Actually, they made P59's with the IAC hardware (drive by cable) up to 2007. What you want to look for is hardware (not service) numbers: 12575502, 12570558, 12583659, and 12589161.

Hope this helps...

 

Yes I was aware of this but I was bringing it up due to the flashing aspect. I wish I still had an amd p59 to test out.

 

See post 738. It's defaulting to 512 because it doesn't recognize the chip ID. If you can get me the chip ID, I can fix this.

 

I emailed you some compare logs hours ago, I guess the chip ID wasn't in there?
I'll try again

 

Can't seem to get the chip ID with the compare function, unless it's in the logs I sent you earlier.
What should I try?

 

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.

 

Got it! I guess I didn't fully understand your message.
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!

 

You are welcome!
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

 

Oh, you are thinking I know what I'm doing now! HA! I have no idea how to find something like that. I truly struggle with this stuff. It's a miracle I got my BDM rig/fixture to work!

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...

 

When you are connected in usbbdm just hit the ID button at the top, should show you the id#s

 

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.

 

Id1 = 0089
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)

 

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 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?

 

With 8 and earlier, it depends on the OS and the chip. With the next version it will only depend on the chip, and it should support the Intel chip, so it should work for a lot more P59s. Maybe all of them, but I can't promise... There might be more surprises out there.

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.

 

No, it has the intel chip
That why I assumed it recognized the OS as being a 1mb OS because I assume it doesn't recognize the intel chip id

 

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.

 

Well, here's wishing non-brickitude upon your pcm!
Have a Happy Thanksgiving!

 

What happens when you use the "quick compare" button with that PCM and the image that you read from it?

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?