• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 18 replies
  • Subscribers 33 subscribers
  • Views 4572 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Similar topics

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

EK-TM4C129EXL: Texas instruments Programmer for the standalone Tiva-ARM Series TM4C1294NCPDT

Dave Zeb.
Prodigy 140 points
Part Number: EK-TM4C129EXL
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: ENERGIA, UNIFLASH, SEGGER

Dear All,

I have been working wth EK-TM4C129EXL Launchpad and Energia IDE. So all the Firmware is written in Energia IDE as .ino files. I would like to program the Tiva-MCU via jtag. Lets say if I have embedded the controller somewhere and now we need to program it, what programmer i have to buy from TI?. The second question,  using code composer studio v7 and any  of the suggested programmers from Texas Instruments can I program the core with Energia IDE firmware?.

any help highly appreciated here.

David

  • 0
    TI__Guru 72500 points

    There are several JTAG emulators that you can purchase that will support programming the TM4C1294CPDT. This page lists some of them LINK. Also checkout the IAR J-Link emulators. (It is a favorite among some of our long time users.) Also new, not on the wiki page is the XDS110. For programming software, the TI programming utility UniFlash is available for free download. It supports the XDS100, XDS110 and XDS200 emulators. Make sure to match the emulator target connector to your board footprint. There are several options. The most common being 14-pin and 20-pin variants.

    The next issue is creating the object file. In the process of building and uploading a sketch, Energia creates a temporary elf file (projectName.ino.elf) that can be programmed using UniFlash. Another option is to import your Energia project into Code Composer Studio version 7. This is TI's free development environment. You can use a cloud version, or download a copy to your system. Code composer will build the project and create a projectName.out file that can be loaded by Code Composer or by UniFlash.

  • 0 in reply to Bob Crosby
    Guru 117855 points

    May we (somewhat) long-time user-clients  *** LIKE *** ?

    That declared - may we note two (minor) points:

    • J-Link is (really) Segger's product (past, private labeled for IAR, possibly others)
    • Are these not actually JTAG/SWD Probes or Pods - rather than "emulators?"     (as they really do generate & exchange JTAG/SWD data - LIVE & DELIBERATELY - myself/others prove unable to recognize any "emulation.")

    You are, "far from alone" in employing "emulator" - yet firm/I have (several) past "MCU Emulators" - in which the "guts of the MCU" were disbursed among (many) external ICs (memories, latches etc.) so that the MCU's behavior could be more readily, "exposed, probed and observed!"     (via the monitoring/probing of these (many) external ICs - which attempted to "mimic" the behavior of an "enclosed (entombed, really) MCU" which could not allow such "internal probing.")     "That" was "real emulation" - JTAG probes prove FAR from that...

  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    Prodigy 140 points
    cb1_mobile, thanks for very illustrative intro into JTAG emulation world. Hope one day I will be able to nosedive into that as deep as you did. But at the moment I need a good advise, should i spend on Segger J-Link or on XDS 110 from Texas Instruments?. It is going to be used to program mostly Tiva Cortex cores in Code Composer Studio and Energia Environment.
  • 0 in reply to Dave Zeb.
    Guru 117855 points

    Thank you - I will take a photo - which reveals a (past) yet (very real), "MCU Emulator."  The fact that a word is "so often" misused - does not (surely should not) change its intent nor meaning.     And - pardon - but I must note that there is NO/ZERO "JTAG emulation world!"    i.e. emulation

    You note, "mostly TI Cortex cores & CCS/Energia" - yet - as and when you progress - is it "wise" for you to, "Lock yourself into "ONE and only one Vendor" forever?"    Is it not true that there are "many" vendors supplying Cortex M MCUs - which include M0, M3, M4 & M7 - although (sadly) only Cortex M4 is presented here.   You should note that - most always - vendors "leapfrog each other" - thus, "One vendor forever" proves NOT an effective, long-term strategy.     in the case of my firm - we employ Cortex M from four different vendors - which our key clients DEMAND!)

    The J-Link - to my mind (and to the mind's of many) proves superior to the "vendor locked, limited versions" earlier mentioned.    J-Link's proper, "vendor agnostic" capability - and substantial development time/funding/effort - and "true focus" - renders it measurably superior.    It is also - the most popular JTAG/SWD Probe - by sales volume - and was introduced long prior to "lesser/limited versions."

    A full-featured J-Link version is offered at a special, "Educational Discount price" - and you do NOT have to "pretend" to be a student!     (I still have my "UCLA" sweatshirt)     Neither firm - nor I - receive reward for such endorsement (although NOT by choice) - highly skilled (fellow) poster Robert also employs, "J-Link" - such (should) prove telling...

    It should be noted that (even) vendor agent (here, TODAY!) endorses J-Link/J-Trace ... ... ... (seems an irresistible force - does it not?):

    https://e2e.ti.com/support/microcontrollers/tiva_arm/f/908/t/633207

  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    Prodigy 140 points
    Definitely it does cb1. Thanks for sharing your knowledge which I bet is of great value. These days proper communication is becoming a useful skill to have in ones arsenal. You state that there is no J TAG-emulation, so how should it then be properly cited, and/or used as Term?. Just for myself to keep in mind.

    also looking forward for the pictures ^^)
  • 0 in reply to Dave Zeb.
    Guru 117855 points

    My friend - not so many here adopt "your/my arsenal" belief.     

    May I suggest, "DEBUG AND PROGRAMMING PROBE" (or Pod) as far more (properly) descriptive.    Emulation - does NOT come into play!    (It is just WRONG!)

    You look forward to "pictures" (I prefer to await "demand" - prior to effort) thus (now) shall comply.

    Note that the above flows (directly) from Segger's site - "Trace is a more powerful tool - and of course (still) NOT an "Emulation."    (you should note that "cb1" (according to unbiased staff) is far better looking...and a "righty" - attending (always) to detail...)

    And - arrives now a "real" Emulator: (board is 37x28cm - contains multiple latches, buffers, Ram and 64 pin "bond-out/hybrid CPU...It was these signals being "made external" which enabled MCU debug & development.)     The difference between an "emulator" and "probe or pod" should (now) be evident.

  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    Prodigy 140 points
    Thanks for the picture. This looks a lot of hardware to take care of.
    May I dare to ask what is a purpose of those latches?. In reality what enables possibility to track in real, what actually the µCU is executing?.
  • 0 in reply to Dave Zeb.
    Guru 27665 points
    Those may be RAM chips Dave. Emulators often provide RAM both to emulate RAM and ROM on the board and to provide local memory for tracing etc..

    Emulating on board RAM makes it easier to set breakpoints based on access permissions.

    The in circuit emulators for larger faster processors would have a fragile use-once and pricey, adapter to connect them to the board. Base cost of these were 5 figure U$.

    The actual emulator for an ARM is on the chip. The JTAG adapter is a communication link to that and to the chip registers.

    Although these large emulators were expensive and fragile but very capable. It's not clear to me that the ARM on board emulation facilities are up to matching them but they do cover most of that capability and are inexpensive enough that they come with every ARM core.

    Robert
  • 0 in reply to Robert Adsett
    Guru 117855 points

    Robert Adsett said:
    It's not clear to me that the ARM on board emulation facilities are up to matching them (past "giant", MCU Emulators) but they do cover most of that capability and are inexpensive enough that they come with every ARM core.

    That's a most perceptive observation - those large, past MCU Emulator Boards did outperform certain aspects of today's "on chip interrogation" - but suffered in other areas.    We had such boards from Zilog & Intel - the latter were more expensive, more extensive, and more capable.

    Indeed the board was populated w/a vast amount of 74LS logic (61 logic ICs) and 2 EPROMS,  and 2 EMULATION (bond-out) MCUs.    The 74LS devices (61 total) were divided between data buffers, bus transceivers, inverters, gates, flip-flops, shift registers and 8-bit latches.    RAM proved the storage medium - which demanded (some other) means of non-volatile program storage.

