RE: [dsdp-dd-dev] Re: [dsdp-tm-dev] Target/Board descriptionrequirements

["Spear, Aaron" <aaron_spear@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Kang,

A very good question, and one that must be discussed.  The context of
the discussion has always been around debuggers, and debuggers needs.
So this document centers around things that are only applicable to
debuggers as a first pass, but it does omit some things that debuggers
do need (e.g. detailed instruction set information).  we could push the
standard to the limit and create data driven descriptions for the entire
instruction set as well, so that a debugger could use this information
to do disassembly and stepping, and an ISS could use the infomration
(with a little more info...) to do instruction simulation.  We actually
talked about this in the Toronto meeting a bit.  I think that most
people, myself included are fearful that if we try and make the scope
too broad at first then we will never get anything done!  So as a first
pass it was decided to limit what we do to standardization of debugger
specific needs:

-core information (variant, instruction set version/id)
-core register information
-memory map infomration
-memory mapped peripherals
-connection related (JTAG scan chain info, protocols for a JTAG
connection device, etc)

What would you add?

regards,
Aaron


-----Original Message-----
From: dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:dsdp-dd-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of kang shuo
Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 9:15 PM
To: Target Management developer discussions
Cc: dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [dsdp-dd-dev] Re: [dsdp-tm-dev] Target/Board
descriptionrequirements: your thoughts requested

Now I am maintaining a mutil-archiecture simulator
(http://www.skyeye.org, an open source project)  . In our simulator,
there also exist a config file that describes the machine we want to
simulate.
So I have a question about the target description. Which level do we
want to reach for description? In register-level or higher level, or
lower  level in circuit . I guess for device or peripheral ,  a
description about its  io memory range and irq number   is enough?


On 3/1/06, Spear, Aaron <aaron_spear@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> After the Toronto meeting I went ahead and took my presentation, along

> with notes that I took from everyone while we were brainstorming, and 
> cobbled together a first pass requirements document regarding target 
> information needed for debugging purposes.  Doug has posted it in the 
> downloads section of the Wiki site at:
> http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/DSDP/DD/Spirit.
>
> Note that the purpose of this document is purely requirements 
> gathering at this point.  I suppose the idea that it will be XML might

> be implied, but I tried to steer away from explicitly saying how 
> anything should be done.
>
> The document in its current form has a first cut at information about 
> memory maps and registers, and a bit of information about cores 
> (nowhere near complete).  It is also missing scan chain information, 
> so that would be great if folks could speak to that.
>
> Here is my plan for moving forward:
> 1) solicit feedback from everyone in this community regarding the 
> requirements themselves
> 2) add these additional requirements to the document
> 3) goto 1 as until we stabilize...
> 4) Approach SPIRIT with these requirements to see where we go from 
> here...
>
> My colleague John Wilson, who has been Mentor Graphics representative 
> on the SPIRIT steering committee, tells me that they are having a 
> SPIRIT roadmap meeting the first week of March to decide on future 
> directions for SPIRIT.  He also said that ARM has apparently already 
> pushed for debugger topics to be a part of the agenda, which is great.

> (Anthony, was that you that introduced that?)  Yes, today is March 
> 1st, so we might have missed the opportunity to actually submit 
> something for the meeting, but this document might help the
discussion.
>
> I think it would be great if we could have a tangible set of 
> requirements finished, and from that create a document to present to 
> the SPIRIT community the set of information that we see as missing 
> from the SPIRIT spec to make it truly useful for debugging.
>
> the floor is open!
> Aaron
>
> --
> Aaron Spear
> Debug Tools Architect/Staff Engineer
> Accelerated Technology a Mentor Graphics Division 
> _______________________________________________
> dsdp-tm-dev mailing list
> dsdp-tm-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-tm-dev
>
_______________________________________________
dsdp-dd-dev mailing list
dsdp-dd-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-dd-dev