Hi Tomek,
On 14 June 2012 09:41, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> Hello Akos :-)
> The hardware for openocd-box should not be any hardware centric, it should
> be hardware independent.
I'm not sure I agree with this. If we are to design a hardware
ourselves, which will be open-source, and because of this re
Hello Akos :-)
The hardware for openocd-box should not be any hardware centric, it should
be hardware independent. Support for target is the openocd task. From what
I know there was an idea for coresight library at arm but I did not take
part in it (planning and funding issues) but if they make it
Yes, the entropy of the data is much much lower, however this is the
rate at which it is "coming out".
It has to be decoded by the FPGA and filtered, probably even
compressed somewhat as most of it are only synchronizing sequences,
and empty frames, and repeating sequences like (Memory at address
0
Akos Vandra wrote:
> plan ahead and design a hardware that will be able to capture the
> trace traffic
How much traffic do you think is needed to be useful?
800Mbps sustained gets difficult to manage really quickly.
If there's no alternative to streaming then I think the 800Mbps needs
to be enco
Hi guys,
Just my two cents for this idea:
I think if we are to build something like this, and we plan for it to
be ARM centric - just as openocd is atm -, I think we should think
about hardware support for the full ARM Coresight architecture, in
advance.
What I intend to point out is real-time t
Sure it could be PI or any other hardware that would be cheap enough and
fit our needs :-) some friends mentioned about it maybe i will order one
too :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
On May 22, 2012 12:00 AM, "Andrew Leech" wrote:
> On 22/05/12 6:55 AM, Tomas Frydrych wrote:
>
On 6/06/12 8:48 AM, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> Okay, I can see there is major of interest in the subject of
> OpenOCD-BOX, this is good, thanks :-)
>
I'm pretty keen too!
>
> Buffer should allow to input/output/tristate lines connected to a
> target device and shift voltage levels safely between interfac
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 07, 2012 at 08:50:47AM +0100, Dave Marples wrote:
> Has anyone considered using RasberryPi as a base, at least for
> development? It does seem to have some uncommitted I/O, SPI and I2C. It
> doesn't have level converters or any of the other bits and pieces needed
> in the real w
On 05/06/12 23:48, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> Okay, I can see there is major of interest in the subject of
> OpenOCD-BOX, this is good, thanks :-)
>
> As there seems to be plenty of hardware solutions, I think we should
> invent one common buffer design to be applied on any GPIO and allow
> JTAG, SWD, SP
Okay, I can see there is major of interest in the subject of
OpenOCD-BOX, this is good, thanks :-)
As there seems to be plenty of hardware solutions, I think we should
invent one common buffer design to be applied on any GPIO and allow
JTAG, SWD, SPI, I2C, 1Wire, etc using common signal definition
On June 05, 2012 7:30 AM, David Riley wrote:
>
> On Jun 5, 2012, at 8:08 AM, Anders Montonen wrote:
>
> > On Jun 5, 2012, at 14:16, Peter Stuge wrote:
> >
> > Aren't these the kind of problems Zeroconf was designed to solve?
>
> Not address distribution. Name resolution, yes, and if you were t
On Jun 5, 2012, at 8:08 AM, Anders Montonen wrote:
> On Jun 5, 2012, at 14:16, Peter Stuge wrote:
>
>> These benefits result in excellent usability, and in practice I think
>> the IP address conflict can be solved rather easily - by allowing the
>> device's IP address and subnet to be reconfigure
On Jun 5, 2012, at 14:16, Peter Stuge wrote:
> These benefits result in excellent usability, and in practice I think
> the IP address conflict can be solved rather easily - by allowing the
> device's IP address and subnet to be reconfigured manually, e.g.
> through type=vendor recipient=device co
Michael Schwingen wrote:
> the benefit in using IP to talk to a USB-connected device .. ?
1. cross-platform API with in-kernel device class drivers everywhere
2. that cross-platform API can even be used to make the GDB server
socket available, without any device-specific software component
On 06/05/2012 07:25 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Austin, Alex wrote:
>> As long as the DHCP response doesn't include a default route, it
>> shouldn't interfere with an existing network connection.
> If the DHCP server in the device has the same IP as the default
> gateway then things stop working.
>
Al
Hi,
I'm currently planning to design one hardware for this
If we canhave enough pre-order
I can start the production
It will be based on a arm9 with/without fpga
Best Regards,
J.
On 22:45 Mon 21 May , Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> Hello :-)
>
> Simple USB JTAG adapt
Austin, Alex wrote:
> As long as the DHCP response doesn't include a default route, it
> shouldn't interfere with an existing network connection.
If the DHCP server in the device has the same IP as the default
gateway then things stop working.
