Jump to content
pb3623

My SE/30: w/ Turbo 040, ROM-inator, Ethernet and 8.1

Recommended Posts

There is no switch for the Turbo 040. The 040 will always be active. The switch in the control panel just disables all the caches on the 040 to make it more like a 030 but that’s it.

 

You could do this with a Carrera040 though. The switch in its control panel actually disables the 040 and hands control back to whatever is on the logicboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bolle said:

There is no switch for the Turbo 040. The 040 will always be active.

But electrically speaking, would having the socketed 50MHz 030 PowerCache installed while also having the Turbo040 in the PDS slot pose an electrical problem?  I doubt the socketed board would power down simply because the 040 takes over processing, in which case the load on the PSU would be quite high.  But even if the PSU could handle that load, I still wonder if the two boards are compatible such that they both could be installed at the same time.

 

Why even do this if no "switch" exists?  Well, for quick testing with the back case off.  Your "switch" is "remove the Turbo040 to disable it" or "insert it to enable it" (with the power off, of course).  It would be nice if that was feasible because you wouldn't need to pull out the motherboard, remove the socketed accelerator, put in the CPU, then put it all back, then put in your Turbo040 and test.  Theoretically, all you should need to do is just insert the Turbo040 (with power off), then power on and test.  Then power off, remove the Turbo040, and you're back to your 50MHz 030 SE/30.

 

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would work electrically if your PSU can handle the load. The PowerCache will disable all data and address drivers when an external device is becoming the bus master (the Turbo 040 in this case)

I might have to give this a try with two stacked adapters and a PowerCache and Carrera installed at the same time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2018 at 5:31 AM, pb3623 said:

Here is the ROM image (thanks again to OlePigeon): olePigeonPatchedROM-normalchecksum_disabled.bin - so it's the 040 driver, memory test disabled and some other features that you won't see with the accelerator installed (again courtesy of OlePigeon - his custom boot chime and icon are pretty awesome). So give it a try with your programmer. Just make sure the SIMM capacity is correct and write to the entire thing.

@Bolle Very kindly fixed my Turbo040 PDS accelerator, so I am eager to program my ROM-inator II MEGA with the above ROM.  But it's been a while since I've used my SIMM Programmer and for the life of me I cannot find the documentation (USER MANUAL) for the programmer anywhere on the BMoW website.  Do I need to convert that *.BIN file to a *.ROM file?  If so, what is the procedure?  And if anyone has a link to the programmer documentation (which covers things like concatenate, ROM image, etc.) I would be eternally grateful.

 

(Yes, I remember that we cannot use a ROM image with the above olePiegon ROM.  Thanks.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@pax Thank you for your quick reply.

 

Your 1st link I already knew. Please note that on that page there is a USER MANUAL icon but no link to the actual user manual!

Your 2nd link is helpful for making ROM images.  That's one of things I was looking for.  Thank you for that link!

 

The biggest unanswered question I still have is about *.BIN files vs. *.ROM files.  Again, my question is this...

Must we convert *.BIN files to *.ROM files when programming?  If so, how?

 

Why do I even wonder about this?  Please read through Your 2nd link and you will see it talks about *.ROM files.  But the OldPigeon ROM (Turbo040 patched) is actually a *.BIN file, not a *.ROM file, hence my question.  Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JDW Yes, I also noticed the user manual icon but no link. I don't know that I've ever seen a pdf manual, but it is curious nonetheless.

 

In any case, I don't think the file suffixes matter. The ROM image is a blob of binary data and some people append ".bin" to indicate that it is binary data, while some people append ".rom" to indicate that the binary data is a ROM image. You'll notice that the @olePigeon patched ROM image is the exact same number of bytes as the default BMOW base ROM image (524,288 bytes). If you examine both files in a hex editor you'll also see that large portions of them are identical.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@pax

Thank you again for your quick reply.  

Can I take your advice to mean that I can rename the extension of "olePigeonPatchedROM-normalchecksum_disabled.bin" to any of the following and program any of the following without error? 

  •  olePigeonPatchedROM-normalchecksum_disabled.rom
  •  olePigeonPatchedROM-normalchecksum_disabled.txt
  •  olePigeonPatchedROM-normalchecksum_disabled.sillyme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JDW Yes, indeed. Just to clarify, I don't personally have any experience with the patched ROM image, but I quickly tried opening it—alongside the base BMOW ROM image—in the ODA web-based disassembler set up for m68k and they both sure look like valid ROM images to me. Again, they appear identical in places so I would feel comfortable just renaming the patched ROM and trying it. But that's me. No guarantees.

 

By the way, and apologies for going off topic, I watched a whole bunch of your YouTube videos yesterday. I wish I could be as helpful as they are. Wonderful work!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@pax

Well, thank you for your kindness in watching my videos.  I try to make videos I wish somebody else had made for me.  That's also why my videos tend to run long.  I love details!  :-) 

 

A big thanks for your help with the file naming. Much appreciated!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news.  I've just programmed the patched ROM to my ROM-inator II MEGA and I can now boot my SE/30 with my 40MHz Turbo040 (ROM v.4.11)!  Yipee!  Thank you for the patched ROM, @dougg3

 

The patched ROM boots from my internal HDD with System 7.1 just fine, even without the Turbo040 installed.

 

Now for the BAD NEWS...

 

My FloppyEMU from @bigmessowires will no longer boot in HD20 Mode (System 6.0.8), even if I disconnect, boot from my internal HDD, disable 32-bit addressing and restart.  I get a skull and crossbones, and then it will eventually boot from my HDD.  If I shutdown, disconnect power to my HDD, then restart with the FloppyEMU connected (HD20 mode), I get the skull and crossbones repeatedly. :-( 

 

If I shutdown and remove the Turbo040 and leave the FloppyEMU connected and power-on, System 6.0.8 boots perfectly.

 

Thoughts?

Edited by JDW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been running more tests.  All my floppy images on the FloppyEMU boot my SE/30 perfectly with the patched ROM-inator II MEGA and the Turbo040 installed.  It's only the HD20 mode that does not work with the Turbo040 installed.  This seems to give evidence that whatever patching the Turbo040 is doing to the ROM is somehow eliminating the HD20 compatibility.  Not sure if there is a workaround for this, but I would love to hear your thoughts.

 

Until now, I've been using my FloppyEMU to boot all my Macs from my 512K to my SE/30s (with different OS's, of course).  It's been a great substitute for a SCSI2SD.  Slow, but it works well.  I suppose I need to buy a SCSI2SD one day, but I am quite curious if there is a fix for this current incompatibility.  Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad it worked @JDW! I think you're right that the ROM patches Turbo040 applies at boot is the culprit. ROM disk support like in the base BMOW ROM image also don't work with Turbo040. :(

 

Have you seen that forum member @ZaneKaminski is creating a new ROM SIMM with many of the same features as ROM-inator? Maybe Zane's new ROM code can fix HD20 support with Turbo040 sometime in the future. 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@pax

I actually don't mind the lack of ROM disk support too much in the Turbo040-patched ROM because I could just buy the ROM-inator II ATOM which doesn't have enough memory for a useful ROM disk anyway and use that with my Turbo040 SE/30.  The big problem I have at the moment is the lack of HD20 Mode support.  I know from my testing that HD20 Mode is supported in the patched ROM without the Turbo040 installed, but the Turbo040 does something to unpatch the HD20 init in ROM, thereby preventing the FloppyEMU from booting an HD20 Mode disk.  It would be great if there was a workaround for that problem.

 

Thank you for the link to that other thread.  I posted there a couple hours ago.  As I wrote there, I want to know what initiated that effort since BMOW already has a ROM built and on sale (albeit without a programmer now).  Steve, Doug and many others all contributed to making that a real product, so I am quite curious what is to gain by reinventing that wheel.  I don't seek to discourage the effort at all by asking this question.  It's just a question.  And hey, if that new ROM can work with my Turbo040 AND give my FloppyEMU HD20 Mode support too, that's GOLD!  But for now, I am curious what can be done with my existing ROM-inator II MEGA ROM, since that is what I own right now.

 

Thanks, guys!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/28/2018 at 8:43 PM, ants said:

I just stumbled across this thread - but I thought I'd mention that I recently upgraded the ROM in my Turbo 040. I've got a few PLCC32 rom chips left (they came in a pack of 5), and I have a programmer - so if anybody needs a 4.11 ROM I'd be happy to send you one.

 

I’ve newly acquired a Turbo 040, can someone tell me what the 4.11 ROM provides over the 4.01 ROM? Are there known issues or benefits to running the different versions?

 

8493824B-425D-4723-A46E-F42EBF50904D.jpeg.7d1dc3fde90afdf5a566b1426fe8f623.jpeg

Edited by Fizzbinn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s a DayStar support document around I can’t seem to find right now, but I believe 4.11 brings System 7.5 support and fixes something with Virtual Memory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×