Warn when people (or scripts) use numeric identifiers for TAPs,
instead of dotted.name values. We want this usage to go away,
so that for example adding more TAPs doesn't cause config scripts
to break because some sequence number changed.
It's been deprecated since late 2008, but putting a warning on
this should help us remove it (say, in June 2010) by helping to
phase out old (ab)usage in config scripts.
Other than in various config files, the only code expecting such
a number was the almost unused str9xpec driver. This code was
changed to use the TAP it was passed, instead of making its own
dubious lookup and ignoring that TAP.
git-svn-id: svn://svn.berlios.de/openocd/trunk@2415
b42882b7-edfa-0310-969c-
e2dbd0fdcd60
In older code, JTAG TAPs were numbered from 0..N.
This feature is still present.
However its use is highly discouraged, and
In older code, JTAG TAPs were numbered from 0..N.
This feature is still present.
However its use is highly discouraged, and
-should not be counted upon.
-Update all of your scripts to use TAP names rather than numbers.
+should not be relied on; it will be removed by mid-2010.
+Update all of your scripts to use TAP names rather than numbers,
+by paying attention to the runtime warnings they trigger.
Using TAP numbers in target configuration scripts prevents
reusing those scripts on boards with multiple targets.
@end quotation
Using TAP numbers in target configuration scripts prevents
reusing those scripts on boards with multiple targets.
@end quotation
str9xpec_info = malloc(sizeof(str9xpec_flash_controller_t));
bank->driver_priv = str9xpec_info;
str9xpec_info = malloc(sizeof(str9xpec_flash_controller_t));
bank->driver_priv = str9xpec_info;
- /* find out jtag position of flash controller
- * it is always after the arm966 core */
-
+ /* REVISIT verify that the jtag position of flash controller is
+ * right after *THIS* core, which must be a STR9xx core ...
+ */
armv4_5 = bank->target->arch_info;
arm7_9 = armv4_5->arch_info;
jtag_info = &arm7_9->jtag_info;
armv4_5 = bank->target->arch_info;
arm7_9 = armv4_5->arch_info;
jtag_info = &arm7_9->jtag_info;
- str9xpec_info->tap = jtag_tap_by_position(jtag_info->tap->abs_chain_position - 1);
+ str9xpec_info->tap = bank->target->tap;
str9xpec_info->isc_enable = 0;
str9xpec_build_block_list(bank);
str9xpec_info->isc_enable = 0;
str9xpec_build_block_list(bank);
+/* returns a pointer to the n-th device in the scan chain */
+static inline jtag_tap_t *jtag_tap_by_position(unsigned n)
+{
+ jtag_tap_t *t = jtag_all_taps();
+
+ while (t && n-- > 0)
+ t = t->next_tap;
+
+ return t;
+}
+
jtag_tap_t *jtag_tap_by_string(const char *s)
{
/* try by name first */
jtag_tap_t *t = jtag_all_taps();
jtag_tap_t *jtag_tap_by_string(const char *s)
{
/* try by name first */
jtag_tap_t *t = jtag_all_taps();
while (t)
{
if (0 == strcmp(t->dotted_name, s))
while (t)
{
if (0 == strcmp(t->dotted_name, s))
if (parse_uint(s, &n) != ERROR_OK)
return NULL;
if (parse_uint(s, &n) != ERROR_OK)
return NULL;
- return jtag_tap_by_position(n);
+ /* FIXME remove this numeric fallback code late June 2010, along
+ * with all info in the User's Guide that TAPs have numeric IDs.
+ * Also update "scan_chain" output to not display the numbers.
+ */
+ t = jtag_tap_by_position(n);
+ if (t)
+ LOG_WARNING("Specify TAP '%s' by name, not number %u",
+ t->dotted_name, n);
+
+ return t;
}
jtag_tap_t *jtag_tap_by_jim_obj(Jim_Interp *interp, Jim_Obj *o)
}
jtag_tap_t *jtag_tap_by_jim_obj(Jim_Interp *interp, Jim_Obj *o)
-/* returns a pointer to the n-th device in the scan chain */
-jtag_tap_t *jtag_tap_by_position(unsigned n)
-{
- jtag_tap_t *t = jtag_all_taps();
-
- while (t && n-- > 0)
- t = t->next_tap;
-
- return t;
-}
-
jtag_tap_t* jtag_tap_next_enabled(jtag_tap_t* p)
{
p = p ? p->next_tap : jtag_all_taps();
jtag_tap_t* jtag_tap_next_enabled(jtag_tap_t* p)
{
p = p ? p->next_tap : jtag_all_taps();
extern const char *jtag_tap_name(const jtag_tap_t *tap);
extern jtag_tap_t* jtag_tap_by_string(const char* dotted_name);
extern jtag_tap_t* jtag_tap_by_jim_obj(Jim_Interp* interp, Jim_Obj* obj);
extern const char *jtag_tap_name(const jtag_tap_t *tap);
extern jtag_tap_t* jtag_tap_by_string(const char* dotted_name);
extern jtag_tap_t* jtag_tap_by_jim_obj(Jim_Interp* interp, Jim_Obj* obj);
-extern jtag_tap_t* jtag_tap_by_position(unsigned abs_position);
extern jtag_tap_t* jtag_tap_next_enabled(jtag_tap_t* p);
extern unsigned jtag_tap_count_enabled(void);
extern unsigned jtag_tap_count(void);
extern jtag_tap_t* jtag_tap_next_enabled(jtag_tap_t* p);
extern unsigned jtag_tap_count_enabled(void);
extern unsigned jtag_tap_count(void);
Linking to existing account procedure
If you already have an account and want to add another login method
you
MUST first sign in with your existing account and
then change URL to read
https://review.openocd.org/login/?link
to get to this page again but this time it'll work for linking. Thank you.
SSH host keys fingerprints
1024 SHA256:YKx8b7u5ZWdcbp7/4AeXNaqElP49m6QrwfXaqQGJAOk gerrit-code-review@openocd.zylin.com (DSA)
384 SHA256:jHIbSQa4REvwCFG4cq5LBlBLxmxSqelQPem/EXIrxjk gerrit-code-review@openocd.org (ECDSA)
521 SHA256:UAOPYkU9Fjtcao0Ul/Rrlnj/OsQvt+pgdYSZ4jOYdgs gerrit-code-review@openocd.org (ECDSA)
256 SHA256:A13M5QlnozFOvTllybRZH6vm7iSt0XLxbA48yfc2yfY gerrit-code-review@openocd.org (ECDSA)
256 SHA256:spYMBqEYoAOtK7yZBrcwE8ZpYt6b68Cfh9yEVetvbXg gerrit-code-review@openocd.org (ED25519)
+--[ED25519 256]--+
|=.. |
|+o.. . |
|*.o . . |
|+B . . . |
|Bo. = o S |
|Oo.+ + = |
|oB=.* = . o |
| =+=.+ + E |
|. .=o . o |
+----[SHA256]-----+
2048 SHA256:0Onrb7/PHjpo6iVZ7xQX2riKN83FJ3KGU0TvI0TaFG4 gerrit-code-review@openocd.zylin.com (RSA)