8061 / 8063 op-codes

[Roy]

Tom Cloud wrote:
> 
>  I wrote:
> >>
> >> I've "found" a list of op-codes for the 8063.  The processor
> >> in the eec-iv is supposed to be an 8061 -- don't know the
> >> difference --- anybody out there know ?
> >>
> >> actually, what I have are mnemonics only, no definitions
> >> or machine code -- could use some help here ......
> 
>  and then Mike wrote:
> 
> >
> >Um, the 8063 never made it to production as far as I know. Somebody
> >snuck that info out of Intel(Toshiba/Motorola) or Ford. I'd be a bit
> >wary of using information like that. Ford thought I was and it cost me a
> >buttload of money to prove I wasn't. They watch these lists.
> 
> to which I respond:
> 
>  - first, it is my understanding that the newer Ford ECM's now use
> the 8063 instead of the 8061
> 
>   (I've also noticed that the mnemonics for the 8061/3 are a good
>    bit different from the 8096; the interrupt vectors are different;
>    and I understand the pinouts and port designators are different)
> 
>  - second, the info I posted I found by being very persistent.
> If someone snuck it out of wherever, I didn't do it and I don't
> know about it
> 
>  - third, I'm not looking to compete or profit by any of this
> information ..... I think all or most of us already OWN these
> units and we just want to know how they work !!
> 
>  - fourth, mnemonics can be copyrighted, but that doesn't
> mean that they can't be published -- I just can't use them
> to build my own processor (besides, the mnemonics are so
> standard, I don't see how they could even be copyrighted,
> and "trade secrets" aren't covered by any patent, copyright
> or trademark protections)
> 
>  - in the same vein as the above, the "Harvard architecture"
> can't be copyrighted or patented -- it is the standard architecture
> we are familiar with for the confuzers of today -- op-codes,
> registers, memory, addressing modes, etc
> 
>  - you can't patent or copyright op-codes (i.e. numbers) -- that's
> how AMD is able to make the 80486 but can't make a "Pentium"
> 
>  - you can't be prevented from "reverse engineering" something
> you own (and I don't know the current status of the legal
> maneuver that says you're only "leasing" something you bought,
> but I suspect it's been thrown out by the courts)
> 
>  - you CAN stop someone from using your ideas (that you've
> copyrighted, trademarked or patented) "against" you or to
> make a profit -- i.e., as I understand, I could build
> a copy of an eec-iv or a macintosh computer for myself if
> I wanted to (I could not "copy" their software, however,
> as it's covered by copyrights -- but if its modified 20% or
> more I can)
> 
>  - BTW, are you familiar with "Sams PhotoFacts"??  Back in the
> forties and fifties, all electronics mfgrs kept their schematics
> secret, so no one could work on anything.  Howard W. Sam (think
> that was his name) started taking radios and TV sets and reverse
> engineering the schematics, parts lists and signal levels so
> they could be worked on.  He sold those (still does) to repair
> shops.  Don't know if he got sued, but he probably did.  Obviously,
> he must've won!  Obviously, it can't be illegal to reverse
> engineer schematics (or op-codes) for that matter.  I know
> that some companies try to say that it's illegal to reverse
> engineer their software -- even put that in their license
> agreements, but I don't believe it's enforcable (???).
> 
>         **********************
> 
>  - and lastly, all the above (and any following) statements
> are mine alone and are probably a bunch of uninformed crap  ;-)
> 
>         **********************
> 
> [I understand why Ford hides its code, but I don't understand
> why they keep the data about the hardware secret.  They could
> make quite a bundle with people buying eec units to run
> their vehicle's engine (why not make them usable as an after-market
> sort-of add-on??>) -- and even then, if people cracked
> their code, the market shows that that doesn't necessarily
> hurt them.  Yeah, it gives the competition access to their
> investment in development, but I'll bet the competition
> already has their code, and vice-versa.  I can get schematics
> for the radio and I can get data on virtually everything
> else on the car, so why not the ecu?  How is revealing ALL
> the details of the eec going to impact Ford at all?  I guarantee
> you GM and the other competitors already have all the data
> about it they want -- this is not a new product we're trying
> to figure out.  If we're successful, I think it'd actually
> make Ford some money (though an insignificant amount in
> comparison to their other sales).]
> 
> Tom Cloud <cloud at peaches.ph.utexas.edu>

The processor used is the 8065 along with several supporting peripheral
chips like the DUCE chip which can provide up to 8 PWM outputs and the
DARC chip which has 6 channels of timer capture inputs. 

This control unit is more suited to a history class than modern engine
management systems.  All of the functions within the EEC apart from the
actual power drivers are now found within the micro controller such as
the 68332 and 336.