JP1 Remotes

The Robman · Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2003 2:59 pm Post subject: FYI: 6805 protocols

MikeE has noticed that there are two types of 6805 protocol out there, not one as we had previously assumed.

Mike can fill you in on the details, I'm just throwing this out there so that any of you maintining IR, RM, KM, etc can start allowing for a new protocol type.
_________________
Rob
www.hifi-remote.com
Please don't PM me with remote questions, post them in the forums so all the experts can help!

mr_d_p_gumby · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 11:47 am Post subject:

I'm still wondering how we are going to denote the difference in the protocols in the RDF files (for RM's benefit). The problem is not dissimilar to the old/new S3C8 types, which got me thinking aboout how that was addressed.

Basically, the RAMAddr=nn setting is used to differentiate between the two S3C8s, since IR only needed to know how to disassemble the protocols. While this works OK, it's not the most reliable method of indicating a fundamental difference in the protocol construction.

Again, this has no direct impact on IR, so I am proposing that we add a new item to the [General] section to indicate the protocol type. IR would simply ignore this new item, so Mark Pauker would not have to do anything to IR to encompass this change.

My suggestion for the new item is "ProtocolClass=xyzabc", but I'd be happy with any other name that makes us all happy.

So, the RDF would look something like this:

The Robman · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 12:02 pm Post subject:

I like the idea, however, I think a better name might be ProcessorVersion or ProcessorVer as this makes the link to Processor more obvious.

We should then also include something in the S3C8 RDFs to differentiate between the two versions.
_________________
Rob
www.hifi-remote.com
Please don't PM me with remote questions, post them in the forums so all the experts can help!

jamesgammel · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 12:28 pm Post subject:

I gather from Mark Pierson's KM post that apparantly some 6805's use a different 6805 processor chip, so there's ar least two, possibly three(?) different 6805 processors?

As noted in my various posts about the Mill4, i discovered that the B00 and B01 use epoxy blob processors, and the B04 uses a "normal'chip. I was able to find that it can be discerened without taking the remote apart

Can one discern which of the 2 or 3 different 6805's his particular remote has without having to take it apart? IE do all B00's have a common processor, whereas a B02 or B04, or whatever always uses a different one?

Looking at Kent's Intuitive pix at his site, It can be seen that his "B01" uses a "normal" chip (no epoxy blob). Since no one has indicated that he has a "B00" version, I guess we don't know yet if it exists as a model, nor what chip it uses if it does exist. I assume from what I've seen and noticed so far that the signatures are identical, regardless of the processor chip (like the Mill4)?

Jim

gfb107 · Expert Joined: 03 Aug 2003 Posts: 3411 Location: Cary, NC

I don't know about IR, but RM uses the processor information to detemine:

1. Determining what protocols have protocol upgrade code compatible with a given remote.
2. Which protocol upgrade code to use for a given remote, and if it should be translated.

For RM it would be just as effective to embed the processor version in the processor, as opposed to adding an additional parameter.

So, instead of
Processor=6805
ProcessorVersion=C9

We would have
Processor=6805-C9

In protocols.ini, we would need to create separate entries for the protocol upgrade code, which would somehome combine the processor and version in much the same way.

Code.6805-C9=...
Code.6805-RC16/18=...
_________________
-- Greg
Original RemoteMaster developer
JP1 How-To's and Software Tools
The #1 Code Search FAQ and it's answer (PLEASE READ FIRST)

mr_d_p_gumby · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 5:55 pm Post subject:

mr_d_p_gumby · Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 6:21 pm Post subject: