From 5793056d96fd88845cde0d107c002a5fce413909 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Spencer Oliver Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 10:13:21 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] jtag: use correct tap -ignore-version mask when -ignore-version is used we should mask of the upper 4bits not 8bits. Change-Id: I9ffe24c2aeeb414677357a647609fdf018890194 Signed-off-by: Spencer Oliver Reviewed-on: http://openocd.zylin.com/473 Tested-by: jenkins --- doc/openocd.texi | 2 +- src/jtag/core.c | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/doc/openocd.texi b/doc/openocd.texi index 1aaac584..323136f3 100644 --- a/doc/openocd.texi +++ b/doc/openocd.texi @@ -3369,7 +3369,7 @@ hardware to find these values. option. When vendors put out multiple versions of a chip, or use the same JTAG-level ID for several largely-compatible chips, it may be more practical to ignore the version field than to update config files to handle all of -the various chip IDs. +the various chip IDs. The version field is defined as bit 28-31 of the IDCODE. @item @code{-ircapture} @var{NUMBER} @*The bit pattern loaded by the TAP into the JTAG shift register on entry to the @sc{ircapture} state, such as 0x01. diff --git a/src/jtag/core.c b/src/jtag/core.c index 6de168e6..a36345b7 100644 --- a/src/jtag/core.c +++ b/src/jtag/core.c @@ -958,8 +958,8 @@ static bool jtag_examine_chain_match_tap(const struct jtag_tap *tap) if (0 == tap->expected_ids_cnt && !idcode) return true; - /* optionally ignore the JTAG version field */ - uint32_t mask = tap->ignore_version ? ~(0xff << 24) : ~0; + /* optionally ignore the JTAG version field - bits 28-31 of IDCODE */ + uint32_t mask = tap->ignore_version ? ~(0xf << 28) : ~0; idcode &= mask; -- 2.39.5