- TechToolsList - listserv.classicarcade.com

RE: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100
by Chris Toseland 09 May '02

09 May '02

I'm coming into this thread half way so excuse me if i'm getting the wrong end of the stick. RomIdent does indeed use Standard CRC32, With Thierry's I wrote a VB front end that imported the Romident database into access and then took a file from disk or memory (It was an add on tool for my eprom programmer) and calculated it's CRC32 and scanned the DB for matches. The one down side I found was the diffence with how C++ and VB handle the datatype, it took a while to realise that VB had inverted all of the CRC values..... Chris -----Original Message----- From: Phillip Eaton [mailto:inbox@phillipeaton.com] Sent: 08 May 2002 22:51 To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com Subject: RE: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100 AFAIK, the signature that Rom Ident uses is a standard CRC-32 calculation, which is calculated in an identical way to CRC-16 and CCITT CRCs, using all bits of each byte in the file. The polynomial may be different (i.e. more bits for CRC-32), but the technique is the same for any CRC/Signature calculation. Have a search for CRC-16 and CRC-32 on Google, you get back loads of results. WinZip uses CRC-32, as does MAME, to see the CRC-32 for a file, zip it up in WinZip (8.0?) and set the configuraiton options to show the CRC. You'll see it's 8 hex characters i.e. 32 bits. Cheers, Phillip Eaton > -----Original Message----- > From: John Robertson [mailto:jrr@flippers.com] > Sent: 08 May 2002 22:44 > To: Phillip Eaton; TechToolsList(a)flippers.com > Subject: RE: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100 > > > Home today fighting a small chest infection... > > I don't think these ROM Signatures generated by the base numbers are true > "Signatures" after all. Note that the coding for them does not follow the > convention of using HP's ACFHPU, rather the "signature" generated uses > standard HEX nomenclature.. Now I wonder what this number > actually is...I'm > going to try to use my new Arium ML1400 Logic Analyzer to see if > I can find > the section of code in the base that actually is used to create the ROM > signature and report back. > > I think it is more likely a signature similar to the one ROMIDENT uses... > anyone know it's root formula? > > John :-#)# > > At 10:06 AM 07/05/2002 +0100, Phillip Eaton wrote: > > >Ah ha! You've just spotted the reason for my previous > >question - What's the polynomial? > > > >I worked out the Cat Box polynomial directly from the PCB, > >you can actually _see_ the address counter and the XOR > >feedback points. Apparently the Cat Box polynomial is the > >same as the HP one. > > > >Now it gets a bit confusing... (Especially as I've not > >actually had time to get stuck into my Fluke and confirm all > >of this!) > > > >/As far as I can see/ The Fluke creates a signature with a > >similar procedure to a boring old checksum, by reading each > >byte of a region of memory space and performing a calculation > >on it to produce a single 16 bit signature. To create the > >signature, it right shifts each bit of each byte into the > >polynomimial XOR 'circuitry'. On the Cat Box the 'circuitry' > >is physical, but is probably software on the 9010a for > >reasons shown below. > > > >On a Fluke, there seems to be a bit of general confusion as > >to where the calculation is done, in the pod or in the main > >unit. I would be very surprised if it were done in the pod > >but I could be wrong. (I hope to have a look myself in the > >summer, when I've finished college...) > > > >Anyway, the Cat Box performs Signature /Analysis/, which also > >produces a signature, but not by reading in a chunk of bytes > >and creating a signature from them via software. > > > >Using a probe, it reads the chain of bits that occur at a > >particular point on a PCB when the address bus is ramped from > >0 to FFFFH. To test one part of a circuit e.g. a single ROM, > >you would tie a sig analysis start and stop line to the chip > >enable of the ROM which in effect maps to that ROMs address > >space only. > > > >If you point the probe at the one data line of the ROM, you > >will get a stream of bits which you can XOR in a similar way > >to the standard Fluke signature. BUT the calculation will > >only be performed on one bit of each byte as there are 8 data > >lines and you only have one probe! Thus, you get 8 