target.cfg: label ETBs correctly

Various cores with an ETB have its TAP misnamed ... either as a
boundary scan TAP or as the iMX "Secure JTAG Controller" (which
is, among other things, a JRC that could be used to shorten
scan chains).

Use the correct name for these TAPs, which we can recognize since
their IDs were assigned by ARM and these chips all document the
presence of an ETB.  The 0x2b900f0f is ETB11; the 0x1b900f0f
is an older module, just called "ETB".

Also shrink the ETB's IR configuration; the default IR-Capture
value is fine, and the mask can specify that all four bits are
safe to check (per ARM documentation).

Signed-off-by: David Brownell <dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net>
This commit is contained in:
David Brownell
2009-11-13 13:44:50 -08:00
parent afe0298399
commit 38e8d60f79
5 changed files with 26 additions and 28 deletions

View File

@@ -19,11 +19,12 @@ if { [info exists ENDIAN] } {
set _ENDIAN little
}
if { [info exists BSTAPID ] } {
set _BSTAPID $BSTAPID
# trace buffer
if { [info exists ETBTAPID ] } {
set _ETBTAPID $ETBTAPID
} else {
# force an error till we get a good number
set _BSTAPID 0x2b900f0f
set _ETBTAPID 0x2b900f0f
}
if { [info exists CPUTAPID ] } {
@@ -35,8 +36,7 @@ if { [info exists CPUTAPID ] } {
#jtag scan chain
# I think the "unknown" is the boundry scan tap
jtag newtap $_CHIPNAME unknown -irlen 4 -ircapture 0x1 -irmask 0xe -expected-id $_BSTAPID
jtag newtap $_CHIPNAME etb -irlen 4 -expected-id $_ETBTAPID
jtag newtap $_CHIPNAME cpu -irlen 5 -ircapture 0x1 -irmask 0x1f -expected-id $_CPUTAPID
set _TARGETNAME $_CHIPNAME.cpu