On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 8:52 PM, Zach Welch<[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 09:19 +0200, Øyvind Harboe wrote: >> Committed. >> >> Does OMAP/BeagleBoard need this? >> >> This "pathmove" command is ready for testing & feedback. >> I've done some quick smoketests and it reveals some interesting >> points in terms of where error checking should go... Discussed >> yesterday. > > Cool. Except that -- for all its error checking -- it does not catch > all of the possible errors. Specifically, jtag_add_statemove and > jtag_add_pathmove both can set jtag_error (without returning an error > directly).
which jtag_execute_queue() catches. jtag_execute_queue() has two purposes: - execute queued commands(if the minidriver is asynchronous) - report any errors accrued during synchronous minidriver execution > > Personally, I think jtag_error should be removed, and all routines pass > back an error code. If those values needs to be "carried forward" to be > reported in the right place, then they should be stored in whatever > structure must be carried forward. As it is, the jtag_error code is > _never_ checked by callers, while return codes are checked religiously. > Today, removing it would have no effect other than to simplify the code. Here be dragons! :-) This jtag_error analysis is wrong. You are not taking into account synchronous jtag minidrivers. The error check happens either immediately *or* during the jtag queue execution. -- Øyvind Harboe Embedded software and hardware consulting services http://consulting.zylin.com _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
