Re: 9010A signature analysis option

From: John Robertson <jrr_at_flippers.com>
Date: Tue Jan 29 2002 - 14:03:06 EST

<x-html>
<html>
Is it not easier to just use a NOP fixture for the processor? Perhaps
some genius here could write a routine that&nbsp; happily steps through
each and every address line the same as a NOP does. This would work for
any pod then...handy!<br><br>
John:-#)#<br><br>
At 10:11 PM 22/01/2002 +0000, Peter Fyfe wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite><font face="arial" size=2>Folks,</font><br>
&nbsp;<br>
<font face="arial" size=2>Has anyone used the SA option on the Fluke
yet.&nbsp; I've been playing around with space invaders and the RAM
failures that are due to other TTL chips.&nbsp; It occured to me that
when you loop on a read instruction you get a fairly stable train of
pulses on a lot of the IC's which would make it ideal for
SA.</font><br>
&nbsp;<br>
<font face="arial" size=2>Does anybody know if you can READ 2000 and LOOP
on it and still use the Fluke for the SA.</font><br>
&nbsp;<br>
<font face="arial" size=2>Just wondering</font><br>
&nbsp;<br>
<font face="arial" size=2>Peter</font><br>
&nbsp;<br>
<font face="arial" size=2>PS&nbsp; I do have some checksum data for
various boards, none of which has been verified.&nbsp; Pete Davies
(Invadar) was going to host these but if anyone is interested I can type
then up and you can use them at your leisure /
risk.</font></blockquote></html>

</x-html>
Received on Tue Jan 29 11:12:36 2002

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Dec 02 2003 - 18:40:39 EST