signatures > >per ROM as shown in the Atari Cat Box signature reference for > >each PCB. > > > >A Fluke signature is an improved way of testing a ROMs > >integrity over a checksum, but it can't be used to analyse > >anything other than a fixed areas of memory space i.e. ROM. > >Signature /Analysis/ can test /any/ digital part of a circuit > >as long at it derives from the processor's address and data > >decoding (i.e you can't do the video circuitry). > > > >My program uses a software way of calculating the signature, > >but it emulates the Atari probe hardware i.e. by testing only > >1 bit of a byte and thus it is an emulator, as opposed to > >just a signature generator. > > > >I originally wrote it to do the 8 bits of a ROM, but this > >added an extra loop, and all I was really trying to do was > >show how it worked, so I went back to just one bit for > >clarity. > > > >Note BASIC has no bitwise operators so the code is a bit > >cumbersome, if you rewrote it in C, or even better Forth, it > >would be a fraction of the size. > > > >You could quite easily modify my emulation to either create > >all 8 checksums together like the Cat Box or pass all of the > >information from each byte serially into the calculation like > >the Fluke (if you knew it's polynomial). > > > >Cheers, > >Phillip Eaton > >http://www.phillipeaton.com > > > >---- Original message ---- > > >Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 21:45:41 -0700 > > >From: John Robertson <jrr(a)flippers.com> > > >Subject: RE: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100 > > >To: "Phillip Eaton" <inbox(a)phillipeaton.com>, > ><TechToolsList(a)flippers.com> > > > > > > > > >Hi Phillip, > > > > > >I just tried your emulator on a bunch of Asteroid files and > >compared them > > >with the signatures on the 9010 and I do not get the same > >results... Does > > >it not setup the same Signature that HP designed and thus > >should it not > > >give the same results for any file as the Fluke would do on > >a ROM signature > > >test? The signatures generated by your emulator are > >consistent - identical > > >files give identical signatures... > > > > > >Might I ask what the "Bit number <0 - 7>" refers to in the > >emulator? > > > > > >John :-#)# > > > > > >At 11:08 PM 06/05/2002 +0100, Phillip Eaton wrote: > > > > > > > > >>I wrote one of these a few years back. It's part of my > >Atari Cat Box > > >>signature analysis write-up which is held at > > >>http://www.gamearchive.com/video/manufacturer/atari/vector/s > >ignatures/ > > >> > > >>It includes a very simple program source code (to aid > >understanding) to do > > >>what you mentioned in MS DOS QBasic for the Cat Box. > > >> > > >>You could quite easily use it as a base to write your own, > >or simply change > > >>the polynomial in mine and it'd do what you need. > > >> > > >>How did you work out the ploynomial? > > >> > > >>Cheers, > > >>Phillip Eaton > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: owner-techtoolslist(a)www.flippers.com > > >> > [mailto:owner-techtoolslist@www.flippers.com]On Behalf > >Of John Robertson > > >> > Sent: 06 May 2002 22:03 > > >> > To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com > > >> > Subject: Re: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100 > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > What we need is for some bright person to write a simple > >utility that > > >> > converts data files to signatures. The signature formula > >is fairly simple > > >> > and if combined with Bill Ung's ROMSUM would be a nice > >tool for our > > >> > package. If you don't know ROMSUM it is a dos utility > >that will give a > > >> > checksum listing plus the ROM size for a single or group > >of files... > > >> > > > >> > The Signature process is a CRC process that uses the > >following feedback > > >> > equation: X(to the 16th) + X(to the 12th) + X(to the > >9th) +X(to > > >> > the 7th) + > > >> > 1 or > > >> > P(X) = X(15th) + X(9th) + X(7th) +X(4th) + 1 > > >> > > > >> > So who wants to make a simple (not for me!) binary > >program that > > >> > allows one > > >> > to input a file and outputs it's signature? > > >> > > > >> > John :-#)# > > >> > > > >> > At 09:11 AM 06/05/2002 -0400, Kev wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >Anyone written any test scripts for these or at the > >very least have some > > >> > >checksum signatures? > > >> > > > > >> > >Thanks, > > >> > >Kev > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >

