Forums

TI's MSP430-F2013 USB DevKit & mspgcc

Started by No Spam June 17, 2007
I have one of these kits.  Very cool, but the IAR compiler won't work 
with anything other than Win2000/XP, so not much good to me.  I went 
to the MSPGCC page and looked at the FAQ, but it looks like the USB 
debugger is not supported yet (at least as of 1 yr. ago).  Can anyone 
confirm if it is supported under WinME or Linux and point me to what I 
need to know to make it work.


Thanks,
On Jun 17, 2:17 pm, No Spam <NoS...@verizon.net> wrote:

> to the MSPGCC page and looked at the FAQ, but it looks like the USB > debugger is not supported yet (at least as of 1 yr. ago). Can anyone
I check in on this issue periodically myself, but I haven't yet managed to get it working. It's a pity there is not a big vendor- supported gcc-bundlin' body for MSP430 (a la WinAVR) because theoretically all the documentation is available and it's "just" a matter of writing an implementation.
On 2007-06-17, larwe <zwsdotcom@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 17, 2:17 pm, No Spam <NoS...@verizon.net> wrote: > >> to the MSPGCC page and looked at the FAQ, but it looks like the USB >> debugger is not supported yet (at least as of 1 yr. ago). Can anyone > > I check in on this issue periodically myself, but I haven't yet > managed to get it working.
There are reports that it can be made to work under Linux, but it still seems to require a lot of futzing around.
> It's a pity there is not a big vendor- supported gcc-bundlin' > body for MSP430 (a la WinAVR) because theoretically all the > documentation is available and it's "just" a matter of writing > an implementation.
TI is aware of mspgcc and vaguely supportive, but they could do a lot better... -- Grant Edwards grante@visi.com
On Jun 17, 9:26 pm, Grant Edwards <gra...@visi.com> wrote:
> On 2007-06-17, larwe <zwsdot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 17, 2:17 pm, No Spam <NoS...@verizon.net> wrote: > > >> to the MSPGCC page and looked at the FAQ, but it looks like the USB > >> debugger is not supported yet (at least as of 1 yr. ago). Can anyone > > > I check in on this issue periodically myself, but I haven't yet > > managed to get it working. > > There are reports that it can be made to work under Linux, but > it still seems to require a lot of futzing around.
I doubt Linux will work with the downloader/debugger.
> > > It's a pity there is not a big vendor- supported gcc-bundlin' > > body for MSP430 (a la WinAVR) because theoretically all the > > documentation is available and it's "just" a matter of writing > > an implementation. > > TI is aware of mspgcc and vaguely supportive, but they could do > a lot better...
Without any reasonable downloading support, there is no point in porting gcc for it.
> > -- > Grant Edwards > gra...@visi.com
On 2007-06-17, linnix <me@linnix.info-for.us> wrote:

>>>> to the MSPGCC page and looked at the FAQ, but it looks like >>>> the USB debugger is not supported yet (at least as of 1 yr. >>>> ago). Can anyone >> >>> I check in on this issue periodically myself, but I haven't >>> yet managed to get it working. >> >> There are reports that it can be made to work under Linux, but >> it still seems to require a lot of futzing around. > > I doubt Linux will work with the downloader/debugger.
There are quite a few people on the mspgcc list that say it does work for them. I suppose they could all be liars, but some of them are people for whom I have a fair bit of respect and I'd believe them before I'd believe you.
>>> It's a pity there is not a big vendor- supported gcc-bundlin' >>> body for MSP430 (a la WinAVR) because theoretically all the >>> documentation is available and it's "just" a matter of writing >>> an implementation. >> >> TI is aware of mspgcc and vaguely supportive, but they could do >> a lot better... > > Without any reasonable downloading support, there is no point in > porting gcc for it.
GCC has been ported for years. There has downloading support for parallel JTAG and USB interfaces for a long time. There is also downloading support for the new two-wire debugging interface -- it's just not in "vanilla" Linux kernels. IIRC, you have to compile a patched USB serial driver for it, and edit one of the USB subsystem files to add a vendor/device ID. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! .. Should I get at locked in the PRINCIPAL'S visi.com OFFICE today -- or have a VASECTOMY??
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:50:46 -0000, Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com>
wrote:

>On 2007-06-17, linnix <me@linnix.info-for.us> wrote: > >>>>> to the MSPGCC page and looked at the FAQ, but it looks like >>>>> the USB debugger is not supported yet (at least as of 1 yr. >>>>> ago). Can anyone >>> >>>> I check in on this issue periodically myself, but I haven't >>>> yet managed to get it working. >>> >>> There are reports that it can be made to work under Linux, but >>> it still seems to require a lot of futzing around. >> >> I doubt Linux will work with the downloader/debugger. > >There are quite a few people on the mspgcc list that say it >does work for them. I suppose they could all be liars, but >some of them are people for whom I have a fair bit of respect >and I'd believe them before I'd believe you. > >>>> It's a pity there is not a big vendor- supported gcc-bundlin' >>>> body for MSP430 (a la WinAVR) because theoretically all the >>>> documentation is available and it's "just" a matter of writing >>>> an implementation. >>> >>> TI is aware of mspgcc and vaguely supportive, but they could do >>> a lot better... >> >> Without any reasonable downloading support, there is no point in >> porting gcc for it. > >GCC has been ported for years. There has downloading support >for parallel JTAG and USB interfaces for a long time. There is >also downloading support for the new two-wire debugging >interface -- it's just not in "vanilla" Linux kernels. IIRC, >you have to compile a patched USB serial driver for it, and >edit one of the USB subsystem files to add a vendor/device ID.
Debugging support, though? (My guess is that this would require TI to disclose details they probably aren't interested in having become "open source.") Jon
On 2007-06-18, Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote:

>>> Without any reasonable downloading support, there is no point in >>> porting gcc for it. >> >>GCC has been ported for years. There has downloading support >>for parallel JTAG and USB interfaces for a long time. There is >>also downloading support for the new two-wire debugging >>interface -- it's just not in "vanilla" Linux kernels. IIRC, >>you have to compile a patched USB serial driver for it, and >>edit one of the USB subsystem files to add a vendor/device ID. > > Debugging support, though?
Yes. gdb has supported the msp430 for ages.
> (My guess is that this would require TI to disclose details > they probably aren't interested in having become "open > source.")
Gdb uses a daemon that talks to the JTAG interface widget and acts as a gdb-server on a TCP port. That daemon uses a library for which source is unavailable unless you sign an NDA. http://mspgcc.sourceforge.net/ http://mspgcc.sourceforge.net/tools.html TI recently came out with parts that use a proprietary 2-wire debugging interface called "spy-by-wire" instead of the standard JTAG interface. That interface presents a 2-port USB-serial interface to the host which required a patch to the USB-serial device. Support for the USB-serial dongle that talks to that 2-wire interface is what the OP was asking about. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! Is this an out-take at from the "BRADY BUNCH"? visi.com
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 14:51:41 -0000, Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com>
wrote:

>On 2007-06-18, Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote: > >>>> Without any reasonable downloading support, there is no point in >>>> porting gcc for it. >>> >>>GCC has been ported for years. There has downloading support >>>for parallel JTAG and USB interfaces for a long time. There is >>>also downloading support for the new two-wire debugging >>>interface -- it's just not in "vanilla" Linux kernels. IIRC, >>>you have to compile a patched USB serial driver for it, and >>>edit one of the USB subsystem files to add a vendor/device ID. >> >> Debugging support, though? > >Yes. gdb has supported the msp430 for ages. > >> (My guess is that this would require TI to disclose details >> they probably aren't interested in having become "open >> source.") > >Gdb uses a daemon that talks to the JTAG interface widget and >acts as a gdb-server on a TCP port. That daemon uses a library >for which source is unavailable unless you sign an NDA.
Ah. There it is. That is congruent with my expectations. Who developed this library and does TI control it? Or is the control of the source of that library out of TI's hands? Also... does TI allow most anyone to sign the NDA to gain access to the source? Or are they pretty picky about it and pretty much would refuse most such inquiries unless they considered them well-justified from their own marketing point of view? (From your following note, presume my above questions are related to the earlier JTAG and not the 2-wire interface unless it applies.)
>http://mspgcc.sourceforge.net/ >http://mspgcc.sourceforge.net/tools.html
>TI recently came out with parts that use a proprietary 2-wire >debugging interface called "spy-by-wire" instead of the >standard JTAG interface. That interface presents a 2-port >USB-serial interface to the host which required a patch to the >USB-serial device. Support for the USB-serial dongle that >talks to that 2-wire interface is what the OP was asking about.
Yes. And I note that you carefully chose to mention 'downloading' in yuor comments about supporting the 2-wire. Does this mean that debugging is not yet supported over 2-wire? Or am I reading you too closely? Jon
On 2007-06-18, Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote:

>>> Debugging support, though? >> >>Yes. gdb has supported the msp430 for ages. >> >>> (My guess is that this would require TI to disclose details >>> they probably aren't interested in having become "open >>> source.") >> >>Gdb uses a daemon that talks to the JTAG interface widget and >>acts as a gdb-server on a TCP port. That daemon uses a library >>for which source is unavailable unless you sign an NDA. > > Ah. There it is. That is congruent with my expectations. > > Who developed this library
Some guys who worked on the other open-source tools and signed an NDA.
> and does TI control it?
No.
> Or is the control of the source of that library out of TI's > hands?
That is my understanding.
> Also... does TI allow most anyone to sign the NDA to gain > access to the source?
I don't know. I haven't attempted to gain access to the source, but I know you don't have to work for a commerical tool vendor.
> Or are they pretty picky about it and pretty much would refuse > most such inquiries unless they considered them well-justified > from their own marketing point of view? > > (From your following note, presume my above questions are > related to the earlier JTAG and not the 2-wire interface > unless it applies.)
The same library is used for all of the interfaces, so it doesn't really matter which interface you talk about. The older interfaces (e.g. parallel port JTAG) have had support for longer than the new interfaces (e.g. USB 2-wire).
>>TI recently came out with parts that use a proprietary 2-wire >>debugging interface called "spy-by-wire" instead of the >>standard JTAG interface. That interface presents a 2-port >>USB-serial interface to the host which required a patch to the >>USB-serial device. Support for the USB-serial dongle that >>talks to that 2-wire interface is what the OP was asking about. > > Yes. And I note that you carefully chose to mention > 'downloading' in yuor comments about supporting the 2-wire.
As I understand it, downloading/programming flash doesn't require the closed source stuff. Only debugging does.
> Does this mean that debugging is not yet supported over > 2-wire?
Yes, debugging via the 2-wire interface is supported (and has been for a little over a year now). The 2-wire stuff was introduced last spring, and it took a few weeks after introduction of the 2-wire stuff weeks for the open-soruce tools to catch up.
> Or am I reading you too closely?
I was a bit sloppy in my wording. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! This PIZZA symbolizes at my COMPLETE EMOTIONAL visi.com RECOVERY!!
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 16:37:10 -0000, Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com>
wrote:

>On 2007-06-18, Jonathan Kirwan <jkirwan@easystreet.com> wrote: > >>>> Debugging support, though? >>> >>>Yes. gdb has supported the msp430 for ages. >>> >>>> (My guess is that this would require TI to disclose details >>>> they probably aren't interested in having become "open >>>> source.") >>> >>>Gdb uses a daemon that talks to the JTAG interface widget and >>>acts as a gdb-server on a TCP port. That daemon uses a library >>>for which source is unavailable unless you sign an NDA. >> >> Ah. There it is. That is congruent with my expectations. >> >> Who developed this library > >Some guys who worked on the other open-source tools and signed >an NDA. > >> and does TI control it? > >No.
Interesting. That's good to hear.
>> Or is the control of the source of that library out of TI's >> hands? > >That is my understanding.
Thanks.
>> Also... does TI allow most anyone to sign the NDA to gain >> access to the source? > >I don't know. I haven't attempted to gain access to the >source, but I know you don't have to work for a commerical >tool vendor.
I tried, already, to sign one. Unless I was a tool vendor, they weren't interested. Even with some meaningful business attached to the idea. So this may be a sea-change I was unaware of. I need the capability for some products I do -- the ability to develop my own custom debug tools. ARM is nearly the only processor where I can find that doc placed in the manual and without having to pull teeth to get it. I'd be interested in anyone's comments about other processors where the debug JTAG interface isn't too complicated to get.
>> Or are they pretty picky about it and pretty much would refuse >> most such inquiries unless they considered them well-justified >> from their own marketing point of view? >> >> (From your following note, presume my above questions are >> related to the earlier JTAG and not the 2-wire interface >> unless it applies.) > >The same library is used for all of the interfaces, so it >doesn't really matter which interface you talk about. The >older interfaces (e.g. parallel port JTAG) have had support for >longer than the new interfaces (e.g. USB 2-wire).
Makes sense.
>>>TI recently came out with parts that use a proprietary 2-wire >>>debugging interface called "spy-by-wire" instead of the >>>standard JTAG interface. That interface presents a 2-port >>>USB-serial interface to the host which required a patch to the >>>USB-serial device. Support for the USB-serial dongle that >>>talks to that 2-wire interface is what the OP was asking about. >> >> Yes. And I note that you carefully chose to mention >> 'downloading' in yuor comments about supporting the 2-wire. > >As I understand it, downloading/programming flash doesn't >require the closed source stuff. Only debugging does.
Yes, that's my gathering of it, too.
>> Does this mean that debugging is not yet supported over >> 2-wire? > >Yes, debugging via the 2-wire interface is supported (and has >been for a little over a year now). The 2-wire stuff was >introduced last spring, and it took a few weeks after >introduction of the 2-wire stuff weeks for the open-soruce >tools to catch up.
Good to hear. Thanks. Jon
> >> Or am I reading you too closely? > >I was a bit sloppy in my wording.