From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22686 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2005 10:30:30 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-discuss-help@ecos.sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-discuss-owner@ecos.sourceware.org Received: (qmail 22643 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jun 2005 10:30:24 -0000 Received: from mail.contec.at (HELO mail.contec.at) (213.229.28.240) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:30:24 +0000 Received: from fs-1.contec-int.at (unknown [192.168.1.221]) by mail.contec.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FBA2370F9 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:22:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from grma-linux-2.contec-int.at ([192.168.1.216]) by fs-1.contec-int.at with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 29 Jun 2005 12:20:22 +0200 From: Manfred Gruber To: ecos-discuss@ecos.sourceware.org Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 10:30:00 -0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <200506290915.06896.gruber.m@utanet.at> <20050629095641.GA5563@lunn.ch> In-Reply-To: <20050629095641.GA5563@lunn.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200506291220.18925.gruber.m@utanet.at> Subject: Re: [ECOS] change to flash_v2 tree problem X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg00284.txt.bz2 Am Mittwoch, 29. Juni 2005 11:56 schrieb Andrew Lunn: > > I think I missed something on flash configuration: on the old ecos 2_0 > > I got: FLASH: 0x10000000 - 0x14000000, 512 blocks of 0x00020000 bytes > > each. Now I get: FLASH: 0x10000000 - 0x13ffffff 512 x 0x20000 blocks > > These are equivelent. I changed the end address to be the real end > address, not the end address plus 1. OK > > The strange thing is that fis init works. but fconfig -i not. Has someone > > an idea? Maybe there is a problem on flash size on the last block or > > something... > > Does you have two block in use, one for fis and one for config or is > it a shared block? I use two. > Could you do some more debugging. Which function is causing the > illegal memory access. Is it the cyg_flash_write()? What addresses are > passed? OK i will do. regards manfred -- Before posting, please read the FAQ: http://ecos.sourceware.org/fom/ecos and search the list archive: http://ecos.sourceware.org/ml/ecos-discuss