godiag nano with pcmhammer

They go by many names, P01, P59, VPW, '0411 etc. Also covering E38 and newer here.
99zguy
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2023 3:30 am
cars: 99 Z28
97 Trans Am Vert
10 LS Camaro
08 Silverado
02 Avalanche
52 GMC 5.3 swap (in progress)
56 Chevy Hardtop (in progress)
Location: PA

Re: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by 99zguy »

Here is what it looks like in the selector. As for it stable currently, I guess will have to see if any adjustment can be made to accommodate the max buffer size that they state the device is capable of doing and test it.

device_type.PNG
device_type.PNG (11.32 KiB) Viewed 1334 times
User avatar
Gampy
Posts: 2333
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by Gampy »

Awesome, they put their name in it ... That would make it fairly easy if one wanted to do a tool specific configuration, it is not on my list of things to do but I guess that also depends on how bored I get setting here!

It's not hard to make that simple change and test, takes 5 minutes maybe, so we'll know shortly after mine gets here, unless you want to do it, then go for it. FMI ask ...

-Enjoy
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!
99zguy
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2023 3:30 am
cars: 99 Z28
97 Trans Am Vert
10 LS Camaro
08 Silverado
02 Avalanche
52 GMC 5.3 swap (in progress)
56 Chevy Hardtop (in progress)
Location: PA

Re: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by 99zguy »

I would go ahead and do some changes and test as well as possibly a specific tool config. However I am still finding my way through the code. Getting there with it but not quite to that point yet. If I was, would definitely look into getting a start on it for testing and all.
User avatar
Tazzi
Posts: 3431
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 8:53 pm
cars: VE SS Ute
Location: WA
Contact:

Re: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by Tazzi »

Id say they are allocated a buffer per protocol, rather then a global shared one which is why they have varying buffer sizes. It does require thinking outside of the box.

Looks like it should be able to handle a couple hundred bytes at a time at 1x. Itll be slow but should get through it eventually.
Your Local Aussie Reverse Engineer
Contact for Software/Hardware development and Reverse Engineering
Site:https://www.envyouscustoms.com
Mob:+61406 140 726
Image
99zguy
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2023 3:30 am
cars: 99 Z28
97 Trans Am Vert
10 LS Camaro
08 Silverado
02 Avalanche
52 GMC 5.3 swap (in progress)
56 Chevy Hardtop (in progress)
Location: PA

Re: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by 99zguy »

@Tazzi I am still looking thru and learning the pcmhammer code to find where I can adjust what is needed. Gampy will likely get to it before I can find where the changes should be made in order to test.
User avatar
Gampy
Posts: 2333
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:38 am

Re: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by Gampy »

Right here: J2534Device.cs

Change those to 238 ... Then if it works, try bumping it up from there until it crashes!

-Enjoy
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!
Cincinnatus
Posts: 305
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2021 5:49 pm
cars: 97 Corvette
92 Camaro
2005 Silverado
2001 Savana 2500
1998 c3500hd
1998 tahoe

Re: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by Cincinnatus »

Would the buffers be inherent to the chip, or just the firmware?
User avatar
antus
Site Admin
Posts: 8252
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: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by antus »

The chip does impose hard limits, but its mostly firmware depending on how its designed to work with what the hardware makes available and how it uses or reuses ram. Im very interested to see how this goes.
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
Cincinnatus
Posts: 305
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2021 5:49 pm
cars: 97 Corvette
92 Camaro
2005 Silverado
2001 Savana 2500
1998 c3500hd
1998 tahoe

Re: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by Cincinnatus »

Gampy, that link to modify the code on github seems like the key to pandora's box. I played around there, but having no experience with github or software development I'll wait until you get your godiag and test with hammer. I assume there's no folder on my PC that would permit changes to the buffer limits for hammer?
99zguy
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2023 3:30 am
cars: 99 Z28
97 Trans Am Vert
10 LS Camaro
08 Silverado
02 Avalanche
52 GMC 5.3 swap (in progress)
56 Chevy Hardtop (in progress)
Location: PA

Re: godiag nano with pcmhammer

Post by 99zguy »

So far not having much luck with different buffer size adjustments. If too low pcmhammer will not even pull the OSID and of course fails. Seems so far that I can not go below 192 or else it does not get far at all. 192 it at least goes thru and does state 0% of kernel upload but then times out after multiple tries and fails. I have some logs I am going to post shortly. I was having to use a spare pwr supply that may be sketchy. As Gampy had stated with bad power I am beating my head on wall. So I just got another supply I will try, if that doesnt change things I will set up at test with a battery.
Post Reply