T87A Bins to Pins - Who's In ?

[kur4o]

To quickly check p/ns of t87 and t87a extract these files to xml folder in universal patcher and open a bin in patcher.

The ETK value is useless since it is part of transmission calibration, something like internal firmware revision for tracing changes.

Better use some identifier in eeprom area or OS or bootblock versions.

Do you have some bins to share, once we have enough examples some data pattern in eeprom can be found, for better identification.

MY chart vs OS and service number will be much better for start point.

[veee8]

Regarding the P/N input, I have found it is vehicle dependant.They all use the direct line from TCM to ECM, the Camaro takes it a step further by adding a circuit board in the shifter assembly that uses the CAN to broadcast to the BCM as well. C7 and CTS-V do not have this in the shifter.

[kidturbo]

To quickly check p/ns of t87 and t87a extract these files to xml folder in universal patcher and open a bin in patcher.

The ETK value is useless since it is part of transmission calibration, something like internal firmware revision for tracing changes.

Better use some identifier in eeprom area or OS or bootblock versions.

Do you have some bins to share, once we have enough examples some data pattern in eeprom can be found, for better identification.

MY chart vs OS and service number will be much better for start point.

Yes that is much easier tool to sort the bin OS# differences with, compared to using NEO.

Have a few raw bins reads saved I can share for science.

[kidturbo]

Regarding the P/N input, I have found it is vehicle dependant.They all use the direct line from TCM to ECM, the Camaro takes it a step further by adding a circuit board in the shifter assembly that uses the CAN to broadcast to the BCM as well. C7 and CTS-V do not have this in the shifter.

Correct me if wrong, but C7 and CTS-V both E67 only cars correct? Camaro is E92, but has CANbus to the shifter. Most interesting.

So factory equipped with the 8L90, both would only had a Gnd triggered P/N wire to the ECM as in first example above. And same as the older 4l/6L models. This would be first important point to address if doing a 10L upgrade. Need a little ADC chip to read the CANbus msg from TCM and flip a relay. Luckily that's already available in the market.

I've noted the range switch correlation code set by the TCM seems directly linked to the ECM transmitted P/N value over the bus that match it's current state. So for a 6 to 4 wire, 2015 platform change, demands a hard-wire P/N solution, or at minimum a DTC written out of the ECM and TCM. Well worth noting, thank you.

[veee8]

Correct me if wrong, but C7 and CTS-V both E67 only cars correct? Camaro is E92, but has CANbus to the shifter. Most interesting.
So factory equipped with the 8L90, both would only had a Gnd triggered P/N wire to the ECM as in first example above. And same as the older 4l/6L models. This would be first important point to address if doing a 10L upgrade. Need a little ADC chip to read the CANbus msg from TCM and flip a relay. Luckily that's already available in the market.
I've noted the range switch correlation code set by the TCM seems directly linked to the ECM transmitted P/N value over the bus that match it's current state. So for a 6 to 4 wire, 2015 platform change, demands a hard-wire P/N solution, or at minimum a DTC written out of the ECM and TCM. Well worth noting, thank you.

2014-2016 C7 and 2016 CTS-V are E92, 2017+ on all are E92A.
The Camaro has an added CAN board in the shifter. The C7's and V's don't.

8L90 IMS 1.pdf

(125.21 KiB) Downloaded 99 times

Camaro Shifter.pdf

(342.15 KiB) Downloaded 63 times

C7 Shifter.pdf

(103.74 KiB) Downloaded 66 times

8L90 IMS 2.pdf

(405.52 KiB) Downloaded 87 times

[veee8]

To quickly check p/ns of t87 and t87a extract these files to xml folder in universal patcher and open a bin in patcher.

The ETK value is useless since it is part of transmission calibration, something like internal firmware revision for tracing changes.

Better use some identifier in eeprom area or OS or bootblock versions.

Do you have some bins to share, once we have enough examples some data pattern in eeprom can be found, for better identification.

MY chart vs OS and service number will be much better for start point.

Still muddling my way through Universal Patcher, so I may be missing something, but the T87 identifier is working ok, but all of the T87A bins I try return an error of...
frmPatcher, line 734: Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection.
Parameter name: index

Attaching a few bins here that have already posted.

[Gatecrasher]

Regarding the slave CPU, my understanding has always been that it's a watchdog and limp home device. It performs sanity checks against the application running on the main CPU. I believe it can even run the engine or trans in a very limited limp home mode if the main CPU is failed. If there's a protocol mismatch between the two, the sanity checking fails.

Regarding the software tags kidturbo posted, I think they break down like this.

