Re: [UrJTAG-dev] STAPL format support for UrJTAG

[Gaston R. <gro...@em...>]

Hi Michael:

>> The patch can be downloaded here:
>> http://www.ulozto.net/7488477/stapl-int32-indented-patch
>> or
>> http://www.easy-share.com/1913618888/stapl_int32_indented.patch
> I will test this patch (in the next few days) with Actel ProAsic3 FPGAs
> and give you feedback about the results. If works ok my vote is to merge
> it with UrJtag.
Finally I've found the time to test the stapl patch.

We use Cygwin to build urjtag for window. The instructions required are 
published in our wiki:
https://emtechweb.dyndns.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=public:steps_to_build_urjtag_for_windows

The --enable-stapl option for configure are now required.

There is some changes needed in the stapl code to make it work under 
windows:
     * In jamport.h, change
#define PORT UNIX
for
#define PORT WINDOWS

     * In jamexprt.h, comment out several includes of unix specific headers:
//#include <termios.h>
//#include <dlfcn.h>
//#include <netdb.h>
//#include <poll.h>
//#include <pthread.h>
//#include <sys/mman.h>
//#include <sys/socket.h>
//#include <sys/wait.h>
//#include <sys/un.h>
//#include <sys/select.h>
//#include <sys/ioctl.h>
//#include <sys/ipc.h>
//#include <sys/sem.h>
//#include <sys/shm.h>
//#include <sys/msg.h>
//#include <sys/ioctl.h>
//#include <sys/poll.h>

Seems to me that these includes are not required at all.

The "stapl" command works ok to read idcode, erase, program, verify and 
get device info of a Actel A3P250_vq100 Fpga. We now will try with an 
Altera Fpga.

The benefits of use stapl over svf for us are:
     * Only one stp programming file for all actions (erase, program, 
verify) rather than several svf files.
     * Smaller programing file sizes. For the Fpga tested the 
PROGRAM.svf file is 12Mb large. The stp for the same design is only 500Kb.
     * Faster programming time: 57 seconds with stapl instead 2 min 7 
sec with svf.
     * There is no problem with the cable frequency observed with svf 
(See the thread "SVF player doesn't work with current versions, it's ok 
with rev. 1737")

For all these reasons, we deadly want a solution for the licensing issue 
to allow the merge with urjtag.

Regards,
Gastón.