//Peter
---
Peter Stuge wrote:
> > > DHCP server in the MCU is important for usability. I think the CDC
> > > Ethernet interface class is quite widely compatible and is also a
> > > good choice for good usability.
> >
> > A static IP address can be used, and add an entry to the route
> > table will do it.
>
>
simonqian.openocd wrote:
> Yes, the MCU I will use is SAM3U.
You may be able to reuse some code from OsmoSDR in that case.
> > DHCP server in the MCU is important for usability. I think the CDC
> > Ethernet interface class is quite widely compatible and is also a
> > good choice for good usabili
> Not so many choices for the MCU, but at least there is SAM3U and
> hopefully sometime soon the LPC1820 goes into production.
Yes, the MCU I will use is SAM3U.
> DHCP server in the MCU is important for usability. I think the CDC
> Ethernet interface class is quite widely compatible and is also a
Akos Vandra wrote:
> I'm sorry, if I'm missing something, but the lpc1820 is already on
> stock at farnell.
Yes, I discovered that too! I first looked at nxp.com, which still
says Qualification..
//Peter
--
Live Securit
I'm sorry, if I'm missing something, but the lpc1820 is already on
stock at farnell.
7.5USD/piece,
or 62USD/10 pieces.
Regards,
Ákos Vandra
On 4 June 2012 20:01, Paul Fertser wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 07:44:48PM +0200, Peter Stuge wrote:
>> DHCP server in the MCU is important f
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 07:44:48PM +0200, Peter Stuge wrote:
> DHCP server in the MCU is important for usability.
What about using something like this instead:
$ ping6 -I usb0 ff02::1
And you'll get the reply from the connected device, then you can use
its link-local address, e.g. if it was
simonqian.openocd wrote:
> I just read this thread. Actually I'm considering implement a
> device with embedded GDB server.
> Hope I can have enough time for this.
> Below is my solution, 480M USB:
> MCU with 480M USB, RNDIS on USB, so it will appear on OSs as a NIC.
> Implement a GDB server conne
dware will be as simple as Versaloon, but need more flash an ram.
And I don't plan to use linux or uclinux.
simonqian.openocd
From: Xiaofan Chen
Date: 2012-05-22 16:25
To: Tomek CEDRO
CC: openocd-devel
Subject: Re: [OpenOCD-devel] OpenOCD-BOX
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Xiaofan Chen w
Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> I have ordered bundle today, lets see what software/source/documentation
> comes included and if its worth the money :-)
Nothing included at all. It boots OpenWrt, source at:
https://github.com/8devices/carambola
This work is already being upstreamed into OpenWrt because one
I have ordered bundle today, lets see what software/source/documentation
comes included and if its worth the money :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live even
David Riley wrote:
> >>> Raspberry Pi
> >>
> >> Superclosed ARM11
> >
> > Hmm, I wonder how long it will stay "closed" with 10,000 hackers
> > playing with it?
>
> You've obviously never tried to extract datasheets from Broadcom, then. :-)
..
> amazed that they got even the smattering of documen
On May 22, 2012, at 4:17 AM, John Devereux wrote:
> Peter Stuge writes:
>
>> Andrew Leech wrote:
>>> Raspberry Pi
>>
>> Superclosed ARM11 in 2012? Or maybe 2013 before they ship. No thanks.
>> I'll be using the small MIPS board meanwhile. :) The next Carambola
>> spin is a 27x18mm module to shi
Spencer Oliver wrote:
> > U-Boot source code has still not been made available, feel free to
> > send 8devices an email to ask for it if you have a board, maybe that
> > can help accelerate the process.
>
> I have heard from a few that support is not that responsive.
My experience in communicatio
On 22 May 2012 11:20, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Peter Stuge wrote:
>> Drasko DRASKOVIC wrote:
>> > I don't see JTAG header on this board... Is it present or they
>> > thought that we are all printk lovers ?
>>
>> No header but see http://stuge.se/carambola_jtag.jpg
>
> U-Boot source code has still not
Peter Stuge wrote:
> Drasko DRASKOVIC wrote:
> > I don't see JTAG header on this board... Is it present or they
> > thought that we are all printk lovers ?
>
> No header but see http://stuge.se/carambola_jtag.jpg
U-Boot source code has still not been made available, feel free to
send 8devices an
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Drasko DRASKOVIC wrote:
>> I don't see JTAG header on this board... Is it present or they
>> thought that we are all printk lovers ?
>
> No header but see http://stuge.se/carambola_jtag.jpg
Thanks Peter,
that is what I was looking for.
BR,
D
Drasko DRASKOVIC wrote:
> I don't see JTAG header on this board... Is it present or they
> thought that we are all printk lovers ?
