[ECOS] More eb40a redboot questions

Tim Drury tdrury@siliconmotorsports.com
Sun Dec 8 18:06:00 GMT 2002

Shannon Holland wrote:
> Ok,
> So I managed to get the eb40a target "think" it's happy. I found
> Christophe's lists of what he did at
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss/2002-10/msg00397.html and have
> done the same thing.

Sorry I haven't responded - I've been working on other projects.
The eb40a patches I wrote are based on TK's first set of eb40
patches. I haven't updated them for his latest patch because
I wanted to wait until his eb40 code made its way into CVS.
I don't want to constantly be updating a moving target.

> This gives me an eb40a target to compile against.
> However, I hit some snags. The first big one was that I haven't added the
> external sram to my eb40a (leaving me with only the 256Kb on-chip sram).
> This left angel very unhappy about loading to the external sram addresses.

I guess I was lucky when my eb40a board arrived with the external RAM
already on board.

> So, I tried to add another build configuration (SRAM) to the eb40a target.
> This attempts to be angel friendly by only loading code to 0x2000 to
> 0x20000. Everything seems to build and angel/gdb seem to be happy about
> downloading it, but when I quit gdb and open hyperterminal, I don't get a
> friendly redboot prompt. instead, for any key I press I get:
> 	"$T050f:403a0300;0d:00000000;#08"
> What does this mean? Is this angel trying to tell me something (gdb seems
> happy) or redboot?

This is gdb trying to tell you something went wrong.  There were some
good emails within the last week from someone with a similar problem
and Gary and others described how to get a gdb backtrace.  Look back
in the email archives for about a week.

> 1. Is the process I used to create the eb40a target still valid with the
> latest source tree or should I go back to 1.3.1?

No - stay with the ecos 2.0 code.

> 2. Is what I did to make the sram configuration correct? (I did actually add
> an redboot_SRAM.ecm and mlt_arm_at91_eb40a_sram.h/ldi - I can provide more
> info on what I did here.

This is one of my gripes with the ecos setup.  It would be nice if the
memory layout were constrained to just one file, but there are a few
places it shows up.  You found the .h and .ldi file.  Also look in
hal_platform_setup.h.  There are some chip select setups (which you
may not need for the onboard sram) and if you are trying ROMRAM,
there are some memory values in there.  It's been a while since I
looked at this stuff...

> 3. what does the output "$T050f:403a0300;0d:00000000;#08" mean?

Gary reads gdb-speak.  Hopefully he'll be along to interpret for you.

-tim drury

Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://sources.redhat.com/fom/ecos
and search the list archive: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/ecos-discuss

More information about the Ecos-discuss mailing list