Hi Arnd-Hendrik,

I did not realise that msp430-gdbproxy accepted a parallel port like this
(although I knew about the choice of tcp/ip port for communicating with
gdb).  That would certainly be a help if I can first get access to the
second parallel port.

Unfortunately, my PC (like most these days) has no ISA slots, so I can't add
a second ISA parallel port.  That would probably have worked straight away,
since HIL.c has the second ISA bus parallel port address hard-coded.

And unfortunately, I'm not running Linux (except as colinux) on this
machine.  It looks (from HIL.c) like it would be easier to get things
working with Linux, even with a PCI parallel port, since HIL.c passes
requests down to the /dev/parportX driver rather than trying to guess the
direct hardware address of the parallel port.

mvh,

David



> Hi David,
> I am using my Linux PC mith an onboard parport and an additional ISA
> parport card. If you are working on Linux You can
> - open four xterms (or if you do not need the debug output of
> msp430-gdbproxy three)
> - on xterm1: msp430-gdbproxy -port=2000 msp430 /dev/parport0 (which is
> the default)
> - on xterm2: msp430-gdbproxy -port=2001 msp430 /dev/parport1
> - on xterm3: msp430-gdb ...
>               target remote localhost:2000
>               ...
> - on xterm4: msp430-gdb ...
>               target remote localhost:2001
>               ...
> I am using an Olimex MSP430 Parport-JTAG dongle with an msp430fg439
> running suse-linux on an old 233MHz Celeron with 128MB RAM and it works
> without any problems.
> Have a nice day
>
> Arnd-Hendrik
>
> David Brown wrote:
> > Has anyone had success using LPT2 (on windows - or, for curiosity's sake
at
> > the moment, on linux) for debugging or programming, using parallel port
jtag
> > interfaces?  I regularly use msp430-jtag for programming and
msp430-gdbproxy
> > while debugging, normally using the first parallel port.  But at the
moment
> > I am working on a system involving two msp430 cards which should
communicate
> > over a serial link, and it would be really nice to be able to debug both
at
> > once.  msp430-jtag has a flag "-l2" or "--lpt=LPT2", but I can't get it
to
> > work - I get the same "An error occured: Can't open interface" error as
I
> > would when there is no contact with the msp430 (for example, if the
power
> > supply is switched off).  I can't see any flags for msp430-gdbproxy
relating
> > to the parallel port.
> >
> > Having wandered around the sourceforge cvs repository, I have found the
> > source of the problem with msp430-jtag, but I'm not sure about the best
way
> > to deal with it.  In the file mspgcc/jtag/hardware_access/HIL.c function
> > HIL_Initialize, the LPT port addresses are hard-coded to [0, 0x378,
0x278,
> > 0x3bc], which are standard for ancient ISA card lpt cards.  PCI cards,
such
> > as mine, invariably use different addresses (mine happens to be at
0xb000).
> > So I downloaded the HIL source code, edited the addresses to [0, 0x378,
> > 0xb000, 0x3bc] and re-build HIL.dll using cygwin gcc.  I then replaced
the
> > HIL.dll in the mspgcc\bin directory (using the pre-built windows
binaries
> > that I downloaded a few months ago) with my modified version.
> > Unfortunately, this made no difference to msp430-jtag - nor did removing
the
> > original HIL.dll entirely.  It looks like the binaries (most likely
> > msp430mspgcc.dll ?) are have the HIL.c functions staticly linked.  While
> > this is not entirely a dead-end for me (I could re-build the other
binaries
> > too), it is getting beyond what I can do at the moment, and at best it
would
> > leave me with a specificly patched jtag download of no use to anyone
else,
> > and with no debugging.
> >
> > To get much further, this is going to need at least some work by "the
powers
> > that be".  While I might be able to hack together a specific downloader
> > binary for myself, to be of use to others it is going to need
configurable
> > addresses rather than fixed ones, support for Linux and FreeBSD, and
support
> > in gdbproxy, which are all beyond me at the moment.  I don't know
whether
> > this is a big issue - maybe I'm the only one looking for the feature.
If
> > USB-based debugging takes off, there will no longer be the same problem,
as
> > support for multiple debuggers will be more natural there.
> >
> >
> > David Brown
> > System Developer
> > WestControl a.s
> > Norway
> >
> > "Utvikling er kunsten av å vikle seg ut av det man har viklet seg inn i"
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
> > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
> > Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
> > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_ide95&alloc_id396&opÌk
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mspgcc-users mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
> >
> >
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by: New Crystal Reports XI.
> Version 11 adds new functionality designed to reduce time involved in
> creating, integrating, and deploying reporting solutions. Free runtime
info,
> new features, or free trial, at: http://www.businessobjects.com/devxi/728
> _______________________________________________
> Mspgcc-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mspgcc-users
>
>
>



Reply via email to