V6 ability for pcm hammer.

They go by many names, P01, P59, VPW, '0411 etc . Circa 1999 to 2006. All VPW OBD2 PCMs.
Site Admin
User avatar
Posts: 5976
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:34 pm

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby antus » Tue Jan 14, 2020 10:38 pm

Im not sure what the 83 00 20 is, it might mean upload completed, but it breaks all the standards, so maybe not. I think we need to trust that the OS said it'd take the kernel, so it did. If there was something wrong with the arguments it would have sent an error. A dev kernel should try and send anything straight away to identify iteself as running at this stage of development. When I did the ls1flash read kernel, I got the DLC working, then had a function that just sent some vpw as a marker, and when I found a crash I'd move where I called that function from until I didnt see the response from it.

The 7F response shows its crashed because neither the read kernel or the write kernel have anything in the main loop that would generate that response. So if it cant do it, it must be the OS.

Because of the watchdog, and the way its built you'll (almost certainly) never get a crash where it just stops and needs power removed. It tends to reset and go back to the factory OS and you see standard responses like you would the same as if you threw packets at a locked pcm. you will see this a lot :think:
Have you read the FAQ? For lots of information and links to significant threads see here: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1396

Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby Gampy » Tue Jan 14, 2020 11:04 pm

I do have the kernel sending a debug message upon execution, If it runs and can communicate I should know pretty quickly.

I call that the 'printf()' debugging technique ... I have no idea what others call it, haven't done much programming communication with others, always been a closet coder.

[edit]
BTW, I do test my kernel on a P01/59 frequently to ensure I haven't broke it.

Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby Gampy » Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:33 am

What would these logs lead one to believe??
P59
[09:19:04:544] TX: 36800542FF9000 ... Wacked data off.
[09:19:05:888] RX: 6D F0 10 76 00 73
[09:19:05:889] Found response, Success
[09:19:05:889] Kernel upload 100% complete.
[09:19:05:895] TX: STPX H:6C10F0, R:1, D:3D00
[09:19:06:240] RX: 6D F0 10 AA BB CC
[09:19:06:349] TX: STPX H:6C10F0, R:1, D:3D00
[09:19:06:959] RX: 6C F0 10 7D 00 08 02 04 CC
[09:19:06:960] Kernel Version: 080204CC
[09:19:06:962] kernel uploaded to PCM succesfully. Requesting data...
P04
[09:24:53:201] TX: 36800552FF9000 ... Wacked data off.
[09:24:57:833] Empty response to receive. That's not OK.
[09:24:57:845] Sending 'test device present' notification.
[09:24:57:853] TX: STPX H:8CFEF0, R:0, D:3F
[09:24:57:872] Empty response to STPX with data. That's OK
[09:25:00:110] Empty response to receive. That's not OK.
[09:25:00:118] Sending 'test device present' notification.
[09:25:00:126] TX: STPX H:8CFEF0, R:0, D:3F
[09:25:00:143] Empty response to STPX with data. That's OK
[09:25:02:382] Empty response to receive. That's not OK.
The only changes between them are ... 1) The device, 2) The DLC Addressing.
If one notices the kernel is loading at FF9000 on the P59 as well.

My debug "printf technique" ...
[09:19:06:240] RX: 6D F0 10 AA BB CC
Code: Select all
void DebugMsg()
{
   MessageBuffer[0] = 0x6D;
   MessageBuffer[1] = 0xF0;
   MessageBuffer[2] = 0x10;
   MessageBuffer[3] = 0xAA;
   MessageBuffer[4] = 0xBB;
   MessageBuffer[5] = 0xCC;
   WriteMessage(6, 1);
   LongSleepWithWatchdog();
}
Code: Select all
int
__attribute__((section(".kernelstart")))
KernelStart(void)
{
   DebugMsg();

   for(;;)
   {
As you can see I have removed everything upon entry.

P59: Looks good, it's working ...
P04: Leads me to believe the kernel is running and unable to talk back ...

Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2016 9:20 pm

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby kur4o » Wed Jan 15, 2020 1:59 am

[09:24:53:201] TX: 36800552FF9000 ... Wacked data off.
[09:24:57:833] Empty response to receive. That's not OK.


It is because you are overwriting RAM that pcm uses for DLC communication. You can`t get the proper response and the jump to subroutine executed correctly because they are overwritten on the upload.
On earlier v6 OS the minimum for uploading is FF9090.
Use 38 00, 36 80 is not supported. Expect a 78 response byte if the upload is successful.

Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby Gampy » Wed Jan 15, 2020 2:23 am

kur4o wrote:It is because you are overwriting RAM that pcm uses for DLC communication. You can`t get the proper response and the jump to subroutine executed correctly because they are overwritten on the upload.
On earlier v6 OS the minimum for uploading is FF9090.
Use 38 00, 36 80 is not supported. Expect a 78 response byte if the upload is successful.
Awesome input, Thank you!
I totally agree, one must respect each others space!

So using 3800 means it is a single packet only??

Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby Gampy » Wed Jan 15, 2020 2:54 am

Bah Humbug ... First attempt.
[11:41:01:324] TX: 38000540FF9090 ... Wacked data off.
[11:41:05:924] Empty response to receive. That's not OK.
[11:41:05:925] Sending 'test device present' notification.
[11:41:05:925] TX: STPX H:8CFEF0, R:0, D:3F
Haven't given up on this though ... Gotta verify what I've done.

Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:02 pm

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby Vampyre » Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:10 am

kur4o wrote:
[09:24:53:201] TX: 36800552FF9000 ... Wacked data off.
[09:24:57:833] Empty response to receive. That's not OK.


It is because you are overwriting RAM that pcm uses for DLC communication. You can`t get the proper response and the jump to subroutine executed correctly because they are overwritten on the upload.
On earlier v6 OS the minimum for uploading is FF9090.
Use 38 00, 36 80 is not supported. Expect a 78 response byte if the upload is successful.


thank you, I did notice in the other flash programs 80 wasnt used.

Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2016 9:20 pm

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby kur4o » Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:11 am

Sorry for the typo error.

It is 36 00, what I mean, and yes single upload only.

Posts: 364
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby Gampy » Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:45 am

[01:37:22:484] TX: 3600053CFF9090
[01:37:23:812] RX: 6D F0 10 76 00 78
[01:37:23:813] Found response, Success
[01:37:23:814] Kernel upload 100% complete.
[01:37:23:822] TX: STPX H:6C10F0, R:1, D:3D00
[01:37:27:116] Empty response to receive. That's not OK.
[01:37:27:240] TX: STPX H:6C10F0, R:1, D:3D00
[01:37:27:267] RX: 6C F0 10 7F 3D 00 11
[01:37:27:277] Kernel Version: 00000000
[01:37:27:284] kernel uploaded to PCM succesfully. Requesting data...
No response from kernel ... it has rebooted? or not executed the kernel?

[edit]
This is looking like it's going to need two kernels just for the P04 in the end, a skinny one to handle multi packets to bring the working kernel onboard ...
Last edited by Gampy on Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:08 am, edited 2 times in total.

Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:02 pm

Re: V6 ability for pcm hammer.

Postby Vampyre » Wed Jan 15, 2020 5:06 am

I get zero response with 38, would that be hammer saying no response since its not 76 or just no responce

PreviousNext

Return to GM LS1 512Kbyte and 1Mbyte

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests