W dniu 2013-01-16 22:57, Spencer Oliver pisze: > I have already started the rebase - > http://repo.or.cz/w/openocd/ntfreak.git/shortlog/refs/heads/libswd > > The next step is to squash some of the commits as noted in my comments > on gerrit, if you have time then feel free to continue.
Well, in that case I think it's best for me to wait until you're done with your rebase and then I can do the squashing/merging stuff, right? > My main concerns at the moment are mainly todo with the additional > configs required with Tomek's changes. I do not want to 2 configs per > adapter (one jtag and one swd). Well, on the other hand we already do have two sets of files for most of adapters - one for ft2232.c and another one for ftdi.c... As a side note - there will not be SO MANY of them, as most adapters don't really support SWD. From what I know there's JTAGkey with a special adapter from Rowley, KT-LINK and JTAG-lock-pick Tiny 2. I'm sure I missed some, but for ~50 adapters supported I guess maybe ~10 support SWD without some additional hardware... Or maybe there's a way SWD could be used for an interface that knows nothing about SWD, so no bidirectional connection of TDI/TDO with RnW pin? > To me the point of gerrit is to merge a working change, not something > that is wip. Yes, that would be nice, but it's also true that SWD is a DRASTIC change and a "completely working and polished solution" would be like 100 commits with thousands of lines... OpenOCD is really JTAG-centric and I'm under impression that you cannot make the SWD merge in a "clean and elegant" way at this moment... Maybe after the changes Tomek's been writing about would be implemented it would be simpler/cleaner, but the changes are not like "2 weeks from here" - the SWD thing is going on for a few years... I guess such reorganization or source code would take at least a few months if not a couple of years - depending on interest of other devs, time each of them will have to spare etc. Merging the code as it is now will probably be a nice boost both for Tomek (to continue his work) and for other developers as it would be easier for them to also implement/change/improve something. > I really would like to see comments from other devs on these changes so > we can make sure we are heading in the the right direction. Not that my opinion is very valuable but I think merging the stuff in this alpha-experimental stage is a good thing - it can always be removed later if the code becomes obsolete (for example because Tomek looses interest in maintaining it). On the other hand I'd also like that to be "usable" (it can be slow), so for me a few tweaks would be most welcome: 1. lower the noise created by debug output of LibSWD - by default only warnings/errors (maybe this will even improve performance a bit? who knows) 2. adding an example of temporary workaround for lack of reset, possibly in a form of a TCL script? After these two things one could try to use this for some experimental debugging, so it will be a working solution - just not polished (yet) (; 4\/3!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow - 200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts. SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612 _______________________________________________ OpenOCD-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel
