On Fri, 29 May 2009, Magnus Lundin wrote: >> I have attached logs of both rev, as you can see the line of interest for >> r1508 is >> Debug: 119 218 jlink.c:963 jlink_debug_buffer(): 0000 cf 00 08 00 ff 00 >> and r1509 >> Debug: 119 249 jlink.c:963 jlink_debug_buffer(): 0000 cf 00 07 00 7f 00 >> > Yes, it definetly seems some JLinks dislikes 7 bit transactions, but not > always, not if they are in a good mode after running rev 1188. > > We can patch all transactions to be a multiple of 8, but that has a > tendency of driving some arm7/9 targets into a strange state if the > endstate is IDLE, since this is the clock instruction into cpu. For > Cortex targets this is not a problem. > > Still it would be very good to know if this is the problem for (at least > some of) the V6 adapters.
Unfortunately not mine... I still get a 1 returned (instead of a zero) as the error code from EMU_CMD_HW_JTAG3, when I send 8 bits: Debug: 191 667 jlink.c:1032 jlink_usb_write(): jlink_usb_write, out_length = 6, result = 6 Debug: 192 667 jlink.c:1095 jlink_debug_buffer(): 0000 cf 00 08 00 ff 00 Debug: 193 694 jlink.c:1054 jlink_usb_read(): jlink_usb_read, result = 1 Debug: 194 694 jlink.c:1095 jlink_debug_buffer(): 0000 00 Debug: 195 695 jlink.c:1069 jlink_usb_read_emu_result(): jlink_usb_read_result, result = 1 Debug: 196 695 jlink.c:1095 jlink_debug_buffer(): 0000 01 Error: 197 695 jlink.c:971 jlink_usb_message(): jlink_usb_message failed with result=1) Error: 198 695 jlink.c:810 jlink_tap_execute(): jlink_tap_execute, wrong result -107 (expected 1) This is both from a power-up, and from warm (though not testing with an earlier "working" version). _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
