Inexpensive Opensource Flashing(Read is 100% working)
Teching In
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
From: Fort Collins, Colorado
Just realized after browsing another forum that it is import to note that I believe both of these are intel f800 flash chip 2003? P59 Pcms.
These pcms are actually an oddball but also desirable p59 computers because they have the ability to control a cable throttle body with IAC.
Most of all the later P59s pcms cannot control the cable throttle as they are missing the IAC drivers on the board and are used solely for drive by wire electric throttle bodys
These pcms are actually an oddball but also desirable p59 computers because they have the ability to control a cable throttle body with IAC.
Most of all the later P59s pcms cannot control the cable throttle as they are missing the IAC drivers on the board and are used solely for drive by wire electric throttle bodys
Hope this helps...
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 1,060
Likes: 198
Try a test write (test write, not real write) I'm pretty sure that will print the chip id. Come to think of it, real write would probably be harmless because it won't recognize the chip, but why take chances....
It just occurred to me that I'm assuming that the P59 Intel chip will reflash with the same code as the P01 Intel chip... If that's not true you might need the BDM to recover a PCM or two before we get this working.
It just occurred to me that I'm assuming that the P59 Intel chip will reflash with the same code as the P01 Intel chip... If that's not true you might need the BDM to recover a PCM or two before we get this working.
Teching In
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
From: Fort Collins, Colorado
A little off topic: I wanted to thank you for figuring out the fix for getting the BDM to read and write to the P59's. I'm able to read and write to both Intel and Amd flash P59's now!
What's the ID of your ab28f800 Intel?
Cant seem to get pcm hammer to read mine via compare or test write and I don't have access to my usbbdm for a while
Last edited by i420tom; Nov 26, 2019 at 08:22 PM.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo Teching In
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
From: Fort Collins, Colorado
PCM Hammer (any version) will not read the Intel based P59 I have here. It stops at trying to load the kernel. It's possible there is something wrong with the contents of the flash. The BDM will read and write to it. But I suspect the contents of the flash chip could be anything and the BDM would still work. I'm guessing if the contents of the flash memory are not 100% good, it's possible PCM Hammer can't read it because it's depending on something that's corrupted? I have no idea really. It's all above my pay grade! LOL!
It just occurred to me that I can try and use the BDM to load a new/different and compatible file into the Intel based P59, and then see if PCM Hammer can read it? I will report back...
oh i think i know why it wont show my flash memory ID! It is because when i do the compare my log shows Operating system IDs do not match. and then it does NOT continue on to read the FLASH ID.
i saw someone elses compare debug and after the OS MATCH then it identifies the chip.
i saw someone elses compare debug and after the OS MATCH then it identifies the chip.
Teching In
Joined: Jul 2018
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
From: Fort Collins, Colorado
Id2 = 889d
When I first tried using the BDM software with the Intel flash, I pressed the ID button, and these are the Id numbers the software gives me. I then used these id#'s to get it to work by modifying an existing flash def. Just like I did for the AMD flash. Did I do it correctly? Because it seems to work...
got mine to ID finally
[10:07:43:306] Flash memory ID code: 0089889D
[10:07:43:322] Flash memory manufactuer: Intel
[10:07:43:353] Flash memory type: 28F800B5-B 1Mbyte
looks like our flash IDs are the SAME!
i hope this is a quick fix
yes that is the correct way to get the usbbdm to work just make sure to get the flash type values from an appropriate flash type.
IE
Intel f800(1mb Intel p59)
Intel f400(512kb Intel p01)
Amd f800(amd 1mb p59)
[10:07:43:306] Flash memory ID code: 0089889D
[10:07:43:322] Flash memory manufactuer: Intel
[10:07:43:353] Flash memory type: 28F800B5-B 1Mbyte
looks like our flash IDs are the SAME!
i hope this is a quick fix
yes that is the correct way to get the usbbdm to work just make sure to get the flash type values from an appropriate flash type.
IE
Intel f800(1mb Intel p59)
Intel f400(512kb Intel p01)
Amd f800(amd 1mb p59)
Last edited by i420tom; Nov 26, 2019 at 10:39 PM.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 1,060
Likes: 198
It won't take long to put out a new version to solve this problem. If I don't get it done by Turkey Day, I've got plenty of time on Friday while the rest of the world mobs the department stores.
I will also fix a couple minor things that would have made this easier to figure out. For example it should print the chip ID before reading, and it shouldn't refuse to do a quick-compare just because the operating system IDs are different. There's a bit of code that basically says, "unless we're doing a full write, stop here if the operating systems are different." And that was a good idea when the only options were full-write and calibration-write. But now it prevents comparisons, for no good reason.
I will also fix a couple minor things that would have made this easier to figure out. For example it should print the chip ID before reading, and it shouldn't refuse to do a quick-compare just because the operating system IDs are different. There's a bit of code that basically says, "unless we're doing a full write, stop here if the operating systems are different." And that was a good idea when the only options were full-write and calibration-write. But now it prevents comparisons, for no good reason.
I got a full complete verified successful 1mb fast read with a different OS on p59 in car with pcm hammer 8. Using vcx nano.
So is it correct to assume that pcm hammer can recognize the OS# and/or recognize the chip ID# to switch to a 1mb read instead of the default 512kb?
So is it correct to assume that pcm hammer can recognize the OS# and/or recognize the chip ID# to switch to a 1mb read instead of the default 512kb?
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 1,060
Likes: 198
I got a full complete verified successful 1mb fast read with a different OS on p59 in car with pcm hammer 8. Using vcx nano.
So is it correct to assume that pcm hammer can recognize the OS# and/or recognize the chip ID# to switch to a 1mb read instead of the default 512kb?
So is it correct to assume that pcm hammer can recognize the OS# and/or recognize the chip ID# to switch to a 1mb read instead of the default 512kb?
I say "should" support the Intel chip because I don't have one to test with... I'm going to need help with that.
The car you had that success with presumably has the same AMD flash chip as the P59 that I used for testing releases 7 and 8.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,414
Likes: 28
Hello, just wanted to give a quick update, I think I was able to install a new OS in my 896 pcm, or I bricked it, lol. It does read the new OS when I do a read properties, I won't know for sure till I finish my harness, which is close. All I did to the tune was remove Vats, and I got the new xdf, and os from the Driveway Engineer facebook, if anyone is looking for any.
Thanks.
Thanks.
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 1,060
Likes: 198
When you said verified I assumed that was how you verified it... or did you mean that you verified it by comparing against what you read with the BDM?