EEC V file conversion

[BOOSTEDEVERYTHING]

I've consolidated the available sources, fixed some things, but it's pretty hairy.
Quite a lot of duplicates need commenting out. Run it against SAD V5 and check MSG.

I will run the OMAE2 DIR file with SAD V5 and get the duplicates commented out. Thanks for checking it out for me. Does that seem to be the only issues you are seeing with it so far?

Sorry, I should have specified that the above "error" I posted is in the RZASA DIR file. It says that the table is signed in the DIR file but it looks to be an unsigned Byte table.

[BOOSTEDEVERYTHING]

Also, should I assume that the things that you have commented out are not correct or are they maybe just questionable? If they are wrong I need to go back to basics I guess, LOL. WOW!!! I am not getting this as well as I thought. Or maybe I confused myself by starting out with an already built DIR file? Not really sure where I went so very wrong.

[BOOSTEDEVERYTHING]

Code: Select all

  Sub_99e94:
99e94: f2                 pushp                  push(PSW);
99e95: 9b,ff,ea,02,00     cmpb  R0,[Rfe+2ea]     
99e9a: d7,6a              jne   99f06            if (S.0x18632 = ZERO)  {
99e9c: a1,d8,8a,36        ldw   R36,8ad8         TMP2L = uuyFn.0x18ad8;
99ea0: b0,63,38           ldb   R38,R63          TMP3L = TP_REL_H;
99ea3: 10,08              rombk 8
99ea5: ef,bf,88           call  82767            SLU82767_UUYFn ();
99ea8: a0,3c,26           ldw   R26,R3c          TEMP1L = TMP5L;
99eab: a1,c8,8a,36        ldw   R36,8ac8         TMP2L = uuyFn.0x18ac8;
99eaf: b3,01,3a,06,38     ldb   R38,[R0+63a]     TMP3L = [1063a];
99eb4: 10,08              rombk 8
99eb6: ef,ae,88           call  82767            SLU82767_UUYFn ();
99eb9: a0,3c,28           ldw   R28,R3c          TEMP2L = TMP5L;
99ebc: a0,26,34           ldw   R34,R26          TMP1L = TEMP1L;
99ebf: a0,28,36           ldw   R36,R28          TMP2L = TEMP2L;
99ec2: ad,0a,38           ldzbw R38,a            TMP3L = a;
99ec5: 45,54,06,fe,3c     ad3w  R3c,Rfe,654      TMP5L = syTb.0x1899c;
99eca: 10,08              rombk 8
99ecc: ef,41,8b           call  82a10            SLU82A10_Y16UYTb ();
99ecf: c7,01,3b,06,3f     stb   R3f,[R0+63b]     [1063b] = TMP6H;
99ed4: a0,26,34           ldw   R34,R26          TMP1L = TEMP1L;
99ed7: a0,28,36           ldw   R36,R28          TMP2L = TEMP2L;
99eda: ad,0a,38           ldzbw R38,a            TMP3L = a;
99edd: 45,b8,06,fe,3c     ad3w  R3c,Rfe,6b8      TMP5L = syTb.0x18a00;
99ee2: 10,08              rombk 8
99ee4: ef,29,8b           call  82a10            SLU82A10_Y16UYTb ();
99ee7: c7,01,3c,06,3f     stb   R3f,[R0+63c]     [1063c] = TMP6H;
99eec: a0,26,34           ldw   R34,R26          TMP1L = TEMP1L;
99eef: a0,28,36           ldw   R36,R28          TMP2L = TEMP2L;
99ef2: ad,0a,38           ldzbw R38,a            TMP3L = a;
99ef5: 45,1c,07,fe,3c     ad3w  R3c,Rfe,71c      TMP5L = syTb.0x18a64;
99efa: 10,08              rombk 8
99efc: ef,11,8b           call  82a10            SLU82A10_Y16UYTb ();
99eff: c7,01,3d,06,3f     stb   R3f,[R0+63d]     [1063d] = TMP6H;
99f04: 20,0f              sjmp  99f15            goto 99f15; }

I do have a question about this.... why would the tables above be syTb.0x and not uyTb.0x ??? does the Y16UYTB not mean that it is a byte input multiplied by 16 and then unsigned byte output, or am I confused?

[jsa]

So far. I've only flicked through OMAE2 quickly, so there could be other stuff. I did say it was pretty hairy.

TAB 192DA 192FD :O6 SY #[O6 SY=flo(x*1)] 23 #/>V [/code]
Here is one "error" I may have found

Sorry, I should have specified that the above "error" I posted is in the RZASA DIR file. It says that the table is signed in the DIR file but it looks to be an unsigned Byte table.

I don't have a table in the RZASA DIR at that address 192DA. What's the reason you've decided to add it?

Also, should I assume that the things that you have commented out are not correct or are they maybe just questionable?

OMAE2's consolidated DIR has 4 data sources combined. Priority has to be assigned to the 4 sources otherwise everything will be a multiple duplicate. Your stuff {7} may well be correct, but I chose to give it lower priority than other sources, because the other sources are more comprehensive. Lower priority sources were commented out.

