| ??? 05/10/02 16:13 Read: times |
#22828 - RE: Another FDC problem |
Marcio,
I agree that reading/write to registers is a suitable test for checking the chip. From what you have said previously your base address is C(Y*2)XXH. Where Y=reg address 0-7. You said the Register Address lines are found upon: P2.3=A2; P2.2=A1; P2.1=A0; P2.0=X. So your registers offset by 200H. Base Reg+0 =11000000 xxxxxxxxB or C0XXH Base Reg+1 =11000010 xxxxxxxxB or C2XXH Base Reg+2 =11000100 xxxxxxxxB or C4XXH Base Reg+3 =11000110 xxxxxxxxB or C6XXH Base Reg+4 =11001000 xxxxxxxxB or C8XXH Base Reg+5 =11001010 xxxxxxxxB or CAXXH Base Reg+6 =11001100 xxxxxxxxB or CCXXH Base Reg+7 =11001110 xxxxxxxxB or CEXXH The min spec for the width of IOR/IOW is 150ns so you are ok there but interestingly page 76 of the SMC spec indicates a 40ns delay between nCS and IOW. Since your decode use 8051 wr & rd you are not maintaining this. regards, p |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
RE: Another FDC problem | 01/01/70 00:00 |



