On Fri, 29 May 2009, Spencer Oliver wrote: >>> 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). >> > > what jlink firmware version is this? > mine reports: > J-Link ARM V6 compiled Nov 5 2008 20:49:58
J-Link ARM V6 compiled Mar 3 2008 18:04:42 I don't think much of their revision control, to be honest. The capabilities of a lot of the versions we see in traces are wildly different, and the only distinction is a date. _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
