Maker Pro
Maker Pro

BDM download cables - compatibility issues.

P

Piglit

Jan 1, 1970
0
I have a piece of MC68360 based equipment which requires boot block
reloading via the BDM port.
The procedure calls for running some software (which I have) on a PC,
downloading via the parallel port using a P&E Micro "cable16/32" (which
I do not have). Are all BDM downloaders pin for pin functionally
compatible ?. There seem to be 4 options other than the P&E : A 5 chip
public domain DIY unit on the Freescale site , a 2 chip (HC76 and
HC132) unit, a single chip GAL based unit and the MacCraigor "Wiggler".
Are any of these units directly compatible with the P&E ?. I am not
able to hack into the supplied software. Something that concerns me is
that the PD GAL based unit uses entirely different parallel port
connections to the other two PD units. The Macraigor unit appears to
have a lot more than the standard 10 output pins.
cheers
M
 
D

David Brown

Jan 1, 1970
0
Piglit said:
I have a piece of MC68360 based equipment which requires boot block
reloading via the BDM port.
The procedure calls for running some software (which I have) on a PC,
downloading via the parallel port using a P&E Micro "cable16/32" (which
I do not have). Are all BDM downloaders pin for pin functionally
compatible ?. There seem to be 4 options other than the P&E : A 5 chip
public domain DIY unit on the Freescale site , a 2 chip (HC76 and
HC132) unit, a single chip GAL based unit and the MacCraigor "Wiggler".
Are any of these units directly compatible with the P&E ?. I am not
able to hack into the supplied software. Something that concerns me is
that the PD GAL based unit uses entirely different parallel port
connections to the other two PD units. The Macraigor unit appears to
have a lot more than the standard 10 output pins.
cheers
M

The pinning on the board will normally be a standard 10 pin connector,
although the original BDM connector had 8 pins so you might see that on
very old boards. As for the parallel port side, the P&E Micro setup is
the most common, and used by a number of other parallel port dongles -
P&E Micro's dongles use a GAL. Devices using two logic chips often
follow Motorola's original public domain design.

If you are just looking for a single simple BDM cable, P&E Micro's are
as good as any other. There are freely available design files for
compatible devices around the net if you want to build them yourself.
There are also much faster and more powerful BDM devices around (using
USB or Ethernet), at higher prices, but they will not be compatible with
your existing parallel port software.

Have a look at bdm.sourceforge.net, and google should give you more
useful links (but search for the 68332 rather than the 68360, as it is
much more common).

mvh.,

David
 
P

Piglit

Jan 1, 1970
0
David said:
The pinning on the board will normally be a standard 10 pin connector,
although the original BDM connector had 8 pins so you might see that on
very old boards. As for the parallel port side, the P&E Micro setup is
the most common, and used by a number of other parallel port dongles -
P&E Micro's dongles use a GAL. Devices using two logic chips often
follow Motorola's original public domain design.

If you are just looking for a single simple BDM cable, P&E Micro's are
as good as any other. There are freely available design files for
compatible devices around the net if you want to build them yourself.
There are also much faster and more powerful BDM devices around (using
USB or Ethernet), at higher prices, but they will not be compatible with
your existing parallel port software.

Have a look at bdm.sourceforge.net, and google should give you more
useful links (but search for the 68332 rather than the 68360, as it is
much more common).

mvh.,

David

Just when you think the S/N ratio on usenet has reached unity, along
comes
someone with some really informed and useful stuff. The sourceforge BDM
adaptor works a treat (they even included a .jed file for the GAL).
It appears that the 74HC chip PD implementations had no hope of ever
working
with my particular driver. Thanks heaps, David.
Mike
 
D

David Brown

Jan 1, 1970
0
Piglit said:
Just when you think the S/N ratio on usenet has reached unity, along
comes
someone with some really informed and useful stuff. The sourceforge BDM
adaptor works a treat (they even included a .jed file for the GAL).
It appears that the 74HC chip PD implementations had no hope of ever
working
with my particular driver. Thanks heaps, David.
Mike

This particular group has an extremely high noise-to-signal ratio (to
the extent that American politics, religion, and evolution are always on
topic), but electronics is occasionally discussed rationally. In fact,
it always amazes me that some of the most delusional and naive posters
in the political threads can be so smart in the electronics threads.

If you need more help in the future, comp.arch.embedded is a far more
useful resource (c.a.e. is for work, s.e.d. is for entertainment), as
are the bdm sourceforge mailing list and the Coldfire mailing list at
WildRice (which also covers the 683xx to a lesser extent) - both lists
are read by the guys that made the bdm adaptor design and the gdb
support code.

mvh.,

David
 
Top