Email: Password: Remember Me | Create Account (Free)

Back to Subject List

Old thread has been locked -- no new posts accepted in this thread
???
11/03/06 18:02
Read: times


 
#127341 - That's not how I remember it ...
Responding to: ???'s previous message
When Lattice first released the GAL's ('84-85)and when the databook still contained programming data, they referred to their programmable array as EEPROM and not as FLASH. In fact, the term "Flash" didn't surface until much later.

What interested me at the time wasn't the data retention time, but, rather, how long it took to erase them. I exploited that feature in a tamper detection scheme back then.

I'm having trouble figuring out what your purpose even in mentioning GAL's is. You can't read 'em in-circuit, hence, you can't checksum the things. Their array is small, so you probably wouldn't want to do so.

The PALCE is AMD's version, and the fact that CYPRESS made 'em puzzles me, since AMD had their own FAB. Maybe they were slow in getting their CMOS process FAB going. The damand was so great it really shouldn't surprise me, though. Bipolar (metal fuse) PAL's were notoriously fragile during programming and were often ruined during the verify process. BTW, I've got a dozen or two of CYPRESS' old EPROM-based (windowed ceramic) 22V10's. They always looked interesting in a circuit.

RE






List of 26 messages in thread
TopicAuthorDate
Global Checksum            01/01/70 00:00      
   Checksum of what?            01/01/70 00:00      
      Rom Contents            01/01/70 00:00      
         why checksum???            01/01/70 00:00      
            The OP intended to use CRC-32...            01/01/70 00:00      
            ... but it's a good point otherwise...            01/01/70 00:00      
               timestamp vs crc            01/01/70 00:00      
                  timestamp, serial number, neutral 16 bit checksum            01/01/70 00:00      
                  who said 'automatic' and yes I have            01/01/70 00:00      
                     You didn't, Jan did            01/01/70 00:00      
   A bit of a logical fallasy            01/01/70 00:00      
      not at all... depends on application...            01/01/70 00:00      
      Statistics            01/01/70 00:00      
         ferrite beads            01/01/70 00:00      
            \"legitimate\" uses of checksum            01/01/70 00:00      
               I have seen NO catches by a checksum            01/01/70 00:00      
                  it's not just the matter of "kitchenware"...            01/01/70 00:00      
                     One thing that should not be handled by checksummi            01/01/70 00:00      
                        blah blah            01/01/70 00:00      
                        That's not how I remember it ...            01/01/70 00:00      
                           that was me            01/01/70 00:00      
                  I\'ve got a box that contains a few ...            01/01/70 00:00      
            links to CRC            01/01/70 00:00      
               I still say that crc's and checksums only work            01/01/70 00:00      
                  Most            01/01/70 00:00      
      I'd like to learn more            01/01/70 00:00      

Back to Subject List