From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrey Volkov Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:00:41 +0400 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] BDI vs. Lauterbach In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <427722615.20060410170041@varma-el.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de 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