No header but see http://stuge.se/carambola_jtag.jpg
//Peter
--
Live Security Virtual Co
John Devereux wrote:
> >> Raspberry Pi
> >
> > Superclosed ARM11
>
> Hmm, I wonder how long it will stay "closed" with 10,000 hackers
> playing with it?
I wouldn't be too surprised if bcm had 10,000 lawyers.
The documentation will likely be thousands of pages long.
I don't think that's something
I don't see JTAG header on this board... Is it present or they thought
that we are all printk lovers ?
BR,
Drasko
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> Full box + vat + shipping < 70EUR ordered :-)
>
> --
> CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
>
>
> -
Full box + vat + shipping < 70EUR ordered :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has chan
Peter Stuge writes:
> Andrew Leech wrote:
>> Raspberry Pi
>
> Superclosed ARM11 in 2012? Or maybe 2013 before they ship. No thanks.
> I'll be using the small MIPS board meanwhile. :) The next Carambola
> spin is a 27x18mm module to ship maybe this year. Better performance
> but on the other hand
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> Hello :-)
>
> Simple USB JTAG adapters are not fast enough for operational analysis
> of devices. The commercial ones are fast but limited in
> functionalities and not extensible. The perfect solution would be to
> have/create OpenOCD-BOX that
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
>> Hello :-)
>>
>> Simple USB JTAG adapters are not fast enough for operational analysis
>> of devices. The commercial ones are fast but limited in
>> functionalities and not extensible. The
On 05/22/2012 03:57 AM, David Riley wrote:
>
> That's good to know; I imagine uClinux has a lot to do with
> that. Most of the time I've had to play with embedded Linux
> it's been with particularly boneheaded implementations that
> take that long even on an 800 MHz PowerPC (I was not the
> implem
On May 21, 2012, at 6:14 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> David Riley wrote:
>> is there a history of running OpenOCD embedded (i.e. under a much
>> lighter-weight OS than Linux or Windows)?
>
> ZY-1000 from Zylin did just that.
>
>
>> Linux seems like it would really be a waste of space and
>> horsepo
CeDeROM wrote:
> >> Is there versions with 32MB or 64MB of Flash? :-)
> >
> > Not that I know. It looks like the Nano has MX25L128, ie. 16 Mbyte,
> > the max for SPI. I guess the CFI TSOP on the current boards could be
> > upgraded if there was volume demand.
> >
> > Nano: http://www.8devices.com/c
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:21 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
>> Is there versions with 32MB or 64MB of Flash? :-)
>
> Not that I know. It looks like the Nano has MX25L128, ie. 16 Mbyte,
> the max for SPI. I guess the CFI TSOP on the current boards could be
> upgraded if there was volume demand.
>
> Nano: h
CeDeROM wrote:
> > I'll be using the small MIPS board meanwhile. :) The next Carambola
> > spin is a 27x18mm module to ship maybe this year. Better performance
> > but on the other hand no more built-in antenna.
>
> Is there versions with 32MB or 64MB of Flash? :-)
Not that I know. It looks like
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> I'll be using the small MIPS board meanwhile. :) The next Carambola
> spin is a 27x18mm module to ship maybe this year. Better performance
> but on the other hand no more built-in antenna.
Is there versions with 32MB or 64MB of Flash? :-)
Bes
David Riley wrote:
> is there a history of running OpenOCD embedded (i.e. under a much
> lighter-weight OS than Linux or Windows)?
ZY-1000 from Zylin did just that.
> Linux seems like it would really be a waste of space and
> horsepower, and no one wants a JTAG box that takes 30 seconds
> to boo
Andrew Leech wrote:
> Raspberry Pi
Superclosed ARM11 in 2012? Or maybe 2013 before they ship. No thanks.
I'll be using the small MIPS board meanwhile. :) The next Carambola
spin is a 27x18mm module to ship maybe this year. Better performance
but on the other hand no more built-in antenna.
//Pete
It's certainly something I've considered in the past. An FPGA is not likely to
be ideal for the entire device unless you're running a soft core in it (or a
hard core like the PowerPC in the old Virtex 4/5 FX series or ARMs like in the
new devices from Xilinx and Altera). On-board hard and soft
On 22/05/12 6:55 AM, Tomas Frydrych wrote:
> On 21/05/12 21:45, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
>> Hello :-)
>>
>> Simple USB JTAG adapters are not fast enough for operational analysis
>> of devices. The commercial ones are fast but limited in
>> functionalities and not extensible. The perfect solution would be
On 21/05/12 21:45, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> Hello :-)
>
> Simple USB JTAG adapters are not fast enough for operational analysis
> of devices. The commercial ones are fast but limited in
> functionalities and not extensible. The perfect solution would be to
> have/create OpenOCD-BOX that would have fa
51 matches
Mail list logo