1 0

Re: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100
by Kev 09 May '02

09 May '02

This idea doesn't work either since (look below) > >Okay, a checksum on a single byte of FF yeilds an FF > >I found this to be interesting...... > > >Byte 0 = F3 Sig = FE >Byte 1 = 3E Sig = 1EE8 >Byte 2 = 00 Sig = 1EE8 >Byte 3 = ED Sig = 225A >Byte 4 = 47 Sig = 56B6 Byte 12 = ?? Sig =910E Byte 13 = 00 Sig = 20F6 > >It isn't using the last read byte as the divisor is it? > >Kev > >> >>"Rom Signature is a four-digit HEXADECIMAL number that is a shorthand >>representation of the data obtained in an area of ROM memory. The ROM >>signature is obtained by successively dividing the data in ROM by a binary >>number (they DON't say what the @!$%#$@% number is! - JR). The resulting >>signature identifies the data from which it is obtained, and provides a >>convenient way of" (....blah blah, no other description of the process)."

2 2

Re: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100
by Kev 09 May '02

09 May '02

>There is hardware for running an HP signature in the 9010a. I found this in the >service manual (page 4 of 4 of the main board schematic, or something like that, >there was no page number). Included in the calculation was a counter that >counts the number of high to low transitions made by the incoming data >bitstream. > Is this the Async clock module? (where you looking at the PDF from spies or do yo have a schematic?) >If this circuit is being used to calculate the sigs, it could be that this count >value is being added back into the calculation to convolute things. If this is >the case, the above solution won't work. > >This could be tested by, finding two identical signatures, using different >bytes, that created the same CRC, and then adding a third byte to see if they >are both still equal. > 2 identical signatures for the 9010A? we've got a collection of a paultry few. I did run across one the otherday but I'm pretty confident it was a typo. Alex Yeckley are you reading? Kev

3 2

Uploads...
by John Robertson 09 May '02

09 May '02

(Opps, didn't mean to send this to the list...) Hi Kev, Just moved the uploads of yours, was the earlier Intro defective? I can't open it, plus it was only 24K in size. I've deleted it, was it just an earlier version of the 9010training manual you also uploaded... John :-#)#

1 0

More uploads
by John Robertson 09 May '02

09 May '02

1 0

Re: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100
by Kev 09 May '02

09 May '02

Okay, a checksum on a single byte of FF yeilds an FF I found this to be interesting...... Byte 0 = F3 Sig = FE Byte 1 = 3E Sig = 1EE8 Byte 2 = 00 Sig = 1EE8 Byte 3 = ED Sig = 225A Byte 4 = 47 Sig = 56B6 It isn't using the last read byte as the divisor is it? Kev > >"Rom Signature is a four-digit HEXADECIMAL number that is a shorthand >representation of the data obtained in an area of ROM memory. The ROM >signature is obtained by successively dividing the data in ROM by a binary >number (they DON't say what the @!$%#$@% number is! - JR). The resulting >signature identifies the data from which it is obtained, and provides a >convenient way of" (....blah blah, no other description of the process)." > >John :-#)# > >At 12:14 AM 09/05/2002 +0100, Phillip Eaton wrote: > > >> > >> > Just for the fun of it I wrote a quick program that tried all >> > possible feedback >> > combinations for 16 bit CRCs (65536 combinations), none of them >> > generated the >> > proper signatures, so it's more than just a variation of the standard CRC >> > calculations. >> >>Ah-ha! BUT!! Did you try for all possible combinations of /starting/ CRC? >>Try that 'just for fun' - it should only take 65536 times as long :-) >> >>In my old serial comms days, we always started our CRC's at some bizarre >>number (3403 IIRC), for two reasons 1) it offered better data security of >>our protocols and 2) because it was safer to start there as some random >>numbers are better generators than others. >> >>If you run a mathematical random number generators over a long period then >>you get less random bits that others (i.e. the numbers stay about the same >>for a while). This is the same for CRC's and thus the safety of the >>calculation in spotting single or double bit errors is dimished in certain >>areas. >> >> > Anybody know of two different ROMs, or byte streams that result >> > in the same >> > signature? >> >>There's loads in ROMIdent - just run with a bunch of EPROMS from your MAME >>directory, and you're bound to find a couple. >> >>Cheers, >>Phillip Eaton > >

