From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesper Skov To: pg-itk@t-online.de (Peter Graf) Cc: ecos-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: [ECOS] Hitachi SH7709A problems Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 06:58:00 -0000 Message-id: References: <"Fri,> <17> <2000> <11:11:19> <+0100> <14869.1095.188352.237035@thinktwice.zoftcorp.dk> <3.0.5.32.20001120143631.008fc8b0@pop.btx.dtag.de> X-SW-Source: 2000-11/msg00246.html >>>>> "Peter" == Peter Graf writes: Peter> Jesper wrote: [baudrate errors] Peter> I have only worked around by using a fixed table. A parametric Peter> macro without the rounding problems seems tricky, if you want Peter> to avoid computation at runtime. >> This is a better solution, IMO. Peter> [New macro definition] Peter> Yes it is, thanks very much! Good. Peter> At the moment I am struggling with two serious problems on the Peter> SH7709A target: Peter> 1. When I use the GDB stub compiled from the latest CVS Peter> sources, I can only set one breakpoint. If I remove it and set Peter> the next and so on, everything works fine. If I don't remove Peter> all old breakpoints before continuing, the target keeps on Peter> running and ignores further breakpoint(s). An older stub, Peter> compiled from sources probably around August, works fine. Could Peter> be related to the use of the UBC, but I haven't been able to Peter> figure out. Hm, no clue. Maybe because you use a new(er) version of GDB which uses stub breakpoints, which I believe were added to the stub recently by Drew. Only, I don't think they should affect the HALs unless they claim to support it somehow. I haven't looked at it. In mod_7709a.h you can comment out the UBC definition, and the stub will fall back to the old way of single-stepping. But that should be the only effect. I can't think of any reason breakpoints should be involved. Your target is indeed a 7709A, right? The UBCs differ between the various CPU models. Peter> 2. ROMs compiled in ROMRAM startup mode don't work anymore, Peter> although the pure ROM versions work. The ROMRAM feature has Peter> also worked fine using earlier sources. I may have broken something when the code was split into variant HALs. I probably won't have time to look at it until next year though - so if it's something you need working ASAP, you are probably best of (a) figuring out why it fails on your own, or (b) revert to the older codebase. Sorry. Jesper