public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrey Volkov <avolkov@varma-el.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] BDI vs. Lauterbach
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:00:41 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <427722615.20060410170041@varma-el.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <F4FBA095-7452-4306-9573-AA94421484AD@cse.unsw.edu.au>

On Monday, April 10, 2006, David Snowdon wrote:

> G'Day,

> I've been looking at a few of the posts regarding debugging tools,  
> and the standard answer on this list appears to be "Get a BDI2000".  
> I'm presently looking at getting a debugger to use to bring up a new  
> board, get U-Boot going, and eventually do a lot of OS work (a new OS
> that we're developing - see http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au -- sorry,  
> shameless plug).

> Some people that we are working with use the Lauterbach Trace32 tools
> extensively, and we've had some good experiences with them. I was  
> wondering if anyone on this list had used both (particularly while  
> developing U-Boot), and how the BDI-2000 stacks up against the  
> Lauterbach equivalent. (Apart from being significantly cheaper).

Pros:
     BDI - 10Mbit eth, Lauterbach - 100 Mbit.
     Lauterbach scalable and simply extendable, BDI - not.
Cons:
     BDI support gnu toolchain natively (in GDB server mode),
     Lauterbach - not (sometime it parsing elf/dwarf correctly,
     sometime, usually in critical cases :), not).
     And you are know, hmm, strange Lauterbach price policy:
     price of BDI firmware for a new CPU target is approx. 1000 eur,
     for the Lauterbach - price of new device.

> Any insights much appreciated.

> Many thanks,

> David Snowdon,
> Research Engineer,
> National ICT Australia,
> http://www.ertos.nicta.com.au



-- 
Regards,
Andrey Volkov

  reply	other threads:[~2006-04-10 13:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-04-10 12:38 [U-Boot-Users] BDI vs. Lauterbach David Snowdon
2006-04-10 13:00 ` Andrey Volkov [this message]
2006-04-10 15:32   ` Wolfgang Denk
2006-04-10 16:17     ` Andrey Volkov
2006-04-10 16:38       ` Wolfgang Denk
2006-04-10 18:04         ` Andrey Volkov
2006-04-11  6:06     ` [U-Boot-Users] " Wolfram Wadepohl
2006-04-10 16:35   ` [U-Boot-Users] " llandre
2006-04-10 17:58     ` Andrey Volkov
2006-04-10 19:48       ` Wolfgang Denk
2006-04-10 22:10         ` Andrey Volkov
2006-04-11 10:41     ` Andreas Schweigstill
2006-04-12  7:54       ` David Snowdon
2006-04-12 10:07         ` Wolfgang Denk
2006-04-13  6:17           ` David Snowdon
2006-04-13  6:43             ` Marco Cavallini
2006-04-10 17:00   ` Marco Cavallini
2006-04-10 18:20     ` Frank
2006-04-10 22:04       ` Andrey Volkov
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-04-10 13:02 Woodruff, Richard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=427722615.20060410170041@varma-el.com \
    --to=avolkov@varma-el.com \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox