raiden00pl commented on issue #12768:
URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/issues/12768#issuecomment-2275109404

   > I tried break-point debugging with Ozone, but I only can get it working 
with the nsh example. The different memory layout with the combination of 
miniboot_s and modem_ns seems to mess up things and I likely have it not 
configured correctly. Did you try this?
   
   I've worked with gdb only so I can't help.
   
   > I am still quite new to usrsock in Nuttx. I looked at the gs220m and 
alt1250 implementation, which employ an additional daemon and also employ 
'/dev/usrsock' while for the nrf9160 it doesn't have that. Instead 
NET_USRSOCK_CUSTOM is set. Is this what you mean by missing the 'LTE 
link-control daemon' or what is the difference between NET_USRSOCK_DEVICE and 
NET_USRSOCK_CUSTOM?
   
   You can look at alt1250 architecture here: 
https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/blob/master/lte/alt1250/README.txt
   alt1250 implements user socket API on apps side and NET_USRSOCK_DEVICE 
provides interface to communicate with kernel side part of alt1250 
implementation (like SPI data transfer).
   For nrf91 all user socket API is implemented on kernel side, so we don't 
need `/dev/usrsock`. 
   When I write 'LTE link-control daemon', I mean something like 
https://docs.nordicsemi.com/bundle/ncs-latest/page/nrf/libraries/modem/lte_lc.html
 so we can automate the modem configuration and control.
   
   > I often have the issue that when I only want to flash changes to the 
modem_ns build, the board bricks and I have to first reflash the miniboot_s 
build (chiperasing everything during the operation) and then again flashing the 
modem_s. Do you also encounter this issue?
   
   Sounds like AP-protect mechanism in Nordic chips: 
https://docs.nordicsemi.com/bundle/ncs-2.6.0/page/nrf/security/ap_protect.html 
   It blocks the debugger and the only option to unlock the system is to erase 
the chip.
   AP-protect mechanism is broken for NRF52 (famous NRF52 fault injection bug) 
so for new chips Nordic enables AP-protect at default in HW. But I don't 
remember if it's enabled by default for NRF91, probably it probably is. 
   The missing logic is here:
   
https://github.com/apache/nuttx/blob/3862b717286ddd6ad8375639daa294844b817ade/arch/arm/src/nrf91/nrf91_start.c#L79-L88


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to