What have you in mind to do with OCM ?
The same that I do with my real MSX: spend senseless and remorseless my limited spare time.
Keep one generic boosted MSX2 config for MWave/Meridian etc. Keep another config for experimenting with screenmodes.. (as far as I'm able to do so)
I will insert Space Manbow to see how it works Then I will use the SD card slot, never owned a MegaSCSI
- play Xevious/Vampire Killer/Salamander
- try old games with a boosted MSX2 config
- speed up E3D with VHDL add-on (as far as I'll able to)
Keep one generic boosted MSX2 config for MWave/Meridian etc. Keep another config for experimenting with screenmodes.. (as far as I'm able to do so)
I can't understand at all this point... if I'm not wrong, the OCM comes with the FPGA configured as a MSX2 by default, then, you could reprogramming the FPGA to another configs? (e.g. boosted configs, MSX2+ config, tMSX config... other Z80 based machines as ZX Spectrum or C64 configs too???)
Also, as far as I read here at MRC, it could be quite dangerous reprogramming FPGA, because you will need a special transfer cable very expensive to recover default config, it is true?
That special cable is not expensive if you make it yourself.
1: sure, as long as you know how to program things, and as long as there are enough gates, you can just scrap the whole MSX and try to make it an Amstrad, so you can run the CPC version of SymbOS ^_^ The thing I'm referring to is really to tweak things like screenmodes, they won't have to be compatible with any other computersystem, it's just my own screenmode orso.. my own computer so to say. But most probably I won't be VHDL'ing if it's too tough, I'd prolly cooperate on other person's initiatives to do the same.. Another nice thing I'd like to give a try it to create the uberl33t "soundcard" in VHDL.
2: Could be.. there are also cheap cables one can buy, but one needs to search for those. However, I think it's only a matter of time before someone bulk-buys those cheap cables and sells them for cheap on some MSX fair. Apart from that, you could ofcourse also simulate your new VHDL first. But idd, a supplied cable would've been nice.
Apart from that, you could ofcourse also simulate your new VHDL first.
Simulating a complex design will probably rather awkward, especially if it's a processor which needs some MC to be executed until the error situation occures. So you first have to provide some MC instructions as stimuli to set up the registers. You also must know what signals to view. There are lots of them inside a processor or a SOC (System On a Chip). Maybe you're going to view the wrong ones, i.e. signals where everything is ok, but not the ones where the error is to be found. Simulating is ok when you're going up right form the scratch, first simulating the components and after you're realized that it's all ok, putting them together and again simulating the new component derived from the already working ones. But, to my mind, it will be very hard to find errors in an already existing huge VHDL design written by someone else.
What I am going to do with it? Smash it and see your people's reactions! :D
That is, if I'm going to have one... :(
I think you can borrow Snout's OCM for that.. it's only a mere prototype..