Code for Osmart brand XBox DVD Remote

[Flavor]

Hey guys. I had a question for ya.

If I want to do a

LDW RRF8,#00E0H
CALL 0158H

Is there a better way to do that? I mean, I don't need a whole word to load that byte. It seems like I could cut down the size of the protocol if I could just do an LD, though I don't know what the function expects.

Please let me know if there's a better way to call sleep for a smaller interval like this.

Thanks for all the help!

[The Robman]

Hey guys. I had a question for ya.

If I want to do a

LDW RRF8,#00E0H
CALL 0158H

Is there a better way to do that? I mean, I don't need a whole word to load that byte. It seems like I could cut down the size of the protocol if I could just do an LD, though I don't know what the function expects.

Please let me know if there's a better way to call sleep for a smaller interval like this.

Thanks for all the help!

That statement is the same as loading zeroes to RF8 and #E0h to RF9. If you were to just do the load to RF9 you would not be able to guarantee that RF8 would contain zeroes.

If you're looking to conserve code space, I notice that you are using an inner loop (of 255) and an outer loop (of 4) to send that delay. A better option might be to increase the delay time by a factor of 4 and do away with the outer loop.

[Flavor]

That statement is the same as loading zeroes to RF8 and #E0h to RF9. If you were to just do the load to RF9 you would not be able to guarantee that RF8 would contain zeroes.

Yeah, I realize that RF9 will be random until I initialize it. Will any of the other calls mod RF9? I am doing something a little new, and if I could zero RF9 once and then set RF8 from then on, it would be smaller.

If you're looking to conserve code space, I notice that you are using an inner loop (of 255) and an outer loop (of 4) to send that delay. A better option might be to increase the delay time by a factor of 4 and do away with the outer loop.

Actually, I am using an inner loop of 255 and a ONE-TIME outer loop of 4. That makes the time between the initial signal and the second signal 4 times longer than the following repeats.

Also, any time you're in that delay, it makes the remote less responsive. So, making the loop variable larger and making the delay time smaller has a positive effect on the protocol.

In fact, my next protocol update actually does

Code: Select all

CALL	010AH
JRNC	END
LDW	RRF8,#0038H
CALL	0158H
CALL	010AH
JRNC	END
LDW	RRF8,#0038H
CALL	0158H
CALL	010AH
JRNC	END
LDW	RRF8,#0038H
CALL	0158H
CALL	010AH
JRNC	END
LDW	RRF8,#0038H
CALL	0158H

Instead of

Code: Select all

CALL	010AH
JRNC	END
LDW	RRF8,#00E0H

That's why I asked if there's a smaller way to load that register, because I could do this if it works.

Code: Select all

LD     RF9,#00
CALL	010AH
JRNC	END
LD	RF8,#38H
CALL	0158H
CALL	010AH
JRNC	END
LD	RF8,#38H
CALL	0158H
CALL	010AH
JRNC	END
LD	RF8,#38H
CALL	0158H
CALL	010AH
JRNC	END
LD	RF8,#38H
CALL	0158H

Though, that probablly isn't what you guys want. It would be fine for me, since my remote has lots of room available.

[The Robman]

If you were to switch your outer loop to 255 repeats and your inner loop to 4, instead of adding all that code, you could simply increase the inner loop to 16 and reduce the delay time.

Also, you have the registers backwards, when you load #0038H into RRF8, RF8 will end up zeroes and RF9 will contain "38".

[Flavor]

If you were to switch your outer loop to 255 repeats and your inner loop to 4, instead of adding all that code, you could simply increase the inner loop to 16 and reduce the delay time.

But, that 4 loop only happens one time. The first time you press the button, it runs the loop 1020 times. After that, it only runs it 255 times.

The real reason that I unrolled it to 4 calls is that I plan to test a 3-level repeating. So, when you hit the key, the first delay is N uSec, then the next 10 repeats are N/4 uSec apart. Finally, if you keep holding it down, it speeds up to N/8 (or maybe N/16) uSec per repeat. I could use another (3rd) loop for this, or I could unroll it to 2-4 calls. I'm not sure which is better, and it'll take some testing before I decide.

Also, you have the registers backwards, when you load #0038H into RRF8, RF8 will end up zeroes and RF9 will contain "38".

Thanks! That's a good catch! I would have been scratching my head for a bit on that.

[Flavor]

Here's my latest. I don't really plan to tweak it anymore.

I'm calling this Version 12 because my own numbering got up to 12.

Upgrade protocol 0 = 01 DF (S3C8+) GBX #12-4 (PB v3.12)
3D 90 51 8B 12 85 24 08 05 03 0C 00 F0 01 04 02
F8 0D AC 01 04 00 F0 18 08 56 C1 07 87 21 03 29
03 B0 C5 F6 01 46 F6 01 46 C6 F8 00 38 A6 C5 00
6B 09 A6 C5 0A 2B 08 4C 02 8B 07 4C 10 8B 02 4C
04 5E 6C FF 70 C4 F6 01 0A 50 C4 FB 09 F6 01 58
6A F2 4A EE 8B CD AF
End

