Dear Spen,
Do you see any speed regression between HIDAPI and libusb-1.0
Regards,
Laurent
http://www.amontec.com
Le 06.08.2013 14:15, ger...@openocd.zylin.com a écrit :
> This is an automated email from Gerrit.
>
> Spencer Oliver (s...@spen-soft.co.uk) just uploaded a new patch set to Gerrit
You should try Amontec JTAGkey serie.
The JTAGkey is one of the only JTAG dongle providing all states for TRST
SRST (low high tristate) and providing JTAG IO auto-sense from 1.4V to 6.5V.
If your target provide RTCK you should use JTAGkey-2.
If you want to supply your target board, you may use
Yes, I agree too that porting to libusb-1.0 will be the best to unify
the USB API.
Regards,
Laurent
http://www.amontec.com
Amontec JTAGkey-2 High-Speed USB JTAG with RTCK
Amontec JTAGkey-2P High-Speed USB JTAG with RTCK and with Power
Le 28.06.2013 10:06, Xiaofan Chen a écrit :
> On Tue,
Le 10.06.2013 08:23, Stuart Longland (VK4MSL) a écrit :
> On 10/06/13 14:59, Stuart Longland (VK4MSL) wrote:
>>> Measure the SRST voltage and make sure it's
at Vdd level. [...] If you find a problem with the dongle, you may simply
disconnect the reset line since in many cases you can mana
Hi Ryan,
Does this new cable is based ft2232 ? if yes, no need to have special
interface -> use ft2232.c or ftdi.c .
Regards,
Laurent
http://www.amontec.com
Amontec JTAGkey-2 USB HIGH SPEED Dongle.
Le 23.05.2013 13:49, Ryan Corbin a écrit :
David,
Here is the openjtag configuration file t
x27;crit :
> Hi, Peter,
>
> Thanks for your reminding. I am really confused by Laurent's message.
> Now I got it.
>
> Hsiangkai
>
> "Peter Stuge" mailto:pe...@stuge.se>> 於 2013/5/3 下
> 午6:58 寫道：
>
>> Hello Hsiangkai,
>>
>> Laurent
Hi Hsiangkai,
After gdb modifications review, please come with the architecture debug
support. Important, you have to make sure your architecture debug
session is WORKING with the actual popular usb jtag dongles .
(If you need an Amontec JTAGkey-2 sample to check this, please let me know).
The
Le 16.04.2013 00:05, Andreas Fritiofson a écrit :
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Grant Edwards
mailto:grant.b.edwa...@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 2013-04-13, Andreas Fritiofson mailto:andreas.fritiof...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 11:59 PM, Grant Edwards
mailto:grant.
Don't you still end up with an ft2232 driver?
When we say driver we mean the interface driver inside OpenOCD. Lousy
name, since they're easily confused with operating system drivers with
similar names.
Yes, but we should avoid talking about "interface driver". You have
"interface" (jlin
Le 21.03.2013 17:03, Salvador Arroyo a écrit :
> On 03/21/2013 04:52 PM, Laurent Gauch wrote:
>> Le 21.03.2013 16:41, Salvador Arroyo a écrit :
>>>> But the num_cycles will be depending on the frequency of the JTAG
>>>> interface.
>>> Of course.
>>
Le 21.03.2013 15:18, Laurent Gauch a écrit :
Le 21.03.2013 15:04, Mindy Beseler a écrit :
Hello again,
Do I need the 977 patch to try the 1196 patch?
Thanks,
Mindy
*From:*Salvador Arroyo [mailto:salva...@telecable.es]
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 20, 2013 8:24 AM
*To:* Mindy Beseler
Le 21.03.2013 15:04, Mindy Beseler a écrit :
Hello again,
Do I need the 977 patch to try the 1196 patch?
Thanks,
Mindy
*From:*Salvador Arroyo [mailto:salva...@telecable.es]
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 20, 2013 8:24 AM
*To:* Mindy Beseler; openocd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
*Subject:* Re: [O
could be a good starting point for itm.
some comments .
- stlink-trace name is not so good since your did not do trace but itm
trace.
- to integrate this in openocd you need to think about target /
interface layer / ...
you have done the job for a specific target, for a specific interface ,
y
Le 05.03.2013 20:52, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> Freddie Chopin wrote:
>>> but why 0.7.0 ? for me this is a non-sense !
>> Any better ideas?
> If it's supposed to be a time based release, then identify it as
> such. Think ubuntu.
>
>
> //Peter
>
> ---
>>> I think that the process discussion is interesting and very
>>> important, everyone in a project must agree on process, otherwise
>>> it's not really possible to cooperate. Let's continue that
>>> discussion!
>> Let's not waste time on such endless discussions that lead nowhere.
>> No everyone
Le 05.03.2013 20:47, Freddie Chopin a écrit :
> W dniu 2013-03-05 20:22, Laurent Gauch pisze:
>> but why 0.7.0 ? for me this is a non-sense !
> Anything constructive, or should this list be renamed to "this is nonsense"?
>
> It's not 0.6.2 as it's not a
Le 05.03.2013 19:09, Freddie Chopin a écrit :
> Hi!
>
> We're doing a release - AGAIN (; Please post links to patches in gerrit
> that you think are ready for submission, so that the community could
> focus on reviewing them. I'll also try to prepare a list myself.
>
> There will be nothing spectac
Le 25.02.2013 21:58, Andreas Fritiofson a écrit :
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Laurent Gauch
mailto:laurent.ga...@amontec.com>> wrote:
Le 21.02.2013 22 :44, Michael Schwingen a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 06:51:13PM +0100, Laurent Gauch wrote:
>>>
Le 21.02.2013 22:44, Michael Schwingen a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 06:51:13PM +0100, Laurent Gauch wrote:
>>> I think we should leave the signals in a defined, dongle/layout-specific
>>> state at disconnect, which may be different from what is present at power
&g
Le 21.02.2013 17:56, Michael Schwingen a écrit :
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 05:44:39PM +0100, Laurent Gauch wrote:
>> This will put the io in tristate !
>> This will work with the Amontec JTAGkey JTAGkey-2 ... since we have
>> on-board strong pull-up and use OE_N to control
Le 21.02.2013 15:08, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> Laurent Gauch wrote:
>> I just say ft2232.c has the advantage to include the specific layout.
> You clearly do not know the ftdi.c code. Please stop the noise. There
> is no advantage here. Move along.
Peter, I ever like your comments.
Le 21.02.2013 09:54, Freddie Chopin a écrit :
> W dniu 2013-02-21 09:17, Laurent Gauch pisze:
>> All the JTAGkey signals + TRST + SRST must be tristated before closing
>> the USB device handle, before quiting Openocd.
>
> I'm not using JTAGkey in the examples above...
>
Le 21.02.2013 08:29, Freddie Chopin a écrit :
> W dniu 2013-02-20 23:42, Freddie Chopin pisze:
When I don't specify any resets (so using sysresetreq), when doing
"reset" I get:
>> reset
>JTAG tap: lpc4350.m4 tap/device found: 0x4ba00477 (mfg: 0x23b,
> part: 0xba00, ve
Le 19.02.2013 00:07, Peter Henn a écrit :
> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 18.02.2013 13:54, schrieb Peter Stuge:
>> Peter Henn wrote:
>>> A patched libusb allow me to setup also latency timer values of 0 for
>>> the FT2232H chip.
>> Please tell more about this patch?
>>
> sorry, I used the wrong name. It was li
Le 15.02.2013 17:11, Laurent Gauch a écrit :
It has an ARMv7 ARM CORTEX-A9 1.2GHz
Also, you should start with a configuration file for processor using
ARMv7 as ompa4 or imx6.
So you should see araound omap4430.cfg
Best regards,
Laurent
http://www.amontec.com
Le 04.02.2013 04:20, Peter Henn a écrit :
> Hi Laurent,
>
> Am 02.02.2013 17:23, schrieb Laurent Gauch:
>> so for me I cannot see any trouble on the use of the send immediat 87
>> command regarding and the full-speed and high-speed device.
>> We have used it a lot as w
send_and_receiv.
So the actual patch is really not so good.
Maybe this is why you have sometimes some issues.
Regards,
Laurent
http://www.amontec.com ;-)
>
> Am 01.02.2013 17:51, schrieb Laurent Gauch:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> Where is this patch sourced ?
>>
>> Regards,
Hi Peter,
Where is this patch sourced ?
Regards,
Laurent
I can test with AMONTEC JTAGKEY ft2232D based and AMONTEC JTAGKEY-2
ft2232H based .
http://www.amontec.com
Le 01.02.2013 16:34, Peter Henn a écrit :
> Hi Oliver and OpenOCD developers,
>
> thanks for testing the patch. The patch wa
Le 28.01.2013 16:31, CeDeROM a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Laurent Gauch
> wrote:
>> Let the 'HOST PROCESS' calculate bitstream2 while the 'JTAGKEY PROCESS'
>> resolve and reply bitstream1.
>> :-)
> Uhm, we we are able to get this kin
Le 28.01.2013 14:50, Tomek CEDRO a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Laurent Gauch
> wrote:
>> Asychronous io access is not the problem, the problem is how to
>> implement using it, in the goal to accelerate the JTAG and or SPI SWD
>> ... :-)
>> Also, we do
Le 28.01.2013 13:19, Xiaofan Chen a écrit :
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 4:30 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote:
>> W dniu 2013-01-28 09:14, Peter Stuge pisze:
>>> Freddie Chopin wrote:
It must be stated that ft2232.c has at least two important
advantages over ftdi.c:
1. it can use ftd2xx, whic
Le 28.01.2013 10:00, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> Freddie Chopin wrote:
>> The most important is the first one, so I'll have to browse the net
>> searching for such binary or maybe I'll try to compile myself and check...
> I seem to remember that there was some comparison between ftd2xx and
> mpsse, wit
Le 22.01.2013 16:32, Laurent Gauch a écrit :
>> 2. RnW signal is driven by one mpsse port read/write command. Transfer
>> is done by another command that use MOSI MISO lines. These two
>> commands are separate. How do you want to make something more
>> efficient with that?
> 2. RnW signal is driven by one mpsse port read/write command. Transfer
> is done by another command that use MOSI MISO lines. These two
> commands are separate. How do you want to make something more
> efficient with that? If you have better idea on how to integrate
> Transfer with PortHi and Po
> Current ft2232 driver use Layouts. Layout initialization routines are
> hardcoded into sources and configuration files. Initialization of
> interface in JTAG mode and SWD mode is different, which requires
> separate initialization routine in the sources and layout name change
> - configuration c
Le 21.01.2013 09:18, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> Tomek CEDRO wrote:
>> I suggest that we put all above information essence into the Handbook :-)
> It has nothing to do with OpenOCD. If you want to work on Gerrit docs
> that's great - but then I think that makes most sense *in the Gerrit
> project*.
Wha
Le 17.01.2013 19:39, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> Spencer Oliver wrote:
>> i am also after a second opinion on some of the changes, mainly
>> effecting the transport and additional jtag_interface for swd
>> (ft2232_swd).
> I can not understand why we would want to add *any* code to
> openocd.git which d
Le 17.01.2013 21:24, CeDeROM a écrit :
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Laurent Gauch
> wrote:
>>> How can it seem like a good idea to add *another* set of files?
>>> That's just insane. I think the sane approach is to simply delete
>>> ft2232.c and mov
>
>>
Unless you're publishing your work under a very open license,
effectively making your design open hardware, I don't think that you
will get a lot of help to create the critical part which is actually
the only thing that would be new compared to several existing (open)
> How can it seem like a good idea to add *another* set of files?
> That's just insane. I think the sane approach is to simply delete
> ft2232.c and move on. It sounds like Tomek already has ideas about
> how to use mpsse.c which is great!
>
End why deleting something working ? Stupid idea ! The f
Le 14.01.2013 19:42, CeDeROM a écrit :
> Hello Laurent :-)
>
> Thank you for your input and good words :-) Glad we agree here, also
> that this is a lot of work to be done, this is why I prefer to ask and
> plan first :-)
great point.
> We can use simple name "Core" no problem :-)
>
> Regarding the
PS, Avoid 1.0.0 ! End users will see it as a first stable version.
Regards,
Laurent
http://www.amontec.com
Le 14.01.2013 17:25, Tomek CEDRO a écrit :
If you think this would be too intrusive for current code and too time
consuming for review (lots of reviews will take place), I can create a
Wow ... I remember to have writting close the same about ISO model long
long time ago.
google -> openocd amontec jtagkey ISO-OSI 7 layers
http://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2009-May/006134.html
Any way, this is still the good to go ! But there are a lot of work ...
and here l
Le 11.01.2013 02:17, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> Laurent Gauch wrote:
>>> Output clock isn't the bottleneck, protocol design is.
>> yes right, if you get the actual ftdi mpsse and arm debug. But the
>> Amontec mpsse will comes with new loop function
>>> I like yo
Hi,
Amontec has developped a VHDL version of the mpsse at 60Mhz max swd jtag
spi clock, instead of the actual 30Mhz.
We are now adding new commands in our mpsse core for accelerating the
swd job.
Next and for coming with SWO we will have two solutions :
1. using the channel B of the ft2232h in
s the mpsse
based on Amontec JTAGkey-2. This will give us the advantage to still have the
d2xx driver support :-) which one should still be faster on Microsoft Windows
OS (again better performance). Also, the advantage will be to keep the same
configuration files (coming with new interface/
For info :
linux.c: In function 'linux_os_thread_reg_list':
linux.c:218:4: error: 'I' flag used with '%x' gnu_printf format
linux.c:218:4: error: format '%I64x' expects type 'unsigned int', but
argument 6 has type 'int64_t'
linux.c: In function 'liste_del_task':
linux.c:692:2: error: format '
with last git.
...
cc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors
mxc.c: In function 'initialize_nf_controller':
mxc.c:728:4: error: implicit declaration of function 'ffs'
make[5]: Leaving directory
`/c/amontec/sdk-v0.1/sources/openocd/git/src/flash/nand'
make[4]: Leaving directory
`/c/amontec/s
48 matches
Mail list logo
