From 246ff4f6019ed59fe47295b3753728b3e4c0dc40 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: dbrownell Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 18:51:11 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Better fix for TAPs violating the JTAG spec for IR-Capture. Instead of just assuming all IDCODE-deprived TAPs violate the JTAG spec (they don't!), just require TAPs with such problems to be declared with proper ircapture/irmask values. Example, with mask and value of zero. git-svn-id: svn://svn.berlios.de/openocd/trunk@2823 b42882b7-edfa-0310-969c-e2dbd0fdcd60 --- src/jtag/core.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++---------------- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/jtag/core.c b/src/jtag/core.c index 0b752ea4..e6bde518 100644 --- a/src/jtag/core.c +++ b/src/jtag/core.c @@ -1108,22 +1108,24 @@ static int jtag_validate_ircapture(void) break; } - if (tap->hasidcode) - { - /* Validate the two LSBs, which must be 01 per JTAG spec. - * REVISIT we might be able to verify some MSBs too, using - * ircapture/irmask attributes. - */ - val = buf_get_u32(ir_test, chain_pos, tap->ir_length); - if ((val & 0x3) != 1) { - LOG_ERROR("%s: IR capture error; saw 0x%0*x not 0x..1", - jtag_tap_name(tap), - (tap->ir_length + 7) / tap->ir_length, - val); - - retval = ERROR_JTAG_INIT_FAILED; - goto done; - } + /* Validate the two LSBs, which must be 01 per JTAG spec. + * + * Or ... more bits could be provided by TAP declaration. + * Plus, some taps (notably in i.MX series chips) violate + * this part of the JTAG spec, so their capture mask/value + * attributes might disable this test. + */ + val = buf_get_u32(ir_test, chain_pos, tap->ir_length); + if ((val & tap->ir_capture_mask) != tap->ir_capture_value) { + LOG_ERROR("%s: IR capture error; saw 0x%0*x not 0x%0*x", + jtag_tap_name(tap), + (tap->ir_length + 7) / tap->ir_length, + val, + (tap->ir_length + 7) / tap->ir_length, + tap->ir_capture_value); + + retval = ERROR_JTAG_INIT_FAILED; + goto done; } LOG_DEBUG("%s: IR capture 0x%0*x", jtag_tap_name(tap), (tap->ir_length + 7) / tap->ir_length, val); -- 2.39.5