2 1

RE: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100
by Phillip Eaton 09 May '02

09 May '02

Ah ha! You've just spotted the reason for my previous question - What's the polynomial? I worked out the Cat Box polynomial directly from the PCB, you can actually _see_ the address counter and the XOR feedback points. Apparently the Cat Box polynomial is the same as the HP one. Now it gets a bit confusing... (Especially as I've not actually had time to get stuck into my Fluke and confirm all of this!) /As far as I can see/ The Fluke creates a signature with a similar procedure to a boring old checksum, by reading each byte of a region of memory space and performing a calculation on it to produce a single 16 bit signature. To create the signature, it right shifts each bit of each byte into the polynomimial XOR 'circuitry'. On the Cat Box the 'circuitry' is physical, but is probably software on the 9010a for reasons shown below. On a Fluke, there seems to be a bit of general confusion as to where the calculation is done, in the pod or in the main unit. I would be very surprised if it were done in the pod but I could be wrong. (I hope to have a look myself in the summer, when I've finished college...) Anyway, the Cat Box performs Signature /Analysis/, which also produces a signature, but not by reading in a chunk of bytes and creating a signature from them via software. Using a probe, it reads the chain of bits that occur at a particular point on a PCB when the address bus is ramped from 0 to FFFFH. To test one part of a circuit e.g. a single ROM, you would tie a sig analysis start and stop line to the chip enable of the ROM which in effect maps to that ROMs address space only. If you point the probe at the one data line of the ROM, you will get a stream of bits which you can XOR in a similar way to the standard Fluke signature. BUT the calculation will only be performed on one bit of each byte as there are 8 data lines and you only have one probe! Thus, you get 8 signatures per ROM as shown in the Atari Cat Box signature reference for each PCB. A Fluke signature is an improved way of testing a ROMs integrity over a checksum, but it can't be used to analyse anything other than a fixed areas of memory space i.e. ROM. Signature /Analysis/ can test /any/ digital part of a circuit as long at it derives from the processor's address and data decoding (i.e you can't do the video circuitry). My program uses a software way of calculating the signature, but it emulates the Atari probe hardware i.e. by testing only 1 bit of a byte and thus it is an emulator, as opposed to just a signature generator. I originally wrote it to do the 8 bits of a ROM, but this added an extra loop, and all I was really trying to do was show how it worked, so I went back to just one bit for clarity. Note BASIC has no bitwise operators so the code is a bit cumbersome, if you rewrote it in C, or even better Forth, it would be a fraction of the size. You could quite easily modify my emulation to either create all 8 checksums together like the Cat Box or pass all of the information from each byte serially into the calculation like the Fluke (if you knew it's polynomial). Cheers, Phillip Eaton http://www.phillipeaton.com ---- Original message ---- >Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 21:45:41 -0700 >From: John Robertson <jrr(a)flippers.com> >Subject: RE: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100 >To: "Phillip Eaton" <inbox(a)phillipeaton.com>, <TechToolsList(a)flippers.com> > > >Hi Phillip, > >I just tried your emulator on a bunch of Asteroid files and compared them >with the signatures on the 9010 and I do not get the same results... Does >it not setup the same Signature that HP designed and thus should it not >give the same results for any file as the Fluke would do on a ROM signature >test? The signatures generated by your emulator are consistent - identical >files give identical signatures... > >Might I ask what the "Bit number <0 - 7>" refers to in the emulator? > >John :-#)# > >At 11:08 PM 06/05/2002 +0100, Phillip Eaton wrote: > > >>I wrote one of these a few years back. It's part of my Atari Cat Box >>signature analysis write-up which is held at >>http://www.gamearchive.com/video/manufacturer/atari/vector/s ignatures/ >> >>It includes a very simple program source code (to aid understanding) to do >>what you mentioned in MS DOS QBasic for the Cat Box. >> >>You could quite easily use it as a base to write your own, or simply change >>the polynomial in mine and it'd do what you need. >> >>How did you work out the ploynomial? >> >>Cheers, >>Phillip Eaton >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: owner-techtoolslist(a)www.flippers.com >> > [mailto:owner-techtoolslist@www.flippers.com]On Behalf Of John Robertson >> > Sent: 06 May 2002 22:03 >> > To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com >> > Subject: Re: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100 >> > >> > >> > >> > What we need is for some bright person to write a simple utility that >> > converts data files to signatures. The signature formula is fairly simple >> > and if combined with Bill Ung's ROMSUM would be a nice tool for our >> > package. If you don't know ROMSUM it is a dos utility that will give a >> > checksum listing plus the ROM size for a single or group of files... >> > >> > The Signature process is a CRC process that uses the following feedback >> > equation: X(to the 16th) + X(to the 12th) + X(to the 9th) +X(to >> > the 7th) + >> > 1 or >> > P(X) = X(15th) + X(9th) + X(7th) +X(4th) + 1 >> > >> > So who wants to make a simple (not for me!) binary program that >> > allows one >> > to input a file and outputs it's signature? >> > >> > John :-#)# >> > >> > At 09:11 AM 06/05/2002 -0400, Kev wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > >Anyone written any test scripts for these or at the very least have some >> > >checksum signatures? >> > > >> > >Thanks, >> > >Kev >> > >> > >

