Universal Patcher - .xml files

They go by many names, P01, P59, VPW, '0411 etc. Also covering E38 and newer here.
Post Reply
darkman5001
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2021 8:15 am
cars: 2004 Suburban, 2001 Tahoe, 2002 Envoy, 2006 Envoy, 2003 Lincoln LS
Location: New Jersey, USA

Universal Patcher - .xml files

Post by darkman5001 »

I am curious... Everytime I load a P10 bin, this comes up. It seems to be detecting the PCM as (p08-03-05-l6 (v 1)). Where does this come from, and are the segments and addresses even accurate for the P10? Also is the hardware and other info under Eeprom data correct? I have a few P10s with different hardware numbers. I know if these addresses are not correct, then the segments are not being broken down correctly. Please advise. Thanks.

2002 GMC Envoy_4.2L_OSID 12587430.bin (p08-03-05-l6 (v 1))

Segments:
OS PN: 12587430, Ver: AA, Nr: 1 [0000 - 3FFF, 20000 - 7FFFF], Size: 64000
Engine PN: 12591948, Ver: AB, Nr: 2 [8000 - 10FFF], Size: 9000
Trans PN: 12583713, Ver: AB, Nr: 3 [11000 - 16FFF], Size: 6000
Speedo PN: 9351580, Ver: AP, Nr: 4 [17000 - 171FF], Size: 200
System PN: 12596388, Ver: AB, Nr: 5 [17200 - 17FFF], Size: E00
Eeprom_data [4000 - 5FFF], Size: 2000
VIN: 1GKDT13S622262628
BCC: YBRY
Hardware: 12575331

Checksums:
OS Checksum 1: D822 [OK] Checksum2: D75E
Engine Checksum 1: 77AA [OK] Checksum2: 4C82
Trans Checksum 1: 13A4 [OK] Checksum2: 635E
Speedo Checksum 1: 4754 [OK] Checksum2: 5FAA
System Checksum 1: 9EF1 [OK] Checksum2: 6C7E
Eeprom_data
DTC search: can't find DTC code table
Seeking tables...Configuration not found: TableSeek-p08-03-05-l6.xml

PID search not implemented for this file type[/color]
kur4o
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2016 9:20 pm

Re: Universal Patcher - .xml files

Post by kur4o »

These were created and labelled long time ago. At the time I opened a 03 l6 pcm and it was printed p08 on the board, so I labelled it the way it is now. I have no idea why the commonly accepted naming is p10 and where it came from. So I think p08=p10. It is the same types of files, so you don`t have to worry about them being inaccurate.
User avatar
DavidBraley
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2018 8:15 am
cars: 1948 GMC
Location: Fort Collins, Colorado

Re: Universal Patcher - .xml files

Post by DavidBraley »

darkman5001,

To support what kur4o says, I noticed the "P08" on the main board as well from one of your own posts "Delphi P10 PCM (used for GM Inline 4.2L)"
Attachments
p08.jpg
p08.jpg (1.25 MiB) Viewed 1791 times
-David

I'm a machinist... because engineers need heroes too.
User avatar
Gampy
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: Universal Patcher - .xml files

Post by Gampy »

The P12 also says P08 on the board and the P04 says P01 on the board.

I've often wondered about this moniker and it's validity, purpose and meaning ...
Intelligence is in the details!

It is easier not to learn bad habits, then it is to break them!

If I was here to win a popularity contest, their would be no point, so I wouldn't be here!
darkman5001
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2021 8:15 am
cars: 2004 Suburban, 2001 Tahoe, 2002 Envoy, 2006 Envoy, 2003 Lincoln LS
Location: New Jersey, USA

Re: Universal Patcher - .xml files

Post by darkman5001 »

P10 board says p08 on board; p12 also says p08 on board???p10 has 512mb flash and p12 has 1mb flash. So are the addresses good for both the p10 and p12?
User avatar
Gampy
Posts: 2330
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: Universal Patcher - .xml files

Post by Gampy »

No, each OsID has it's own quantity of addressed elements, thus addressing, that is partially why each OsID must use it's own XDF ... However they can be similar across OsID's of the same unit type (P01, P04, etc...).
Newer Os's for the same unit type may have new elements inserted into them, those new inserted elements cause down stream address shifting, not to mention all the other reasons address shifting can happen.

The file structure depends on the unit type and is mostly different for each type, however there is also some similarities between some, P01 and P59 for example, they are pretty similar, though obviously one is 512k, the other is 1m.
Intelligence is in the details!

It is easier not to learn bad habits, then it is to break them!

If I was here to win a popularity contest, their would be no point, so I wouldn't be here!
User avatar
antus
Site Admin
Posts: 8237
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2009 8:34 pm
cars: TX Gemini 2L Twincam
TX Gemini SR20 18psi
Datsun 1200 Ute
Subaru Blitzen '06 EZ30 4th gen, 3.0R Spec B
Contact:

Re: Universal Patcher - .xml files

Post by antus »

I think the Pxx on the board is not related in any way to the internal GM type which co-incidentally is also Pxx. I don't know what the Pxx on the board means. Even without knowing where the types come from I think its a good idea to follow existing standards as much as possible instead of making new ones to save confusion. In this case I think the commonly used types by commercial software are the ones to keep using, not the undetermined printing on the PCB.
Have you read the FAQ? For lots of information and links to significant threads see here: http://pcmhacking.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1396
Post Reply