| |
Barbarossa
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 31 |
Sprite synchronisation
I am trying to get a stable raster with the help of sprite timing. I've read the articles in C=hacking about it, but it is not explained in full detail there. That is, when I look at the examples Missing Cycles and TechTech, I don't quite get it.
I've tried the timing of those examples in an emulator. I have found out that when the INC ends within the cycles that BA goes low, the intruction ends exactly after the sprite fetch. This would mean that the interrupt cannot be more off than 3 cycles and we all know that we have to deal with 2-9 cycles (7 cycles variance). So how can this trick be stable?
If someone could explain this to me (an article about this in Codebase would be really neat) I would be very grateful.
John
|
|
... 22 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
well, what if someone would write a code which makes sure to only use max 4 cycle long instructions :) just a funny idea ;) |
| |
Radiant
Registered: Sep 2004
Posts: 639 |
Krill: Yeah, as I hinted at. :-) But it's a dead end really. |
| |
Cruzer
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1048 |
Wonder what's the fastest (least cycle-consuming) way of getting a stable raster, if you don't have anything to do outside the IRQ (i.e. the jmp * scenario) and there's no use for any sprites that might be used for stabilizing it.
Also, I don't get all the talk about IRQ's being useless if you're jmping to * outside. Wouldn't you have to do cmp $d012 then, which leaves you in a more jittering condition than a raster IRQ with a jmp *, which if I recall correctly will jitter 0-2 cycles.
|
| |
Ninja
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 411 |
@Krill: Why indirect? Direct is faster, no?
@Oswald: Instead of limiting to 4 cycles, better generate parts, which have constant timing per frame :) (wasn't S:T Lars Meeting III - Invite something like it, Jackie?) |
| |
JackAsser
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 2014 |
Quote: @Krill: Why indirect? Direct is faster, no?
@Oswald: Instead of limiting to 4 cycles, better generate parts, which have constant timing per frame :) (wasn't S:T Lars Meeting III - Invite something like it, Jackie?)
Direct is ofcourse faster but require code in IO-space, ofcourse totally ok.
S:T Lars Meeting III - Invite did not use constant timing per frame... (how else could I have music?!? =D)
However, the 4x4 speed code had constant timing per 4x4-pixel and thus was multiplexable with the raster code to remove the sideborder.
I still used a timer to sync the cpu to the raster beam each frame. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
Quote:Also, I don't get all the talk about IRQ's being useless if you're jmping to * outside. Wouldn't you have to do cmp $d012 then, which leaves you in a more jittering condition than a raster IRQ with a jmp *, which if I recall correctly will jitter 0-2 cycles.
yes, but a) when irq is switched off everything becomes a lot more predictable b) the cycles which would be spent in the irq overhead can be used for another compare that removes the jitter :) |
| |
Danzig
Registered: Jun 2002
Posts: 440 |
Quote: I see a corrupt stack... Please enlighten me. :D
just take a look at the intro from one year crest... i was expecting corrupt stack aswell *G* i tried the trick myself years ago and it worked...
EDIT: iirc not very stable solution at all! |
| |
Ninja
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 411 |
Jackie: That qualifies as "something like it" in my terms :) If you have to get a stable raster just once per frame, then you can spare a dozen cycles on that. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
Ninja: Yes of course, totally forgot that in the morning haze :) |
| |
Devia
Registered: Oct 2004
Posts: 401 |
Perfect sync with only one sprite is impossible. There're only 3 write cycles to do it with and only 1 instruction using 3 consecutive writes: BRK.
So it would seem that you can only account for a maximum of 2 cycles of jitter using 1 sprite, unless you do some NMI trickery, then maybe 3 cycles.
The fact that it works in various IRQ cases is due to the nature of the code being interrupted.
Perfect sync seems possible using 3 sprites like 3, 6 and 0 as that would give you 9 BA+RDY low cycles in one line.
But even with more sprites it seems pointless, unless you're already utilizing those sprites for something else. Why? because, either you have to keep the sprite on for at least 21 lines or you have to set it up 20 lines before.. So if we're talking interrupts, you'd end up with a double interrupt 20-21 lines apart instead of a "normal" double-irq eating 2 lines. Maybe usefull in cases where you need to do stuff every other line, but then again, use the bloody timers!
In the case of JSR * - this works because JSR is a R/W instruction and because of the badlines. JSR * is executing so fast that it is bound to have one of its 2 writecycles hit the 3 BA+RDY low cycles just before every badline, thus gaining 1-2 cycles. Stack corruption is just an added bonus which is irrelevant in this case.
It's the same as doing INC $xxxx;JMP *-3 or even sta/jmp or the like.. as long as some write cycles hit the BA+RDY low cycles, it's bound to get in sync within 1 or maybe a couple of frames.
- Disable bit 4 of $d011 (DEN) and your magic JSR * stable will become unstable, depending on the length of your interrupt of course, hehe :)
|
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |
