[HN Gopher] Testing the Z80 Chip with a 1970s Beauty
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Testing the Z80 Chip with a 1970s Beauty
        
       Author : trakfactri
       Score  : 114 points
       Date   : 2024-11-11 20:11 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (mtsi.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (mtsi.substack.com)
        
       | wrs wrote:
       | Does anyone know what the tester for a 12-core 3 GHz processor
       | looks like now?
        
         | alain94040 wrote:
         | Don't know what the latest is, but this from Teradyne was
         | probably close:
         | https://www.teradyne.com/products/ultraflexplus/
        
           | raverbashing wrote:
           | Interesting, looks expensive
           | 
           | And I mean "chip factory expensive" not "Regular Joe"
           | expensive
        
         | femto wrote:
         | Potentially the processor has Built-In-Self-Test (BIST)?
         | Connect up the JTAG bus, send the right commands and the chip
         | tells you that it is okay.
        
       | jandrese wrote:
       | > We had to be careful about those AC utility jacks. The tester
       | ground was at -11 volts at several hundred amps. If you clipped a
       | scope to a ground, it would happily melt the insulation off the
       | scope probe until it stunk up the room and pooled on the floor.
       | We had to use a three-prong adapter with the ground cut off.
       | 
       | You don't get this kind of excitement anymore with modern
       | electronics.
        
         | fortran77 wrote:
         | I have the same issue today when I fix old tube radios. Once
         | side of the mains is connected to chassis -- and there are no
         | polarized plugs. I use an isolation transformer, otherwise if I
         | try to use a scope, I'd blow it out immediately--50% of the
         | time.
        
           | Aloha wrote:
           | I am cheap.
           | 
           | So I've never used an isolation transformer, I measure from
           | test equipment chassis to chassis and check voltage
           | potential, then roll the plug as needed.
        
             | fortran77 wrote:
             | It also reduces the risk of shock. Spend the $100 and get
             | one.
        
               | Aloha wrote:
               | How so?
        
               | dave8088 wrote:
               | An isolation transformer will prevent electric shock
               | should you accidentally put your body in contact with the
               | hot side of the device and earth.
               | 
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolation_transformer#Ele
               | ctr...
        
               | formerly_proven wrote:
               | An isolation transformer also completely prevents a GFCI
               | from working.
        
         | stephen_g wrote:
         | Not exactly this, but you can easily make big sparks and trip
         | RCD (GFCI) breakers if you accidentally probe something with a
         | grounded scope that isn't isolated. In the past we've used
         | battery powered scopes to get around this (cutting the ground
         | pin off anything isn't a good way to do things!)
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | First thing I made with Arduino was a tester for (much less
       | complex) 54xx and 74xx chips.
        
       | femto wrote:
       | Typo? "ZIP DIP socket" should be "ZIF DIP socket", as in Zero
       | Insertion Force?
        
         | Affric wrote:
         | Surely autocorrect.
        
       | UncleOxidant wrote:
       | I worked at Fairchild Sentry DTS in San Jose (at that time very
       | close to the airport) circa 1984-1986 on the series 50 ATE. It
       | was a beast. At the time it could clock & test up to 50MHz (hence
       | the '50'). It was pretty much all ECL which would get very hot.
       | Each unit shipped with a DEC VAX - that was my intro to VMS which
       | had some interesting features like file versioning. I worked as a
       | tech on the production floor building the 50. It was just being
       | introduced and there were so many problems with getting them up
       | and running. The systems had to be calibrated and that was done
       | by changing the lengths of hundreds of delay wires on the
       | backplane (in addition to digital delay-lines in the test head
       | that could be automatically calibrated (over several hours) with
       | the delay values being stored on disk). No two systems were
       | exactly the same because of this (I'm sure this was also an issue
       | with earlier ATE models as well). IIRC the 50 was "introduced"
       | (announced) in '84 shortly before the time I started. I recall
       | that we were way behind in producing them and there was lots of
       | blame flying between production (us) and engineering - as in
       | maybe they designed something that wasn't easily reproducible.
       | 
       | In my next job I moved into an engineering role and I always kept
       | that experience as a technician in the back of my mind: make sure
       | what you're designing can be built with reproducible results.
        
       | smoyer wrote:
       | > ZIP DIP socket If that is referring to the picture above, my
       | recollection is that it's a ZIF DIP socket ... We used those for
       | writing [E][E]PROM. ZIF was zero-insertion-force.
        
       | emulationonline wrote:
       | I built something like a simpler version of this for testing some
       | edge cases of the 6502. You can play with it through a browser
       | here: https://chiplab.emulationonline.com/6502/
        
       | DeathArrow wrote:
       | >If you used a Z80 chip back in the 1980s, it almost certainly
       | passed through a single room and its Fairchild Sentry 610 test
       | system.
       | 
       | I live in Eastern Europe, so I got access to a Z80 in the '90s,
       | not '80s. And it was a clone, so it wasn't tested at Fairchild ,
       | if it was ever tested.
        
         | timonoko wrote:
         | I was in Finnish Army and I had a sample of Russian 8080 in
         | 1970's. We did not use it perse, but when Americans came with
         | Comecon Trade Embargo - issues, we had this one example to show
         | that advanced weapons we were developing were based on Russian
         | technology.
        
       | J05ephu5M13r wrote:
       | Re the Z80 chip: I recall seeing a picture of a feller laying out
       | the tracks with a roll of sticky tape on a drafting board.
        
       | 082349872349872 wrote:
       | From the neighbouring: https://mtsi.substack.com/p/we-picked-
       | apart-the-milestone-hp
       | 
       | > _I found out many years later that Mostek had put in special
       | mask "cheats" to prevent people from copying our chip. Mostek co-
       | founder and chief designer Robert Proebsting had discovered a way
       | to put a pad on top of a silicon hill, but without connecting it
       | to the obvious trace below. A copier would be unable to see this
       | hill that served as an insulator unless they used a side-viewing
       | microscope, which was rarely used. Copying was almost always done
       | with a top-illuminated microscope_.
       | 
       | > _That would throw off a copier who'd think it was just an
       | ordinary via, and connect the trace to the layer below. This chip
       | had a circuit to signal the specific 2+3 operation, and this
       | would then be connected by the wrongly copied pad to the reset
       | pin of the chip._
        
       | matthewmorgan wrote:
       | Reminded me of http://collapseos.org/
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-12 23:02 UTC)