Lpc2000

Eventually squabbling children and crazy people need to be told to be 
quite or go away.

This is taking up a lot of the newsgroup and those interested 
continueing this bickering should exchange emails or use the 'chat' 
feature.  Perhaps you have been wronged but someones comments, but 
you will never agree so why keep this up? If you have such a low 
opinion of those involved then why engage them in aurgument?? 

Notice that no one is coming to the defence of anyone involved in 
these little spats.  

Also notice that all of the comments of late about this thread 
contain the same simple message - time to stop. 

Ian Scanlon


--- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, "John Heenan" <l10@...> wrote:
>
> No Dominic. My facts are not wrong. Below is what I stated and what 
> Jaya replied. I asserted in Fact 2 that CRP decides if signals from 
> JTAG will be allowed to act. This assumes JTAG is enabled and 
> attempting to pass signals. Surely this is clear. I did not state 
> signals to JTAG (from a debugger for example), I stated signals 
from 
> JTAG, which in the context of Fact 1 clearly means bus signals.
> 
> I never stated CRP enables or disables JTAG. JTAG electronics 
> operates independently. JTAG can be enabled and spinning uselessly 
> because CRP has not enabled Debug.
> 
> I will not accept my comments are unfair. If someone posts to a 
group 
> and imply a level of knowledge they do not possess then it is 
> appropriate and fair to point this out. If you regard it a personal 
> attack, that is not my problem, it still does not mean the comments 
> are inappropriate. 
> 
> I have no intention of giving lessons in basic electronics. Yes I 
am 
> aware you have put on the web a rather lengthy document concerned 
> with JTAG.
> 
> I personally am really fed up the damaging effects of the poor 
level 
> of insight of self proclaimed experts.
> 
> John Heenan
> 
> 
> >  > Fact 1. JTAG hardware operates independently. Nothing JTAG 
does,
> >  > including reset signals, will make the slightest bit of 
> difference
> >  > unless the signals JTAG passes are not blocked and so are 
> allowed to
> >  > act. Simple invertor and OR logic gates are perfectly adequate 
to
> >  > block signals.
> > 
> > Could you explain what your point is in the above paragraph 
> please.  I read 
> > it a few times but cannot make out what you intend to point out.
> > 
> >  > Fact 2. The boot loader decides if CRP (Code Read Protection) 
is
> >  > enabled and so decides if it will allow signals from JTAG to 
act.
> > 
> > Wrong.  JTAG signals are enabled or disabled on reset by pulling 
> specific 
> > GPIO pins low on boot [see notes on page 120 of 2294 user 
manual]. 
> The boot 
> > loader *disables* it, and then at a later time enables it if it 
> thinks that 
> > CRP is not enabled.
> 
> 
> --- In lpc2000@yahoogroups.com, Dominic Rath <Dominic.Rath@> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> > 
> > On Tuesday 28 February 2006 14:31, John Heenan wrote:
> > > I don't believe I have got any facts wrong. The best 
> interpretation
> > > is that Jaya is very naive and has no idea just how deficient 
his
> > > knowledge of electronics and the ARM architecture is and has no 
> real
> > > experience of how a support system works.
> > >
> > 
> > You've listed a number of facts, and at least the second one 
(JTAG 
> > enabled/disabled after reset) was definitely wrong - when Jaya 
said 
> that "you 
> > seem to have some of your facts wrong" he's perfectly right. 
> Leaving this out 
> > of your reply and instead running a personal attack on Jaya seems 
> rather 
> > unfair.
> > 
> > > ...
> > >
> > > John Heenan
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Dominic
> >
>