From: Peter Barada <peter.barada@logicpd.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] disassembler ?
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:56:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <519E8291.7040609@logicpd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130523214917.5f73d2b6@lilith>
On 05/23/2013 03:49 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Thu, 23 May 2013 15:08:24 -0400, Peter Barada
> <peter.barada@logicpd.com> wrote:
>
>> On 05/23/2013 02:53 PM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote:
>>> Also, I *very* strongly suggest that you integrate *some* debugging
>>> interface, based on *some* industry standard. Seeing as you're working
>>> on a brand new, untested so far, silicon, such a debugging interface
>>> is an absolute must IMO.
>> Ditto here.
>>
>> JTAG (or some other industry debugging standard) allows attaching mature
>> tools (like an Abatron BDI or some such) to not only help verify the
>> state, but develop/debug the code you're writing. Without such you'll
>> only be able to do a postmortem and inspect memory after the
>> code/processor crash - a much more laborious process...
> One won't even be able to do that, at least not if the inspection is
> done using Bedbug within U-Boot since launching U-boot will, in itself,
> overwrite some of the memory -- and Murphy guarantees that the
> overwritten memory will include the areas needed for a successful
> postmortem.
>
>
If one was lucky maybe. But who builds schedules around luck? And yes,
Murphy's a mother...
I was assuming that through some black magic they could get into Bedbug
on reset and use it to inspect memory. Of course this assumes that
Bedbug and u-boot don't collide, u-boot doesn't try to relocate itself
(or scribble over memory), all of which is extra development that a
JTAG[1] attached debugger would preclude.
A JTAG debugger would allow you to load code directly into memory and
then step through the processor initialization(or supply instructions on
the fly!), low-level startup development that everyone does on a new
processor. Also by stepping you can see where/when the processor is
about to go off into the weeds many, many, many instructions _before_ it
munches any hope of postmortem debugging. From experience bringing up
boards w/o JTAG is not only tedious but unpredictable and takes a
loooong time - the extra cost/effort of integrating JTAG (especially
since this is a spanking new processor!) is more than justified by it
reducing both total development time and overall schedule risk...
[1] I use JTAG to mean any industry standard hardware debug/access
method that allows arbitrary execution and inspection/modification of
registers/memory...
--
Peter Barada
peter.barada at logicpd.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-23 20:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-16 16:45 [U-Boot] disassembler ? Brad Walker
2013-05-16 17:18 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2013-05-16 22:15 ` Wolfgang Denk
2013-05-23 17:13 ` Brad Walker
2013-05-23 18:53 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2013-05-23 19:08 ` Peter Barada
2013-05-23 19:49 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2013-05-23 20:56 ` Peter Barada [this message]
2013-05-23 21:09 ` Wolfgang Denk
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=519E8291.7040609@logicpd.com \
--to=peter.barada@logicpd.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