    Note that the "Emulator Board" shown in the photo targeted an MCU - which had separate GPIO Ports (much like today's devices)  - and the "latches" served to "monitor & reflect" GPIO status.

    Today's powerful IDEs - along w/JTAG/SWD MCU Access - prove a HUGE Advantage.     One may (now) note the "major difference" between a clear/real "emulator" and today's (far simpler) "Probe or Pod."

    It is noted that you've "Verified/Resolved" your last post - and not any of those which sought to answer your request to: differentiate between "Emulator vs Probe/Pod" - such seems misunderstood/mistaken...

  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    Guru 27665 points

    The last emulator I used had something like this. These two pieces formed the attachment single attachment, as I recall it was a single non-repairable tower. Most of the emulator was packaged separately.

    Images from http://www.icetech.com/techpub/c167-st10-adp-guide.pdf

    Robert

  • 0 in reply to Robert Adsett
    Guru 117855 points
    It would appear that your device could very well (pardon) "Emulate" the "Leaning Tower of Pisa" - in addition to providing MCU insight - could it not?
    Those look like modern, gold flashed, HF input sockets (2 such - surrounding the "D" socket) - which I can't recall on our past emulators.
  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    Guru 27665 points
    This was from the mid-90's and I recall the tower was rather expensive.

    Mind you I think Pisa's landmark is rather more stable. Needless to say this never left the lab bench.

    Robert
  • 0 in reply to Robert Adsett
    Expert 1955 points

    Pisa's tower is under constant work to keep its center of mass in a reasonably manageable alignment. Looks like something similar going on with this one!

    I've enjoyed following this discussion - very informative. Thanks, Guys!

  • 0 in reply to LouEEEE!
    Guru 117855 points

    You may note that there IS a "tip jar" - stuffed w/several "decoy bills" - which also "leans" due to jar's 3D printer sourcing & lack of recent deposits...

    BTW - for those "Current Event Challenged" - some percentage of that "Pisa work" is paid for by the Vatican ... yet that financing is likely, "Up in Smoke" as the Vatican will no longer "Sell Cigarettes" to nicotine addicted (much of Euro) staff...

  • 0 in reply to LouEEEE!
    Guru 27665 points

    LouEEEE! said:
    I've enjoyed following this discussion - very informative.

    That's the advantage of threads that drift off of the original subject. Glad you enjoyed

    Robert

  • 0 in reply to Robert Adsett
    Guru 117855 points

    What, "Drift OFF?"      Does the fact that we (both) share some (slight) "ADHD" warrant such harsh (drift-off) description?

    Should not the words: "enrich, expand, enhance" better describe the "break" from the (H. Simpson proclaimed, (buttoned-down) "Boring!") so often resulting from, "Tech and (only) Tech?"      (lurking in such "over-abundance" - this fruited plain?)

    Speaking towards (real) "drift" - perhaps your next "3D print of our "tip jar" - could less "model Pisa's profile."    (maybe)

  • 0 in reply to cb1_mobile
    Expert 1955 points
    But, fun aside...

    I really came here as part of general research - hoping to glean some insights re my naïvete on the XDS debuggers.

    In short: Given that many/most of the LaunchPad prototypes we're working on already have the on-board XDS110, would the intrepid developer gain significant new value/debugging features from the standalone device? Or is standalone primarily intended for non-LaunchPad builds; eg for 'customer' or 'production' builds?
  • 0 in reply to LouEEEE!
    Guru 117855 points

    Not all here "innately know" of the XDS - our use of "longer existing, more expansive" JTAG/SWD probes/tools - prevent such comparison.

    As written here - Segger's J-Link may be procured at terrific "educational discount" - and as you already have "some history" (w/lesser tools) - would not your procurement - and usage - provide the most notable "A-B" comparison - sure to best supply your answer?

    That said - choosing a device w/out great history or capability - limited to "one and only one vendor" - cannot make sense!     Vendors chronically/predictably "leapfrog" each other ... AND ... M0, M0+, M3 & M7 beckon - yet are "banned" from this limited - yet "fruited plain."      How can you ever justify, "Locking yourself in?"