As per DIR notes syTb.0x18a64 has come from the 806x s6x source.
The sub command is of my doing.
One of them is wrong, I think I have the sub command right, so I'd suggest the s6x source is wrong.
I did say in the header it was a rough throw together and needs a thorough check through.
Amend whichever you think incorrect?

[jsa]

Looking at your most recent RZASA DIR;

I disagree with;

Code: Select all

sub 8D063  "SLU8D063_**YFn"   $ F uuyflu 36    #  COMPARES TO OMAE2 SLU82895_**YFn

Add the # to yours

Code: Select all

SUB 934AB "Sub934AB_TQCTL_LOWEST"                                                             #{7}
SUB 93C5C "Sub93V5C_IGNCOIL_MISSFIRE_MALF_CHECK"                                              #{7}
SUB 93E3F "Sub93E3F_SET_DISCUTOUTS"                                                           #{7}

sub 9B987 "Sub9B987_air_load_inferred"                                                        #{7}

While this one checks out OK, I've not checked any others that are without an address in the minimalist name.

Code: Select all

sub  0f60E "Sub257"   :Y O +4

This is not in the right order in the DIR.
It matches the OMAE2 code. OMAE2 is called whereas this one is a single jump. It's really a part of Sub_04d6f.
Did you update jump comments to reflect the introduction of a new Sub name?
I've added the address to its name and apportioned blame {7} to you ;).
Similar comments for a couple of the others as well.

Code: Select all

SUB 04E24 "Sub04E24_DO_AIR_SAMPLE_METER"           # COMPARES TO OMAE2 L_0400E {7}

[BOOSTEDEVERYTHING]

While this one checks out OK, I've not checked any others that are without an address in the minimalist name.

I will add the comparative address for these in the DIR file. I wasn't thinking about not having a matching DIR file for OMAE2 when I added these.

This is not in the right order in the DIR.

I screwed up there, I may have been thinking I should leave the vector list pushes at the top? Not sure exactly why I put it there, I moved it in my DIR file.

I don't have a table in the RZASA DIR at that address 192DA. What's the reason you've decided to add it?

Sorry. Thats my confusion again. The RZASA entry is below.

Code: Select all

SYM 18053 "syTbIECT_NL"                                                 #Engine Temp SCP Correction {2}
TAB 18053 18076 :O6 SY #[O6 SY=flo(x*1)]                                #/>V {2}

I believe it should be wuyTbIECT_NL instead of syTbIECT_NL, If I am not correct please let me know.

I did say in the header it was a rough throw together and needs a thorough check through.

Yes you did. I am not arguing at all with the entries you have, I was just making sure I understood why you commented out a lot of my entries. Wasn't sure if I was just plain wrong or if there was another reason, Thanks for clarifying. I will investigate the commented out entries further. The names I had for most of them were mainly to match the RZASA code for comparison sake, and I was going to change them, when I was done with the comparison, to the correct names. Just to clarify why I had them named incorrectly for the OMAE2 DIR file.

[BOOSTEDEVERYTHING]

Code: Select all

SYM 13874 "uyTb1362X_LOST"                                              #Lost Base OL Fuel (Active in CL - Lambse Ramp Lean) #sym 13814 "Tb1362X_LOST"
TAB 13874 138D3 :O12    #[O12 UY=flo(X/128)]    5F                        #FN022BX/FN072>-LAMBSE

I have this in my DIR file and I keep getting this....

Code: Select all

table   13874 138c3: O 10 UY X 10 
func    138c4 138d1: SY X 10 : UY X 10 
func    138d2 13873: SY X 10 : UY X 10 
table   13874 138d3: O 10 UY X 10 
sym 13874  "uyTb1362X_LOST"

This is for V4.0.12
V5 gives me....

Code: Select all

table   13874  138d3     [ O 12 UY X 10 ]
sym 13874 "uyTb1362X_LOST"

Bug? Or am I doing something wrong for V4.0.12?

I disagree with;
CODE: SELECT ALL

sub 8D063 "SLU8D063_**YFn" $ F uuyflu 36 # COMPARES TO OMAE2 SLU82895_**YFn

After looking it over....
I agree with your disagreement. Not sure why I put that in there. Deleted from my DIR file. Thanks for pointing it out.

[jsa]

Which strategy?

[BOOSTEDEVERYTHING]

OMAE2
I am wondering if I maybe something is going on with my computers or something. Seems to be a bunch of stuff that sad isn’t putting into the lst file that is in the dir file. It’s happening on both strategies.

[jsa]

Code: Select all

9d6b6: ad,0a,38           ldzbw R38,a            TMP3L = a;

9d7ce: a1,c4,38,36        ldw   R36,38c4         TMP2L = suyFn393F;

138C3 is table end not 138D3.

If there are errors introduced to the bin like the overlapping command you have introduced, SAD output can go haywire.

The RZASA DIR has notes in it for things that SAD has issues printing. It was a moving target toward the end of that DIR consolidation. It could be duplicate or overlapping commands or some other error I've introduced. It could also be one of a number of lingering bugs. I stopped chasing it after a while, as the time could be better spent elsewhere. I'll revisit it on the next V5 release.