From: Mel on
larwe wrote:

> I'm trying to get up and running on the MCB2130 using IAR Kickstart to
> build and FlashMagic to load the code.
>
> Do I need to write my own startup code for this configuration? Since I
> don't have a JTAG adapter that's compatible with IAR, I have to build
> a flash-resident app and serial-load it, but of course I'm operating
> 100% blind. For test purposes I just copied some stuff out of blinky.c
> and changed the IO names to match what's in the IAR headers, as below.

A Macgraigor Wiggler clone is easy to build, and Olimex advertises an even
simpler parallel-port/JTAG adapter that they claim works with some flavour
of IAR kickstart. If one of these worked, you could have JTAG.

Of course it's time and effort wasted if they turned out not to work with
your particular software.

Good Luck, Mel.

From: larwe on
On Jun 12, 10:57 am, Mel <mwil...(a)the-wire.com> wrote:

> A Macgraigor Wiggler clone is easy to build, and Olimex advertises an even

I own a real one bought many years ago, but have no PCs with parallel
ports any more. And for that matter no desktop PCs - I work from
laptops.

I've stepped through the code in the simulator and it all appears to
be sane - it's definitely running out of flash area, and everything
seems to be inited properly. It just doesn't work on the target.

Googling has yielded me other people with the same exact problem, but
no solutions :(
From: larwe on
On Jun 12, 4:34 am, larwe <zwsdot...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm trying to get up and running on the MCB2130 using IAR Kickstart to
> build and FlashMagic to load the code.

Followup: It's something to do with the IAR startup or configuration
code (or the way it generates a HEX file).

I switched to the free version of the Raisonance IDE with their gcc
flavor and all is well. And I'm actually better off, since the free
RiDE is only limited in debug space, not compile+link space. Since I'm
debugging the old-fashioned way anyhow, I'm not really limited at all.

Damned if I can work out what was bad about the IAR code though. I
even poked through the memory dump in Flash Magic and it all looked
good to me.
From: An Schwob in the USA on
On Jun 12, 8:33 am, larwe <zwsdot...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 12, 4:34 am, larwe <zwsdot...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to get up and running on the MCB2130 using IAR Kickstart to
> > build and FlashMagic to load the code.
>
> Followup: It's something to do with the IAR startup or configuration
> code (or the way it generates a HEX file).
>
> I switched to the free version of the Raisonance IDE with their gcc
> flavor and all is well. And I'm actually better off, since the free
> RiDE is only limited in debug space, not compile+link space. Since I'm
> debugging the old-fashioned way anyhow, I'm not really limited at all.
>
> Damned if I can work out what was bad about the IAR code though. I
> even poked through the memory dump in Flash Magic and it all looked
> good to me.

Hi,

if you are still interested in a low cost and really good USB->JTAG
debugger for non-commercial use, check out the Segger EDU version.
Works with GNU and cost is about $60.
Would be interested to get your feedback how you'd compare EWARM from
IAR to RIDE7 from Raisonance. In the professional full-featured
version the IAR tool is 4-times more expensive. Assuming the only
constraint to budget is common sense, would you go for the GNU based
RLink PRO from Raisonance with full debug or with the propriety
compiler based EWARM and why?

Just very curious.

An Schwob
p.s. I used both and am opinionated about the choice but would like to
solicit your input
From: larwe on
On Jun 12, 8:31 pm, An Schwob in the USA <schwo...(a)aol.com> wrote:

> > I switched to the free version of the Raisonance IDE with their gcc
>
> > Damned if I can work out what was bad about the IAR code though. I
>
> if you are still interested in a low cost and really good USB->JTAG
> debugger for non-commercial use, check out the Segger EDU version.
> Works with GNU and cost is about $60.

The "not for profit" restriction is not acceptable to me, though. If I
go gcc, I think I'd rather go to one of Olimex's OpenOCD-compatible
things for about the same price: http://www.sparkfun.com/commerce/product_info.php?products_id=8278

One way or another I'll get real hardware shortly; I was really just
trying to make use of a spare weekend and I was in a catch-22 - I have
an old Wiggler I can't use for hardware reasons, and a Keil uLink plus
a couple of Rowley CrossConnects that I can't use for software
reasons.

> Would be interested to get your feedback how you'd compare EWARM from
> IAR to RIDE7 from Raisonance. In the professional full-featured

As yet, not enough data for a fair comparison. I use EWARM extensively
with Atmel ARM7s at work(*), which is why I reached for it to use at
home; I figured it would be my fastest path to working code. It is
very puzzling why I couldn't get it to work. One EWARM feature that
makes our life a lot easier is the ThreadX awareness. Not sure if RIDE
offers that.

I used RIDE with the STM32 Circle platform a while ago, but not in a
"gotta get code out the door to put food on the table" sort of
situation. And right now since I'm in burn-and-pray mode, I'm not
really using it except as a convenient frontend that sets up the build
environment and linker scripts, etc. for gcc. In fact that's exactly
the reason I was looking for an off the shelf solution - I didn't want
to have to write startup code and set the whole environment up from
scratch. If I had downloaded a generic gcc distro, I would have had to
seek out sample projects for the chip I'm using. Easier to get an IDE
with support for a zillion chips built in.

The downside to using RIDE et al is that they're "wrapped" gcc
distros. Meaning if I want to upgrade components of them with the
latest, I might not be able to.

(*) Despite transferring to the marketing job. Still cleaning up old
projects.