A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the firmware on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited

On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 10:46:37 +0100, "N_Cook" wrote:

A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the firmware on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited



The firmware likely doesn't know about more than 32K.

In article , "N_Cook"
wrote:

A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the firmware on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited

If it can't address more memory, you could use two (or three) memory
chips with a switch to select which one to use.

Isaac

isw wrote in message
]...
In article , "N_Cook"
wrote:

A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by
somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the
firmware on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited

If it can't address more memory, you could use two (or three) memory
chips with a switch to select which one to use.

Isaac

What would be the minimum number of lines that would need switching ?
Could you leave A0,A1,SDA paralleled and just switch SCL and WP?

In article , "N_Cook"
wrote:

isw wrote in message
]...
In article , "N_Cook"
wrote:

A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by
somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the
firmware on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited

If it can't address more memory, you could use two (or three) memory
chips with a switch to select which one to use.

Isaac

What would be the minimum number of lines that would need switching ?
Could you leave A0,A1,SDA paralleled and just switch SCL and WP?

Check what the data sheet says ...

Isaac

[This followup was posted to sci.electronics.repair and a copy was sent
to the cited author.]

In article ],
says...

In article , "N_Cook"
wrote:

isw wrote in message
]...
In article , "N_Cook"
wrote:

A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by
somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the
firmware on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited

If it can't address more memory, you could use two (or three) memory
chips with a switch to select which one to use.

Isaac

What would be the minimum number of lines that would need switching ?
Could you leave A0,A1,SDA paralleled and just switch SCL and WP?

Check what the data sheet says ...

Isaac

The original design has the A0 and A1 pins tied off in some particular
state (most likely at GND). You could arrange your additional chips with
all connections in parallel except for the A0 and A1 pins. Your
switching could the simply be setup to present just one chip at a time
with the A0 and A1 pins set to levels that match the original design.
This way that would be the chip to respond when the controller chip
sends out the I2C slave address.

Supporting two chips like this has trivially simple switching of just
one of the addressing lines. Just make sure that you _do_ _not_ ever
have two or more chips with the A0 & A1 levels being the same and
matching the original design settings.

--

Michael Karas
Carousel Design Solutions
http://www.carousel-design.com

Michael Karas wrote in message
...
[This followup was posted to sci.electronics.repair and a copy was sent
to the cited author.]

In article ],
says...

In article , "N_Cook"
wrote:

isw wrote in message
]...
In article , "N_Cook"

wrote:

A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by
somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the
firmware on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or
allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited

If it can't address more memory, you could use two (or three) memory
chips with a switch to select which one to use.

Isaac

What would be the minimum number of lines that would need switching ?
Could you leave A0,A1,SDA paralleled and just switch SCL and WP?

Check what the data sheet says ...

Isaac

The original design has the A0 and A1 pins tied off in some particular
state (most likely at GND). You could arrange your additional chips with
all connections in parallel except for the A0 and A1 pins. Your
switching could the simply be setup to present just one chip at a time
with the A0 and A1 pins set to levels that match the original design.
This way that would be the chip to respond when the controller chip
sends out the I2C slave address.

Supporting two chips like this has trivially simple switching of just
one of the addressing lines. Just make sure that you _do_ _not_ ever
have two or more chips with the A0 & A1 levels being the same and
matching the original design settings.

--

Michael Karas
Carousel Design Solutions
http://www.carousel-design.com



So any switching has to be break before make combined with gating off all
switching while any activity

On 06/03/12 04:13, isw wrote:
In ,
wrote:

A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the firmware on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited

If it can't address more memory, you could use two (or three) memory
chips with a switch to select which one to use.

Isaac

Can you use an Machine Code instruction to jump to that extra memory
without the switch? You ****ing baby raper.

On Saturday, June 2, 2012 2:46:37 AM UTC-7, N_Cook wrote:
A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B

But, that's not the memory; that's the NONVOLATILE memory, possibly with
some on-chip FLASH ROM. To run six devices (be generous, eight device
codes), with a generous number of buttons (30? 50?) each taking an eight-bit
data value, is still only 400 bytes. Digit codes are regular enough that
they can be compressed into a rule, and macros can be reused...

If one exercises a small amount of cleverness, 32k bits (about 4100 bytes) should
be enough to store device and key assignments. With larger amounts of cleverness,
it's a GENEROUS amount of memory.

On Saturday, June 2, 2012 2:46:37 AM UTC-7, N_Cook wrote:
A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B

But, that's not the memory; that's the NONVOLATILE memory, possibly with
some on-chip FLASH ROM. To run six devices (be generous, eight device
codes), with a generous number of buttons (30? 50?) each taking an eight-bit
data value, is still only 400 bytes. Digit codes are regular enough that
they can be compressed into a rule, and macros can be reused...

If one exercises a small amount of cleverness, 32k bits (about 4100 bytes) should
be enough to store device and key assignments. With larger amounts of cleverness,
it's a GENEROUS amount of memory.

In article , "N_Cook"
wrote:

Michael Karas wrote in message
...
[This followup was posted to sci.electronics.repair and a copy was sent
to the cited author.]

In article ],
says...

In article , "N_Cook"
wrote:

isw wrote in message
]...
In article , "N_Cook"

wrote:

A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by
somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the
firmware on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or
allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited

If it can't address more memory, you could use two (or three) memory
chips with a switch to select which one to use.

Isaac

What would be the minimum number of lines that would need switching ?
Could you leave A0,A1,SDA paralleled and just switch SCL and WP?

Check what the data sheet says ...

Isaac

The original design has the A0 and A1 pins tied off in some particular
state (most likely at GND). You could arrange your additional chips with
all connections in parallel except for the A0 and A1 pins. Your
switching could the simply be setup to present just one chip at a time
with the A0 and A1 pins set to levels that match the original design.
This way that would be the chip to respond when the controller chip
sends out the I2C slave address.

Supporting two chips like this has trivially simple switching of just
one of the addressing lines. Just make sure that you _do_ _not_ ever
have two or more chips with the A0 & A1 levels being the same and
matching the original design settings.

--

Michael Karas
Carousel Design Solutions
http://www.carousel-design.com



So any switching has to be break before make combined with gating off all
switching while any activity

No. No damage will occur. But if two chips are addressed simultaneously,
you may get weird codes. Just don't be pressing a command button while
throwing the selector switch.

Isaac

"N_Cook" wrote in message
...
A very useful cheap and cheerful IR remote control is let down by somewhat
inadequate memory.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/
7dayshop-Universal-Control-Learning-Function/dp/B0043VTRAQ

it uses a 24LC32B
Is it likely or unlikely that if I changed it to a 128, that the firmware
on
the ucontroller would limit the running to 32K/ not work at all or allow
running out to 128K ?
As serial linkage I'm hoping it would not be limited





If you hit the EEPROM hard with a hammer it might enlarge (and spread out)