On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:24 AM, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 28 June 2009, Ųyvind Harboe wrote:
>> How about if the target added new commands, such as
>> "configure FPGA". This would then be distinct from resetting
>> the CPU, but it could still be placed into the .gdbinit sequence.
>
> Targ
On Sunday 28 June 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> How about if the target added new commands, such as
> "configure FPGA". This would then be distinct from resetting
> the CPU, but it could still be placed into the .gdbinit sequence.
Target? What target?
We shouldn't require *debug* support ("targe
On pondering the configure FPGA vs. reset script
problem.
How about if the target added new commands, such as
"configure FPGA". This would then be distinct from resetting
the CPU, but it could still be placed into the .gdbinit sequence.
--
Øyvind Harboe
Embedded software and hardware consulting
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Michael Fischer wrote:
> Hello Ųyvind
>
>>Michael Fischer has maintained a really neat website with lots of
>>Windows binaries. Why should we dilute his efforts?
>
> You can distribute Windows binaries on berlios. I will link
> to it if available.
The point is tha
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:13 PM, Ronald
Vanschoren wrote:
>
>> Nobody has yet posted a license to this list that would make it
>> possible to consider a scenario where it OpenOCD would only
>> allow honorable linking with closed source that could not be
>> exploited in some insidious way by a comm
Hey all,
I just committed the following patch to assist future development of the
JTAG interface driver modules, encapsulating this into its own source
file separate from everything else. This simply moves lines of codes
and adds some documentation, and the new files will allow developing a
patch
So - if we are to turn reset "inside-out" - what commands do we need?
1) ablity to control SRST & TRST externally.
jtag interface assert SIGNALNAME
jtag interface deassert SIGNALNAME
2) Ablity to know SRST & TRST configuration.
set foo [jtag interface cget -trst-srst-con
On Sun, 2009-06-28 at 12:50 +0200, Freddie Chopin wrote:
> Dominic pisze:
> > It isn't possible with the current ft2232.c code because it uses
> > conditional compilation to compile either with libftdi or FTD2XX. While
> > offering basically the same functionality there are not only syntactical
Hello Øyvind
>Michael Fischer has maintained a really neat website with lots of
>Windows binaries. Why should we dilute his efforts?
You can distribute Windows binaries on berlios. I will link
to it if available.
Best regards,
Michael
___
Openocd-dev
> Nobody has yet posted a license to this list that would make it
> possible to consider a scenario where it OpenOCD would only
> allow honorable linking with closed source that could not be
> exploited in some insidious way by a commercially orientated
> villain
Lots of people have, even you, it'
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:03 PM, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 28 June 2009, Ronald Vanschoren wrote:
>> As said before, I am also against closed source target support,
>> but I don't consider FTD2xx a closed source target.
>
> Good! We've been wanting to have source to that library.
>
> What
>> I do *lots* of closed source development. It's what puts bread on the
>> table really, so I don't do GPL exclusively.
>>
> GPL purists (in this case) are the people that are against linking with
> FTD2xx.
Then, yes, I'm a terrorist.
>> Iron clad guarantees that we don't create loopholes for cl
On Sunday 28 June 2009, Ronald Vanschoren wrote:
> As said before, I am also against closed source target support,
> but I don't consider FTD2xx a closed source target.
Good! We've been wanting to have source to that library.
What's the ftdichip.com URL for downloading *SOURCE* code
to that driv
Original Message
Subject: [Openocd-development] Dynamic library loading
From: Øyvind Harboe
To: Ronald Vanschoren
Cc: openocd-development
Date: Sun Jun 28 2009 20:39:05 GMT+0200 (Romance Standard Time)
> (Lots of stuff deleted from your mail. Nothing is intended
> by that othe
On Sunday 28 June 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> I'd hate the idea of having 10 host platforms with a few outstanding
> problems on each and try to time a release until "all" problems have
> been solved.
Me too. Not that I think there is anything like such a
mess; right now, it seems the issue is e
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 9:37 PM, David Brownell wrote:
> On Sunday 28 June 2009, Ųyvind Harboe wrote:
>> I've pondered whether OpenOCD berlios web site should distribute binaries
>> or not and I figure that this is best left to package maintainers, just
>> like in the good old days.
>
> Good. Next
On Sunday 28 June 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> I've pondered whether OpenOCD berlios web site should distribute binaries
> or not and I figure that this is best left to package maintainers, just
> like in the good old days.
Good. Next question: do you know of issues that need to be
fixed before
Øyvind Harboe wrote:
> I believe Harald would have spoken up if the current approach being discussed
> was not in GPL compliance(or was a transparent attempt at circumventing it),
> but I haven't looked into the details.
Well, not loud...but yes. ;-) After finding myself in the proprietary
librar
On Sunday 28 June 2009, Ronald Vanschoren wrote:
> Note: This is an HTML message. For security reasons, only
> the raw HTML code is shown. If you trust the sender of
> this message then you can activate formatted HTML display
> for this message by clicking here.
I'll repeat my suggestion that e
>> I totally can't follow anymore, but are you one of the GPL purists?
Having give this some further thought, I don't think I can be called
a GPL purist.
I chose FreeBSD for Jim Tcl and the HDL implementation of the ZPU.
It's a matter of choosing a license which is effective at achieving
the goa
Committed.
Thanks!
--
Øyvind Harboe
Embedded software and hardware consulting services
http://www.zylin.com
___
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
(Lots of stuff deleted from your mail. Nothing is intended
by that other than that I couldn't really think of a reply.)
> Can you please stop talking in riddles and just write what you want to say?
Am I always talking in riddles or just this once?
> This change is absolutely not a breach of GP
(I saw Duane is following up on this one and he's
pretty much the expert on it...)
> If I've got an FPGA *not* programmed with a Nios core,
> that model doesn't work. :)
>
> That issue isn't entirely "reset". It's "initialization",
> which is a separable chunk of reset processing. For a
> Nios
Original Message
Subject: [Openocd-development] Dynamic library loading
From: Øyvind Harboe
To: Harald Kipp
Cc: openocd-development
Date: Sun Jun 28 2009 19:59:55 GMT+0200 (Romance Standard Time)
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 6:49 PM, Harald Kipp wrote:
Freddie Chop
I worked on this a while back and the rule that I required
OpenOCD to follow was that it should *always* be possible
to write startup sequence that could debug the board,
regardless of whether the previous debug session crashed
(OpenOCD or GDB), state of target, etc.
So any dangling breakpoints mu
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:00 AM, David Brownell wrote:
> On Thursday 25 June 2009, Zach Welch wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Here is my summary of what I think needs to be done to prepare for a
>> "source-only" 0.2.0 release, which will help promote OpenOCD and maybe
>> attract new developers that can he
I've pondered this a bit and I've rejected the idea of chaining
targets for testing purposes:
- it doesn't test what the users would be doing
- you can't mix high/low frequency targets
- RTCK will ruin your whole day here
- weird TRST behaviour making two targets mutually exclusive
on a chain
The
On Sunday 28 June 2009, you wrote:
> What I have to do to add this Interface-board to Openocd?
>
> First, is there already an Adapter with the Pinning below which I can use?
>
> Is there a Documentation with the Pinnings and the differences of
> the supported JTAG-Interfaces?
> I looked a little
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 6:49 PM, Harald Kipp wrote:
> Freddie Chopin wrote:
>
>> About posts by Herald and Pavel - I personally agree totally with you,
>> but - as you've already noticed - some maintainers just don't share our
>> point of view, and I think there is no way of convincing them - they
Hello,
I try to use openocd with a Luminary EK-LM3S9B90 Board.
This is the first time I try to use openocd and I hope I could post this
question to the List.
The EK-LM3S9B90 Board has an extra JTAG-Interface-Board with a FT2232D chip.
I set following in the cfg file,
ft2232_device_desc "Luminary
On Sunday 28 June 2009 12:54:26 Freddie Chopin wrote:
> Everything would be easier if libftdi would be a dll <: Now I'd have to
> change and recompile libftdi <:
Heh, that's exactly where I was heading with my questions ;).
Regards,
Dominic
___
Openocd
Dominic pisze:
> How is libftdi, and more specifically OpenOCD with libftdi support build
> on Windows?
>
> OpenOCD ft2232.o references symbols from libftdi which references
> symbols from libusb0. On Linux, libftdi and libusb are shared objects
> that get dynamically linked.
>
> You say libft
Dominic pisze:
> It isn't possible with the current ft2232.c code because it uses
> conditional compilation to compile either with libftdi or FTD2XX. While
> offering basically the same functionality there are not only syntactical
> but also semantical differences. If ft2232.c was to support bot
On Sunday 28 June 2009 11:07:56 Freddie Chopin wrote:
> Martin Panter pisze:
> > So why loading libusb rather than libftdi? Is it because libftdi is
> > only built (or linked to) as a static library on Windows but still
> > needs the libusb DLL?
>
> libftdi is not a .dll, but it's code statically l
On Sunday 28 June 2009 11:06:27 Freddie Chopin wrote:
> Zach Welch pisze:
> > You cannot have both libftdi and FTD2XX support in
> > the same FT2232 driver binary, so this patch not even allowing testing
> > them both using the same openocd binary (presumably by adding/removing
> > the OS drivers b
Freddie Chopin pisze:
> libftdi is not a .dll, but it's code statically links to libusb0.dll, so
> I guess I'd have to modify libusb sources... Don't know whether that
> would work, but it should.
I meant "libftdi sources" [;
4\/3!!
___
Openocd-develo
Martin Panter pisze:
> So why loading libusb rather than libftdi? Is it because libftdi is
> only built (or linked to) as a static library on Windows but still
> needs the libusb DLL?
libftdi is not a .dll, but it's code statically links to libusb0.dll, so
I guess I'd have to modify libusb source
Zach Welch pisze:
> You cannot have both libftdi and FTD2XX support in
> the same FT2232 driver binary, so this patch not even allowing testing
> them both using the same openocd binary (presumably by adding/removing
> the OS drivers between tests).
Why is that so impossible? init() will try to
38 matches
Mail list logo
