Re: [hatari-devel] Hatari/EmuTOS Conflict

[Vincent Rivière <vincent.riviere@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks to all of you for your investigation.

On 10/06/2013 15:34, Nicolas Pomarède wrote:
> >      /* On Hatari, it is *mandatory* to wait for the IKBD Reset to complete
> >       * before sending the next command bytes. Otherwise, on cold boot
> >       * no further data will be received.
> >       * This is why we read the IKBD version byte below.
> >       */
> > //    ikbd_version = ikbd_readb(); /* Usually 0xf1, or 0xf0 for antique
> > STs */
> > //#if DBG_KBD
> > //    kprintf("ikbd_version = 0x%02x\n", ikbd_version);
> > //#endif
> > //    UNUSED(ikbd_version);
>
> No, this should not be commented. I disagree with the comment in the code :
> it is mandatory to wait for 0xf0/0xf1 after the IKBD reset in all cases,
> whether it's under an emulator or under real HW.

My intention was to say "unlike other inaccurate emulators, Hatari...". I 
will fix the comment.

> Sending commands to the ikbd before receiving 0xf0 or 0xf1 is an
> undocumented behaviour, that will likely result in those commands to be
> ignored.

This is why I fixed EmuTOS, after you told me that critical information.

> A real TOS waits for 0xf0/0xf1 after sending reset, and it's the correct
> thing to do.

I see that TOS 1.2 sends the IKBD reset at 0xfc03ba. After that, it waits in 
a CPU delay loop, then does not read anything. I guess that the actual 
returned value will be read later by the interrupt routine, when interrupts 
are enabled.

--
Vincent Rivière