Go Down

Topic: problem porting new bootloader with avrdude (Read 5121 times) previous topic - next topic

bperrybap

#30
Nov 22, 2012, 05:57 pm Last Edit: Nov 22, 2012, 07:15 pm by bperrybap Reason: 1

i have a quick question. why is new conf needed? ive got many custom entries in my current conf file. i notice standard old conf also gives some "id-type" error. do i have to go in there and change entries for other processor? will any conf files downloaded from other sites need to be modified too?


I have no idea what is going on there. I didn't even do a diff on them to see what the differences were.
When the old one got an error, I just tried the new one and it seemed to work.



--- bill

UPDATE:

It looks like the config file format has changed slightly for additional functionality.
Which means any updates/modifications you have will need to moved into and adjusted to for the new config file.

I'm curious what mods you are needing?


john1993

oh mannnnn.... im so stuffed w/tryptophan i can hardly think. hope you guys had a good one too.

most recently i had to change the signature m1284 from 05 to 06 because of the games atmel likes to play with part number (1284 vs 1284p etc). theres a couple dozen hacks like that and a few to accommodate some of my home grown isp programmer designs and stuff like that. i thought it was something to do with changes you made to the exe but now i see its just the d&d gang up to their practical jokes again. im sure i can figure things out by comparing the two files.

btw in reference to your comment about moving my prototype code down to zero, it a nice idea and i wish. ok for tiny family but theyre so "tiny" that aint even needed. unfortunately on mega chips the booters got to be in rww section which starts up high.

anyway thanks again for a great boost in productivity. i already got more done in one day than previous two weeks.

bperrybap


oh mannnnn.... im so stuffed w/tryptophan i can hardly think. hope you guys had a good one too.
:D And not to mention the sugar from the pie(s)....

Quote

anyway thanks again for a great boost in productivity. i already got more done in one day than previous two weeks.


So I assume that the avrdude binary I built works for you?

--- bill

john1993

yes, so far so good. im going to try a few different devices and loading some really big flash self-check images later today but dont anticipate problems.

since you seem to be on top of this stuff more than most i have another quickie. the official 1284 bootloaders use uart 0 but the ones i got from tom carpenter use uart 1. there was mention here of issues with uart 0. do you know anything about this? which is most popular and closest to a standard?

retrolefty


yes, so far so good. im going to try a few different devices and loading some really big flash self-check images later today but dont anticipate problems.

since you seem to be on top of this stuff more than most i have another quickie. the official 1284 bootloaders use uart 0 but the ones i got from tom carpenter use uart 1. there was mention here of issues with uart 0. do you know anything about this? which is most popular and closest to a standard?


I can answer that one. There seemed to be a die bug in the 1284p chip that would/could cause intermittent errors on input data stream to UART 0. It was discussed a lot over at the AVRfreaks web site. Users have reported a 'fix' if you wire a low pass filter (single small cap & resistor) network between the uart0 rec pin and the source of the transmitted data. Not sure if newer die versions of the chip have fixed the 'bug' or not. As such several have just modified their bootloader code to use UART 1 just to avoid the problem. As I said the avrfreak site had more detailed information on this problem.

http://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=index

Lefty

john1993

thanks. me and the 'freaks' dont get along so well. some of those guys can get pretty nasty. i sometimes browse because there are helpful individuals hiding below the surface there but hesitate to even sign in. you wouldnt happen to have a link to that discussion?

also in your opinion is tom carpenters uart 1 arrangement becoming more of a standard because of this?

retrolefty

#36
Nov 23, 2012, 03:26 pm Last Edit: Nov 23, 2012, 03:30 pm by retrolefty Reason: 1

thanks. me and the 'freaks' dont get along so well. some of those guys can get pretty nasty. i sometimes browse because there are helpful individuals hiding below the surface there but hesitate to even sign in. you wouldnt happen to have a link to that discussion?

also in your opinion is tom carpenters uart 1 arrangement becoming more of a standard because of this?


http://www.avrfreaks.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=107115&highlight=1284p

People building or using mega1284p in the arduino platform are not a huge population so can't say if using UART1 for the bootloader is a 'standard' or not, just one solution if one is building a new design, or as I said the simple cap/resistor seems to be effective to continue to use uart0 for the bootloader.

Lefty

john1993

thanks for taking time to do that. i guess my mistake was using 1284 instead of 1284p for search. your link has led to many other informative links not just freaks. some interesting stories.

for my nano-booter project i got 25pcs of 1284 not 1284p so maybe this is not a problem for those. with more ram than any other avr (no exception) this chip is probably going to become quite popular. making front end decisions for my bootloader im am very curious about pinout and other hardware issues involving arduino. there seems to be the sanguino and bobuino standards which i think use different uarts so it would be interesting to see what surfaces. i was also wondering why a different location for the led was chosen.

Go Up