0x80050 looks like a GMLAN database (DBC) version string. It could be a software version, but the format looks like a database version. Should be easy enough to verify with DID 1A DE.

0x80070 could be some kind of part number in binary coded decimal. 0xA30960 = 10684768

There's an option for data compatibility identifiers in the calibration headers, but it seems like it's never used. It's supposed to be used for SPS to determine compatibility between utility file, OS and calibration. A lot of times it's disabled, like in this example, so that doesn't help. Might be worth seeing if there's some other variation on that idea in the A2L files though. It might help identify boot/slave/cal package compatibility.

[kur4o]

[/quote]

Still muddling my way through Universal Patcher, so I may be missing something, but the T87 identifier is working ok, but all of the T87A bins I try return an error of...
frmPatcher, line 734: Index was out of range. Must be non-negative and less than the size of the collection.
Parameter name: index

Attaching a few bins here that have already posted.
[/quote]

Code: Select all

Allison gm_delco_t87_bench_fullbackup_full_backup_20220326071200_int_flash.bin (t87 (v 1))

Segments:
 Boot Block  PN:  24274018, Ver:   AA, Nr: 99 [1C000 - 2FFFF], Size: 14000
 OS          PN:  24271208, Ver:   AN, Nr: 1  [100000 - 3FFFFF], Size: 300000
 Trans       PN:  24279402, Ver:   AB, Nr: 2  [80000 - FBFFF], Size: 7C000
 TransDiag   PN:  24279403, Ver:   AB, Nr: 3  [FC000 - FEBFF], Size: 2C00
 System      PN:  24279404, Ver:   AB, Nr: 4  [FEC00 - FFFFF], Size: 1400
Checksums:
 Boot Block  Checksum 1: FD0B [OK] Checksum 2: F3E3 [OK] 
 OS          Checksum 1: 2A0A [OK] Checksum 2: 59DD [OK] [n/a]
 Trans       Checksum 1: 588E [OK] Checksum 2: 1BAE [OK] [n/a]
 TransDiag   Checksum 1: 64FD [OK] Checksum 2: 215E [OK] [n/a]
 System      Checksum 1: ED77 [OK] Checksum 2: 58C2 [OK] [n/a]
Seeking tables...Configuration not found: TableSeek-t87.xml

PID search not implemented for this file type
PIDs not found

No errors on my side. Try latest version from github and make sure you overwrite all files I posted earlier in xml folder.

[veee8]

Code: Select all

Allison gm_delco_t87_bench_fullbackup_full_backup_20220326071200_int_flash.bin (t87 (v 1))

Segments:
 Boot Block  PN:  24274018, Ver:   AA, Nr: 99 [1C000 - 2FFFF], Size: 14000
 OS          PN:  24271208, Ver:   AN, Nr: 1  [100000 - 3FFFFF], Size: 300000
 Trans       PN:  24279402, Ver:   AB, Nr: 2  [80000 - FBFFF], Size: 7C000
 TransDiag   PN:  24279403, Ver:   AB, Nr: 3  [FC000 - FEBFF], Size: 2C00
 System      PN:  24279404, Ver:   AB, Nr: 4  [FEC00 - FFFFF], Size: 1400
Checksums:
 Boot Block  Checksum 1: FD0B [OK] Checksum 2: F3E3 [OK] 
 OS          Checksum 1: 2A0A [OK] Checksum 2: 59DD [OK] [n/a]
 Trans       Checksum 1: 588E [OK] Checksum 2: 1BAE [OK] [n/a]
 TransDiag   Checksum 1: 64FD [OK] Checksum 2: 215E [OK] [n/a]
 System      Checksum 1: ED77 [OK] Checksum 2: 58C2 [OK] [n/a]
Seeking tables...Configuration not found: TableSeek-t87.xml

PID search not implemented for this file type
PIDs not found

No errors on my side. Try latest version from github and make sure you overwrite all files I posted earlier in xml folder.

Ok, I was able to get the files previously attached T87/A bin files to open. The T87A files were not getting placed in the XML folder.
I am still getting that same error on these attached T87A and E38 files, and most of the E38 and E92/A bins that used the HPT to Bin conversion tool. Something must getting changed during that conversion that is returning that error on line 734 Index. Not all, but the majority I have checked from my database are seeing that error in UP.

[kur4o]

I still can`t replicate the error[maybe it is from an older version, or OS dependent].

Hpt converted file have issues with autodetection, either file size or some other identifiers are moved around. To test the file you can turn off autodetect checkbox and select manually the config xml and than open the suspect file.