"David Brownell" <davi...@pacbell.net> napisał(a): > Which ones are useless? Which are wrong? And > for the latter , why haven't we seen specific bug reports, followed by > trivial patches?
C'mon - we both know that everyone thinks srst_pulls_trst is mandatory for LPC parts and my findings https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2010-December/017405.html as well as Peter Stuge's findings http://openocd.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=openocd/openocd;a=commit;h=8772355bbd507f4cd191d589d7ab5060b97c1818 show that it's not true. Of course LPCs work with srst_pulls_trst - they will probably work with many (all?) combinations of reset_config, but these configs should show the best possible configuration, not something that barely works. Generally see my previous post about reasons to remove this option. > The first sane example of that option which I > ever herd was for some LPC chip where it was > described as a silicon work-around (and thus it > made sense to be in a target file). I've browsed through erratas for LPC2103, LPC2148 and LPC2478 - no mention about such limitation. > I think everyone agrees that when board wiring > calls for that option, it belongs in a board > config file rather than elsewhere. As I've said on Saturday - I've just removed srst_pulls_trst - nothing else. 4\/3!! _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
