[email protected] said: > One day I shall be interested in hearing why TI (and Atmel, for that > matter) think that protecting parts of the JTAG command structure is a > useful idea. I believe in IP, and I believe there are some things > that users don't need to know about. But the fact they're willing to > share that information with some parties and not others is disturbing. > It seems to indicate a managerial structure that doesn't really > understand what a user wants, but rather a structure based on > unfounded fears. Do they really think some is going to clone the core > because someone knows how to read a register with JTAG? And if they > aren't going to tell, the least they could do is say why they think > they shouldn't.
I have to chime in with a 'me too'. It really annoys me that some companies won't release this information. The absence of documentation for the debug interface can sometimes make it difficult to get a debugger running on new hardware, much less the fact that porting gdb becomes impossible. And what about those who aren't using an intel architecture machine for their debug host? Every time a vendor tells me they need to keep the interface proprietary, I show them section 7 of the Motorola CPU32 manual. It describes everything you need to know to use background debug mode. Publishing this info certainly didn't seem to hurt 683xx sales. Enough ranting for now. galen