3 8

Re: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100
by Kev 07 May '02

07 May '02

Wow! $56, no wonder the guy quickly listed his 2nd one. That is the Clock Module. The question is do you have a place to plug it? Most 9010As do not have Clock module support. As far as I know this is the 3rd DB style plug (sometimes you can see a knockout) on the bottom of the 9010A front. I believe the 9100 supports this clock module also. Does anyone know if the 9100 Signatures are the same or different using the clock module? (The ROM checksums/signatures definitely are). If you need more Signature Analyzer design info I can probably scan my Bugtrap SA. It is fairly small & simple and should be easy to duplicate. Back to Fluke Signatures/Checksums has anyone started disassembling the Z80 code for the 9010A? (or the 68000 for the 9100?) Thanks, Kev > >With all that in mind, I'm hoping to hell that this item I >just won on eBay is the '9010a - Option 006 Signature >Analyser' that I've seem mentioned in only one place on the >net. The numbers of wires hanging off it seem to look about >right. > >http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? >ViewItem&item=1726964195

2 1

RE: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100
by Phillip Eaton 07 May '02

07 May '02

With all that in mind, I'm hoping to hell that this item I just won on eBay is the '9010a - Option 006 Signature Analyser' that I've seem mentioned in only one place on the net. The numbers of wires hanging off it seem to look about right. http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItem&item=1726964195 Can anyone else give me any more information? One of my (very few, but quite long timescale) projects is to create a small standalone signature analysis PCB, similar to the Atari Cat Box design. I reckon I can do this with a small handful of IC's and get it inside a fag packet. It should be possible to do both Atari and Fluke polynomials at the same time, if the Fluke one is simple. With luck I'll get round to doing it this summer! Cheers, Phillip Eaton ---- Original message ---- >Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 21:45:41 -0700 >From: John Robertson <jrr(a)flippers.com> >Subject: RE: Gottlieb / Q*bert scripts for the 9010A/9100 >To: "Phillip Eaton" <inbox(a)phillipeaton.com>, <TechToolsList(a)flippers.com> > > >Hi Phillip, > >I just tried your emulator on a bunch of Asteroid files and compared them >with the signatures on the 9010 and I do not get the same results... Does >it not setup the same Signature that HP designed and thus should it not >give the same results for any file as the Fluke would do on a ROM signature >test? The signatures generated by your emulator are consistent - identical >files give identical signatures... > >Might I ask what the "Bit number <0 - 7>" refers to in the emulator? > >John :-#)#

1 0

Pokey Scripts?
by Kev 07 May '02

07 May '02

I've taken the sound scripts & added the Random Number Test but I cannot get the ALLPOT read to work just using writes/reads from the Fluke (Digital inputs). Has anyone else tackled this problem? I don't know if I have a timing problem or not but I cann't imagine it is a too fast or too slow? I'm using the same code/structure as seen in Tempest. All help appreciated. Thanks, Kev mowerman(a)erols.com

5 11