From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3B8242DD.C4D8EAF4@allot.com> Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:15:41 +0300 From: Felix Radensky MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wolfgang Denk Cc: Linix PPC Emmbedded Subject: Re: BDI2000 vs RiskWatch References: <20010821112325.3EC371125E@denx.denx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Wolfgang Denk wrote: > In message <3B8212A6.9AF31020@allot.com> you wrote: > > > > I have to convince our bosses to purchase BDI2000 for linux kernel > > debugging. > > Can someone please explain what BDI2000 can do that RiskWatch cannot. > > Just one question: does RiskWatch support the MMU? > > Wolfgang Denk > > -- > Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux > Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: (+49)-8142-4596-88 Email: wd@denx.de > "'Tis true, 'tis pity, and pity 'tis 'tis true." > - Poloniouius, in Willie the Shake's _Hamlet, Prince of Darkness_ It seems so. This is what I've found in RISCWatch user manual: RISCWatch support for MMU on the 400Series processors is subject to adherence to the following conditions: 1. The translation mode for Data and Instruction access must be the same. They can both be enabled or disabled; having only one enabled is not supported. 2. If the program execution is stopped at a point where the translation mode has changed from the state existing upon initial load, then the mapping must be real=virtual. If this is not the case, the source level debug information for the stopped context will not be displayed correctly. 3. The real addresses in the TLB entries are assumed to be correct and valid addresses. Please excuse my ignorance: I assume that MMU support in debugger is required to access kernel virtual addresses. Is that correct ? Also what does this excerpt from RISCWatch manual tell you ? How can these RISCWatch "features" influence kernel debugging. Thanks a lot. Felix. ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/