Code: Select all

		DB	3DH,90H	;38.3 kHz 30%
		DB	51H	;5 dev, 1 cmd
		JR	LFF17	
		DB	85H	;pf0: 10000101=1-dev,1-cmd,dev-cmd
		DB	24H	;pf1: 00100100=LI-same,LI-LO
		DB	08H	;pd00: DevBits1=8
		DB	05H	;pd01: CmdBits1=5
		DW	030CH	;pd02/03: 1-burst on=1560 uS
		DW	00F0H	;pd04/05: 1-burst off=520 uS
		DW	0104H	;pd06/07: 0-burst on=520 uS
		DW	02F8H	;pd08/09: 0-burst off=1560 uS
		DW	0DACH	;pd0A/0B: Leadout off=7000 uS
		DW	0104H	;pd0C/0D: Leadin on=520 uS
		DW	00F0H	;pd0E/0F: Leadin off=520 uS
LFF17:	LD	W1,DCBUF+5	
		AND	RC1,#07H	
		LD	W2,#03H[W1]	
		LD	DCBUF,W2	
		CLR	W5	;init the counter
XMIT:	CALL	XMITIR	
		CALL	XMITIR	
		LDW	RRF8,#0038H	
		CP	W5,#00H	;check for first press
		JREQ	FIRST	
		CP	W5,#0AH	;how many times before level 3
		JRLE	SECOND	
		LD	W4,#02H	;third level waits this long (half of lvl 2)
		JR	W4LOOP	;but no longer increments
FIRST:	LD	W4,#10H	;4 times slower than level 2
		JR	INCW5	
SECOND:	LD	W4,#04H	;level 2
INCW5:	INC	W5	;increment the counter
W4LOOP:	LD	W6,#FFH	;Do the main waitloop FF times every time
W6LOOP:	PUSH	W4	
		CALL	010AH	
		POP	W4	
		JRNC	END	
		CALL	0158H	
		DJNZ	W6,W6LOOP	
		DJNZ	W4,W4LOOP	
		JR	XMIT	; XMIT again
END:		RET

It does 3-level repeating. It goes 1X for the initial press, then 4X for the next 9 repeats, and then 8X after that. If you want something really similar to the original, then I suggest you go back and use Version 8. I like this 3-level repeat more than the original, so that's why I did it. I have some large directories to scroll through in XBMC, so it's nice to be able to kick it up to a higher gear after a bit.

[The Robman]

Could you post the PB file also please.
http://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload ... &cat_id=42

[Flavor]

I wasn't sure which one you wanted, so I posted the PB file for version #8 and the version #12.

Thanks a lot for your help, guys. I really appreciate it. I like how it works, now. It's a LOT better than when I started.

[The Robman]

When I test this protocol using my URC-8910, it still doesn't repeat. Could you load your IR image to the Diagnosis Area so I can load it directly into one of my 15-2104 remotes to test it.

Btw, are you using PUSH and POP because the W4 register was getting overlaid? Did you try and other registers?

[Flavor]

I am doing the push/pop because it doesn't work without it. I had tried some other registers, but I didn't know which were safe to use. I had bad luck with the couple I tried, so I just left it at push/pop. If you know of another one that doesn't get clobbered, obviously that would make the protocol smaller.

Here's my .ir file.
http://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload ... le_id=2456

[The Robman]

OK, this is totally weird. I loaded your IR file into my 15-2104 and it does indeed repeat properly, but if I load the same upgrades into a URC-8811 or a URC-8910 the signal doesn't repeat at all.

So, something about your protocol isn't global enough to work on all remotes and so far I haven't spotted what it is.

Maybe there's something weird about the 15-2104 which is the reason why all my earlier protocols looked fine to me but didn't work for you.

[Flavor]

Well, I think my logic is pretty good, but maybe the function calls are a little different between the remotes. Maybe on some remotes the functions clobber different registers. Like John said that W4 wouldn't get modified, but it obviously does on my remote.

You might try a push/pop for the other registers around the calls.

Also, you might notice that I have my sleep calls set to (LDW RRF8,#0038H). I noticed that if I divide it in half down to 1C and double the W4 loop variables, then it doesn't work, anymore. Maybe there's something weird there, too.

I'd say that if it doesn't repeat, then it's staying in the loop forever. It's probable that W4, W5, or W6 is getting messed up during the loop and any of the 3 calls could be doing it. I had a version with a lot of push/pops, but I whittled it down to just W4 around that one call.

[The Robman]

If it was staying in the loop the remote would lock up with the red LED lit up, so it's obviously exiting too soon.

[Flavor]

Yeah, you're probablly right about that, then. Though, I think that the only thing that exits the loop is the "JRNC END." The only other thing that I think could exit my code is if the stack gets screwed up.

Also, I was originally going to modify the sleep time, but I never actually implemented that. So, it might be good to move the "LDW RRF8,#0038H" to immediatly before the "CALL 0158H" so that you know for sure that nobody else mods it. Though, I can't see why that would make it exit the loop.

Does my Version 8 work for you, or does that exhibit the same problem?

[Flavor]

Just FYI, here are some differences between your Ver4 code and my Ver8/12 code.

On yours, RC6 is incremented every time XMITIR is called. I assume that XMITIR doesn't do anything with RC6, and I assume that the other functions don't need to see this register incremented.

You loaded RRF8 with a value MUCH higher than I used. I assumed that it didn't matter, but maybe some remotes need it to be over a certain value.

Your code doesn't push/pop W4 and it uses it as a loop variable. On my remote, that didn't work. Perhaps there's something different between our remotes, and we should use a different register instead of W4.

Are there other registers that are good to use instead of W4, W5, and W6?

I gotta run for a bit now, but I'd sure like to figure out what's up with this.