Re: [Openocd-development] adapter_khz ...

[David B. <da...@pa...>]

On Wednesday 24 March 2010, Laurent Gauch wrote:
> ... why not jtag_khz as before or something more specific ?

You can still call jtag_khz, though it'll be inappropriate for SWD.
(And will eventually go away.)

We really don't want to need JTAG and SWD versions of every config
script and event handler based on what transport is in use...


> The adapter_khz is confusing to end-users of OpenOCD.
> 
> When we will coming with the SWO we will have to specifiy a SWO 
> frequency (baudrate) too.

Kicking in SWO trace will need to specify a few other things too,
so having another clock setting won't hurt.  When a UART is used
to collect the SWO data, it's not likely to go at the same clock
rate as SWD...

> 
> adapter_khz is really bad since at long term we do not know which 
> frequency we are talking about.
> 
> I vote for coming back with a jtag_khz or better jtag_tck_frequency_khz.

So you really do NOT want to see target config files that work correctly
regardless of whether they're used with JTAG -or- SWD??

THat makes no sense to me.  I should be able to switch to some other
debug adapter -- maybe SWD-only, or JTAG-only -- without rewriting any
part of the target config file.

That means minimizing the number of commands that are JTAG-specific.
(or SWD-specific.)