> The tap structure is still not a good place to have it. There are better
> places. Look at http://openocd.zylin.com/2137 where I just pushed some
> proof-of-concept code (i.e. at least it compiles) to show what I'm after.
>
We don’t disagree about the long term solution, what we disagree about is the
first step in that direction.
I think the first step is this: Move the DAP to the TAP leaving a DAP pointer
in the arm common structure.
I think that is a smaller more incremental change.
Second step, is to add a means to connect the ARM structures to that common DAP
struct (which for now lives in the TAP)
Again - this is not that hard - and would be part of the above.
This solves the more immediate problem of a means to have a single common DAP.
Third step: Remove the DAP from the TAP … making the DAP a first class
citizen, and the complete re-arrangement
You seem to want to start at step 3 which I think is a much more complex step.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is your legacy SCM system holding you back? Join Perforce May 7 to find out:
• 3 signs your SCM is hindering your productivity
• Requirements for releasing software faster
• Expert tips and advice for migrating your SCM now
http://p.sf.net/sfu/perforce
_______________________________________________
OpenOCD-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel
