On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Shalabh Jain <[email protected]>wrote:
> Hello, > > 2. Most of the posts on the net mention being able to use the 'uif' or > 'uif-bsl' modes with the JTAG. However, whenever I try that I get errors in > the connection (I'll explain later why I'm trying to use it) > My understanding is that uif uses the jtag pod as a jtag for the device the jtag is connected to... While uif-bsl talks directly to the bsl (bootstrap loader) that is on the cpu in the jtag itself. In other words you don't want to flash a program you've built for your mote into the jtag which is what you might be doing if you specify uif-bsl. Take a look at the email thread at http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.hardware.texas-instruments.msp430.gcc.user/8924 That might provide some insight... I think most of your problems are coming because you updated to V3. > for uif > uif: read error: Connection timed out > fet: open failed > > for uif-bsl > bsl: bootloader start returned error 128 (Unknown error) > bsl: warning: FET firmware not responding > bsl: bad ack character: 5 > bsl: bad ack character: 92 > bsl: sync failed > > I'm guessing/rather hoping that this has something to do with the V3 not > being usable in the bsl mode. Perhaps you could shed some light on that. > Don't know. I consider the V3 stuff a work in progress. I haven't updated my jtag pods. So I use "mspdebug uif -jd /dev/ttyUSB0". Now that you have updated to V3 I don't know how you can go back. > 3. My device (again I'm guessing because of the V3 firmware) shows up as > /dev/ttyACM0. The device ID and vendor ID I get is deviant from most of the > literature I have seen on the internet. Don't know what to tell you. I've avoided taking this route but have stayed on the old firmware. I consider the V3 stuff a work in progress. It is coming along but I didn't want to caught up in helping to make it work (distraction). > Also, plugging in the USB doesn't initiate the loading of the ti3410 > kernel module. That would be a udev issue. > In fact manually loading this module changes nothing in the system. Now I > am able to run the debugger and connect to it (its crashing for now but I > got it to work once). I don't know if its because of this different type of > interface. Do you have any comments/clarifications about this problem? > nope. Here is what I get from lsusb for my device... Bus 005 Device 003: ID 0451:f430 Texas Instruments, Inc. MSP-FET430UIF JTAG Tool I haven't dealt with 2047:0010. > Below are the outputs of dmesg and lsusb after plugging in the board > > dmesg > [34487.948166] usb 6-2: new full speed USB device number 9 using uhci_hcd > [34488.160347] cdc_acm 6-2:1.0: This device cannot do calls on its own. It > is not a modem. > [34488.160411] cdc_acm 6-2:1.0: ttyACM0: USB ACM device > > lsusbBus 006 Device 009: ID 2047:0010 Texas Instruments > Device Descriptor: > bLength 18 > bDescriptorType 1 > bcdUSB 2.00 > bDeviceClass 2 Communications > bDeviceSubClass 0 > bDeviceProtocol 0 > bMaxPacketSize0 8 > idVendor 0x2047 Texas Instruments > idProduct 0x0010 > bcdDevice 1.04 > iManufacturer 1 Texas Instruments > iProduct 2 Texas Instruments MSP430-JTAG > iSerial 3 77FF598CDECE430F > bNumConfigurations 1 > > > I think that most of the confusions I have arise because of a lack of > understanding of the toolchain and the JTAG and BSL interfaces. okay. I would agree. I would recommend in the future that you don't change the state of devices until you've fleshed things out better. It is hard to recover stuff after it has been changed. > Also, there is some confusions in my mind regarding using serial > debuggers. Okay, but you are changing subjects. Technically, jtags aren't serial debuggers. Jtags are boundary scan chain interface units. They talk to control hardware in chips that are VLSI. Is that what you are talking about? Serial debuggers are a different beast. I have been reading a lot on these topics. But this still seems fuzzy. If > you have any good recommendations of things I could look at to better > understand this process and debugging of the board, I'd appreciate it. I > think for the type of algorithms I intend to implement, it will be really > helpful to be comfortable with the overall chain, rather than using it as a > simple gui tool. > I don't know what you mean. I'm not parsing your sentence. There really isn't such a thing as a simple gui tool (its all lies :). eric > > Thanks a lot for your help > > Shalabh > -- Eric B. Decker Senior (over 50 :-) Researcher
_______________________________________________ Tinyos-help mailing list [email protected] https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help
