Updates and strange Finance module behaviour (with HEPAX/NoVRAM)



#2

Hi all,

A new release of the Windows Configuration Utility and its corresponding updated guide are available for download in the usual place.

This version already includes the configuration tools for the new NoV-64 module.

Eventually, during the many burning test performed to verify Windows utility, I selected the Finance module images and burnt them into NoV-64 Flash ROM, namely into pages C & D.

When executing HEPAX 002 to verify proper mapping and functionality I was shocked as page D showed up as "HEPAX RAM"!

My first thought was that I had made some sort of mistake in the process, or (the worst case) something was going *really* wrong into NoV-64's guts.

After repeating the whole test several times with an assorted set of randomly choosen ROM images, it was clear that the NoV-64 was working like a charm, and my procedure was correct.

Then I thought that the upper page image of the Finance module I have may well be corrupted. So I dove into the module's box seeking for a *real* Finance module, which I fortunatey have.

Burnt a *clean* NoVRAM only with HEPAX emulation, plugged Finance module into port 3 and execute HEPAX 002: as supposed, page D showed up as "HEPAX RAM" again.

I'll be happy if someone out there with both *real* modules: HEPAX and Finance, could duoble check this.

Cheers from Spain.

Diego.


#3

Diego,

I have a HEPAX Advanced Module, ROM version HEPAX 1C, as well as a Finance module, and could help this evening. Will HEPAX 1C work, or do you need HEPAX 1D?

Dan


#4

Hi Dan,

Most likely HEPAX-1C or 1D won't make any difference. I've been researching a little bit more and it seems that the header in the upper page of Finance module is indeed a copycat of what a HEPAX RAM page should look alike.

Finance lower page is composed by User code programs, while its upper page is M-code, the XROM# for this upper page is 11 (H'00B) which is the same that HEPAX uses to identify its first RAM page; and no function number is in the second word, just H'000, which again coincides with the contents of an initialized HEPAX RAM.

So I guess that you'll get the same "fake" RAM page with the *real* HEPAX... (Which in the end means that my emulation is "REALLY GOOD"!!! ;-)) excuse me, couldn't resist... :-)

Now, seriously I'd appreciate if you can confirm that point.

Cheers from Spain.

Diego.


#5

Diego,

I completed my testing, and went a little further to characterize the behavior.



First config:



HP-41CX

ADV HEPAX 1C in Port 1

X-Mem in Port 2

Real Estage ROM in Port 3

HP-41 Advantage ROM in Port 4



HEPAX 002 yields:



3:-EXT FCN 2D

4: NO ROM

5:-TIME 2C

6:-HEPAX 1C

7: NO ROM

8:'BUDGET (Used HEPAX function HSAVEP to load this program to HEPAX RAM)

9: HEPAX RAM

A: HEPAX RAM

B: HEPAX RAM

C:REAL EST 1B

D: HEPAX RAM

E:-ADV CONV A

F:'MATRIX (First ROM header entry for Upper 4K of Advantage ROM



I then switched the HP-41 Advantage ROM for the Navigation ROM, another 8K module with only one ROM header, like the Real Estate ROM. I got this:



3:-EXT FCN 2D

4: NO ROM

5:-TIME 2C

6:-HEPAX 1C

7: NO ROM

8:'BUDGET (Used HEPAX function HSAVEP to load this program to HEPAX RAM)

9: HEPAX RAM

A: HEPAX RAM

B: HEPAX RAM

C:REAL EST 1B

D: HEPAX RAM

E:NAVIG 1B

F: HEPAX RAM



The HEPAX function 002 does not appear very sophisticated. It is even 'fooled' by the program entry it created in HEPAX RAM through the HSAVEP function. Even though most of the RAM is still empty, and it should label the page as HEPAX RAM, it sees a function and blindly displays its name ('BUDGET, 'MATRIX)



It appears that the HEPAX function will label any ROM space with a ROM ID but zero function addresses, as HEPAX RAM. I wrote byte '1F' into location 9000, and HEPAX 002 still reported '9: HEPAX RAM', so it does not even look at the ROM ID apparently, just that it is non-zero. By the way, I then executed HEPROOM and HEPDIR, and although neither function changed the ROM ID from '1F', they both reported the correct amount of HEPAX RAM still available.



Dan

Edited: 23 Sept 2008, 8:56 p.m.

#6

Diego,

I will do a test tonight with my MLDL2000, although that configuration is a bit different. Also, do not forget the HP41 bus analyzer, it will allow you to trace exactly what is going on ...

Meindert


#7

Hi Meindert,

A triple checking will be even better than a double one, so testing with MLDL2000 will be a good point indeed.

In case that the real HEPAX behaves different I'll go to your analyzer to have a clerarer picture of what may be going wrong, but according to the rest of tests, I'm confident the HEPAX will also show that "fhantom" RAM when trying to identify Finance upper page.

Best wishes and thanks for your continued support.

Diego


#8

Guys,

I have only one version of the Finance pak, and that has just one page. Am I missing something very obvious here?

Meindert


#9

my thoughts exactly (I had been quiet because of this), I have Hepax 1D but only a 1-page finance pack...


#10

Just "investment dislexya" (sort of...).

Edited: 23 Sept 2008, 3:22 p.m.


#11

that explains a lot ...

It's getting late, so I will do the test this weekend, I will be travelling the rest of the week.

BTW. I just made a big step towards MLDL V3 tonight!

Meindert


#12

.

#13

I'll be happy if someone out there with both *real* modules: HEPAX and Finance, could duoble check this.

Unfortunatelly, I cannot check this with real modules, but I tested it with HP-41X which is quite good in this area. I suspect that you mean "Real Estate" module when talking about double-page "Finance" because I only have single-page "Finance".

This is what I get with HEPAX 002 (HEPAX 1C and REAL EST 1A):

C: REAL EST 1A
D: HEPAX RAM

#14

not that this will bring any new information, but I tested with Hepax 1D and Real estate and got the same result - the first page is recognized as the Real Estate pack, the second page as Hepax memory.


#15

Hi,

Certainly it is the Real Estate PAC.

Thanks so much for checking it out with different tools.

Best wishes.

Diego.

Edited: 25 Sept 2008, 10:17 a.m.


#16

Diego,

Did you see my test results from Tuesday, above?

Dan


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Strange HP 25 Problem (Repair) Onur Ilkorur 5 1,604 12-06-2013, 05:13 PM
Last Post: Onur Ilkorur
  Strange Battery Icon during updaate of Prime Firmware. Harold A Climer 7 1,958 12-05-2013, 04:40 PM
Last Post: Michael de Estrada
  HP-Prime updates fhub 57 9,918 12-05-2013, 09:21 AM
Last Post: Michael de Estrada
  ROM updates? Michael Carey 1 692 11-20-2013, 02:38 AM
Last Post: debrouxl
  HP PRIME : strange behavior when trying user key capability Damien 12 2,294 11-03-2013, 11:02 AM
Last Post: Joe Horn
  HP Prime function APP - Strange limitation ! :o( dg1969 2 923 10-04-2013, 12:10 PM
Last Post: dg1969
  Prime Updates (don't get excited yet) Tim Wessman 3 873 09-26-2013, 06:18 PM
Last Post: Han
  HP41CX: Strange serial #... Stephan Matthys 1 679 09-13-2013, 01:38 PM
Last Post: Stephan Matthys
  [WP34s] strange behaviour at number entry Dieter 12 2,200 06-06-2013, 05:36 PM
Last Post: Harald
  Strange battery leak Cristian Arezzini 0 580 06-03-2013, 09:49 AM
Last Post: Cristian Arezzini

Forum Jump: