7 Jun
2002
7 Jun
'02
6:17 p.m.
On Jun 7, 13:05, Richard Erlacher wrote:
You may be confused about this. I don't know of a
single NMOS 6502 that
didn't adhere to the MOS-technology instruction set. There's no telling
whether that included the undocumented opcodes, but since Synertek and
Rockwell used the MOS mask set, I suspect there was no difference. The
later
Synertek parts may have been different since they
shrank the die and got
a bit
more speed, offering a 4 MHz 6502-C, which was an NMOS
part and worked
perfectly in NMOS-targeted systems that didn't work with the later CMOS
parts.
There certainly were differences between the sets of undocumneted opcodes
from different manufacturers of 2MHz 6502A parts. I
remember one or two
"clever" bits of software that failed on some BBC
Micros for that very
reason. Sean is absolutely right to avoid undocumented codes.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
7 Jun
7 Jun
8:36 p.m.
New subject: minor details on the MC6800
Here's a page with some interesting "miscellaneous trivia" including the
transistor count, etc. of the 6800 ... I remember that came up as a question
some time back.
more regarding the 6502 below ...
Dick
<http://www.motorola.com/content/0,1037,121-286,00.html>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Turnbull" <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: [CCTECH] Interesting tidbit on 6502
On Jun 7, 13:05, Richard Erlacher wrote:
I don't know that I have any of the NMOS 2 MHz 6502A parts any longer, but
I'm
planning a complete re-read of the undocumented opcodes and their behavior
sometime soon. I figure I can do it with a serial-port connected 805x family
part, with ports 1 and 2 monitoring the address lines, port 0 on the data bus,
and port 3 interacting with the clocks, R/W, sync, rdy, and irq lines. A fast
enough part can download the things it "sees" via the serial port and can hold
the circuit under test in WAIT until the data is uploaded to the host. A
timer can drive the Phase-0 clock. That should provide ample detail about
what, exactly happens on every opcode without a lot of fiddling with a logic
analyzer. It'll be a while, though ...
You may be confused about this. I don't know
of a single NMOS 6502 that
didn't adhere to the MOS-technology instruction set. There's no telling
whether that included the undocumented opcodes, but since Synertek and
Rockwell used the MOS mask set, I suspect there was no difference. The
later
Synertek parts may have been different since they
shrank the die and got
a bit
more speed, offering a 4 MHz 6502-C, which was an
NMOS part and worked
perfectly in NMOS-targeted systems that didn't work with the later CMOS
parts.
There certainly were differences between the sets of undocumneted opcodes
from different manufacturers of 2MHz 6502A parts. I remember one or two
"clever" bits of software that failed on some BBC Micros for that very
reason. Sean is absolutely right to avoid undocumented codes.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
10:21 p.m.
New subject: minor details on the MC6800
I have a wonderful magazine, EE Times, September,
1988, a special on the 30th anniversary of the
integrated circuit. It's mentioned that the first
design of the 6800 was a yield catastrophe, and
essentially it was completely relaid out from scratch
before it was actually released. Other interesting
stuff, for example, the PDP-8 inspired Ted Hoff on the
design of the 4004.
--- Richard Erlacher <edick(a)idcomm.com> wrote:
Here's a page with some interesting
"miscellaneous
trivia" including the
transistor count, etc. of the 6800 ... I remember
that came up as a question
some time back.
more regarding the 6502 below ...
Dick
<http://www.motorola.com/content/0,1037,121-286,00.html>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Turnbull" <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com>
To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 5:17 PM
Subject: Re: [CCTECH] Interesting tidbit on 6502
I don't know that I have any of the
NMOS 2 MHz 6502A
parts any longer, but I'm
planning a complete re-read of the undocumented
opcodes and their behavior
sometime soon. I figure I can do it with a
serial-port connected 805x family
part, with ports 1 and 2 monitoring the address
lines, port 0 on the data bus,
and port 3 interacting with the clocks, R/W, sync,
rdy, and irq lines. A fast
enough part can download the things it "sees" via
the serial port and can hold
the circuit under test in WAIT until the data is
uploaded to the host. A
timer can drive the Phase-0 clock. That should
provide ample detail about
what, exactly happens on every opcode without a lot
of fiddling with a logic
analyzer. It'll be a while, though ...
> --
> Pete Peter Turnbull
> Network Manager
> University of York
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
On Jun 7, 13:05, Richard Erlacher wrote:
> You may be confused about this. I don't know of
a single NMOS 6502 that
> didn't adhere to the MOS-technology
instruction
set. There's no telling
> whether that included the undocumented
opcodes,
but since Synertek and
> Rockwell used the MOS mask set, I suspect
there
was no difference. The
later
> Synertek parts may have been different since
they shrank the die and got
a bit
> more speed, offering a 4 MHz 6502-C, which was
an NMOS part and worked
> perfectly in NMOS-targeted systems that
didn't
work with the later CMOS
parts.
There certainly were differences between the sets
of undocumneted opcodes
from different manufacturers of 2MHz 6502A parts.
I remember one or two
"clever" bits of software that failed
on some BBC
Micros for that very
reason. Sean is absolutely right to avoid
undocumented codes.
8244
days inactive
8244
days old
2 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
edick＠idcomm.com -
pete＠dunnington.u-net.com -
sloboyko＠yahoo.com