Merged.
Thanks!
--
Øyvind Harboe
Can Zylin Consulting help on your project?
US toll free 1-866-980-3434 / International +47 51 63 25 00
http://www.zylin.com/zy1000.html
ARM7 ARM9 ARM11 XScale Cortex
JTAG debugger and flash programmer
___
Openocd-d
Rolf Meeser wrote:
> Let me say that I fully support your change request now.
> I have done some investigation on this, and found that this
> configuration works reliably on all devices, including the very
> first generation.
Great. Thanks for confirming this on more devices than I could!
Acked-b
On 12/09/2010 08:33 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote:
On 2010-12-09 20:05, Rolf Meeser wrote:
--- Freddie Chopin schrieb am Do, 9.12.2010:
Von: Freddie Chopin
Betreff: Re: [Openocd-development] [PATCH] remove srst_pulls_trst
from LPC2xxx target scripts
An: openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote:
> On 2010-12-09 10:07, Peter Stuge wrote:
>>
>> I'm hoping to hear test results from Rolf soon, as long as he does
>> not discover any problem I think the patch should be committed.
>
> I'm afraid "they" are hoping that we get bored with waitin
On 2010-12-09 10:07, Peter Stuge wrote:
I'm hoping to hear test results from Rolf soon, as long as he does
not discover any problem I think the patch should be committed.
I'm afraid "they" are hoping that we get bored with waiting for any
reply or decision, and that this good idea will die.
Freddie Chopin wrote:
>> I will violently oppose any attempt to add the option back to config
>> files for 2148 and 1768. Expect all sorts of bits and bytes thrown at
>> you.
>
> Right now we need to violently demand this patch to be committed <;
I'm hoping to hear test results from Rolf soon, as
On 2010-12-08 06:57, Peter Stuge wrote:
Freddie Chopin wrote:
I've CCed Peter Stuge, as he's another person that has different
opinion on this subject than official version from NXP.
Thanks.
U'r welcome [;
I will violently oppose any attempt to add the option back to config
files for 2148
On 2010-12-06 00:35, Rolf Meeser wrote:
Copy protection of LPC controllers relies on the fact that it is not
possible to halt the processor right after reset.
If your findings were correct, you would have discovered an easy way to
circumvent NXP's security mechanism.
The copy protection still w
Hi,
Freddie Chopin wrote:
> I've CCed Peter Stuge, as he's another person that has different
> opinion on this subject than official version from NXP.
Thanks.
I have had significant development issues both with LPC2148 and
LPC1768 having reset_config srst_pulls_trst in their target files.
It wa
On 12/07/2010 09:40 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote:
> reset_config
trst_and_srst separate srst_gates_jtag trst_push_pull srst_open_drain
I tested the srst_gates_jtag instead of the srst_pull_trst option on the
only LPC2000 board that I have here available at home.
It works fine on this board despite
I've CCed Peter Stuge, as he's another person that has different opinion
on this subject than official version from NXP.
On 2010-12-07 20:45, Rolf Meeser wrote:
The problem is that in fact LPC2000 targets need the srst_pulls_trst
option.
Your claim is: "The srst_pulls_trst option doesn't apply
On 12/07/2010 05:16 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote:
On 2010-12-04 15:47, Freddie Chopin wrote:
This is directly related to the findings from this post:
https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2010-December/017405.html
I've only removed srst_pulls_trst and comments that mentioned th
On 2010-12-04 15:47, Freddie Chopin wrote:
This is directly related to the findings from this post:
https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2010-December/017405.html
I've only removed srst_pulls_trst and comments that mentioned that (and
comments that were not very helpful)
So
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 12:35 AM, Rolf Meeser wrote:
> On 12/05/2010 11:00 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote:
>> So how about this idea of removing useless and wrong occurences of
>> srst_pulls_trst from lpc config files?
>
> If your findings were correct, you would have discovered an easy way to
> circumve
--- On Sun, 12/5/10, Freddie Chopin wrote:
> So how about this idea of removing
> useless and wrong occurences of srst_pulls_trst from lpc config files?
Which ones are useless? Which are wrong? And
for the latter , why haven't we seen specific bug reports, followed by trivial
patches?
The
On 12/05/2010 11:00 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote:
So how about this idea of removing useless and wrong occurences of
srst_pulls_trst from lpc config files?
Are you sure this is correct?
Copy protection of LPC controllers relies on the fact that it is not
possible to halt the processor right afte
So how about this idea of removing useless and wrong occurences of
srst_pulls_trst from lpc config files?
4\/3!!
___
Openocd-development mailing list
Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
On 2010-12-04 16:21, Freddie Chopin wrote:
But - you're welcome to remove reset_config's from target files and
there are 46 such files.
I also want to get your attention on the fact that half of target files
does not respect this policy, so maybe it's not so good and maybe it
could be changed
On 2010-12-04 16:06, Antonio Borneo wrote:
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote:
This is directly related to the findings from this post:
https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2010-December/017405.html
I've only removed srst_pulls_trst and comments that mentio
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 10:47 PM, Freddie Chopin wrote:
> This is directly related to the findings from this post:
> https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2010-December/017405.html
>
> I've only removed srst_pulls_trst and comments that mentioned that (and
> comments that were not
This is directly related to the findings from this post:
https://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/openocd-development/2010-December/017405.html
I've only removed srst_pulls_trst and comments that mentioned that (and
comments that were not very helpful)
4\/3!!
From 74e3b52516be9211fa6ea6a89853ac7a3a1
21 matches
Mail list logo
