showing up as the last entries, and I could understand that they were actually converted to internal XROM calls. I was not known about that... I wonder what else I missed all of these years... After that, [COPY] was enough to bring them back.
I´ll go further using HEPAX functionality to deal with as many possibilities as I can, and I'll report any additional fact.
In time: Meindert and Diego, as Diego mentioned his MLDL2000 is a BETA unit and being my own a regular unit, are there any chances that the CPLD program used in mine is an updated version? If so, that would (at least partially) explain the different behavior. I guess it would be related to WXP version or MLDL2000 manager; maybe the HEPAX version, but it seems to me that Diego is using the same.
I wish I knew more about the HP41 + HEPAX internals to be more technical and deeper when mentioning these facts, sorry.
(should we start a new thread?)