On 01/10/2012 03:38 AM, Delio Brignoli wrote: > Hi Kyle, > > No I haven't tried the XDS100v2 yet because the issue does not seem to be > related to the debugger HW. As you say, the issue appears to be lack of > documentation. My immediate need for this is U-Boot debugging and would like > to avoid using CCSv5 if possible. Did you use CCSv5 to debug U-Boot, and if > yes, what was your experience with it? I still hope someone who has succeeded > may chime in and enlighten us. > > Thanks > -- > Delio I used it extensively to debug u-boot and early Linux kernel init. This was my first experience with CCSv5 and was originally trying to avoid using it. That said, I was pleasantly surprised and am convinced for newly released chips (such as ti81xx) there is no other way.
It appears that the CCSv5 tools have a considerable amount of insight into the JTAG scan chain as the CCSv5 developers are privy to the TI internal documents to correctly configure the JTAG chain. In time I'd like to see OpenOCD support the ti81xx chips, but it wasn't in my schedule to debug what seemed impossible. It's also worth noting that the xds100v2 debugger allows you to debug u-boot and the linux kernel with a free limited license[1]. The xds100v2 (and the flyswatter by association I assume) is _very_ slow. Single stepping code and reading a bunch of memory addresses is painful after awhile, and hence why I changed to the xds560v2. - Kyle [1] http://processors.wiki.ti.com/index.php/Licensing_-_CCS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Write once. Port to many. Get the SDK and tools to simplify cross-platform app development. Create new or port existing apps to sell to consumers worldwide. Explore the Intel AppUpSM program developer opportunity. appdeveloper.intel.com/join http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-appdev _______________________________________________ OpenOCD-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openocd-devel
