Since a couple of days ago, when I wrote about the kernel patches that I generated to get the UIF working, I have had a response on the mspgcc-users mailing list. The problem has already been fixed in 2.6.20, so my patches aren’t required.

The reason that I previously thought that the fix hadn’t found its way into the kernel was that it had been fixed in a different, and better way – thus the code changes I was looking for weren’t there. The fix that’s in the kernel is a much more sane approach than the method I copied off the mspgcc-users mailing list. So I’m now running 2.6.20, and the UIF (and presumably the EZ430 – I don’t have that here at the moment) works fine.

One thing that may slightly irritate people when first installing the UIF is that you need to add a rule to udev. This rule is: (edit: you probably don’t want to use the rule below now – see further below)

SUBSYSTEM=="usb_device" ACTION=="add" SYSFS{product}=="MSP-FET430UIF JTAG Tool" \
  SYSFS{bNumConfigurations}=="2" \
  SYSFS{bConfigurationValue}=="1" \
  RUN+="/bin/sh -c 'echo 2 > /sys%p/device/bConfigurationValue'"

And then it works (remember to reload udev rules with “udevcontrol reload_rules“). I’m not 100% sure what it does, but from looking at the rule and driver code, it would seem that the TI USB->UART chip in the debugger can has more than one configuration, and that affects what firmware gets loaded into the USB->UART chip. The udev rule associates the device description string (“MSP-FET430UIF JTAG Tool”) with the correct config value (2).

Edit: Things have changed in udev since I wrote this post. The rule I now use is:

SUBSYSTEM=="usb" ACTION=="add" ATTR{product}=="MSP-FET430UIF JTAG Tool" \
  ATTR{bNumConfigurations}=="2" \
  RUN+="/bin/sh -c 'echo 2 > /sys%p/bConfigurationValue'"

Edit (27/03/2008): Things have changed even more. Now I use this rule (with udev 118):

SUBSYSTEM=="usb", ACTION=="add", ATTR{product}=="MSP-FET430UIF JTAG Tool", \
  ATTR{bNumConfigurations}=="2", ATTR{bConfigurationValue}="2"

Tags: linux, msp430

One response to “MSP430 Programmer Kernel Patches”

1. pascal says:

   March 17, 2007 at 10:06 am

   Hello,

   I have started a forum focused on MSP430, and I have left space for alternative
   development methods (linux, MacOS-X). So if you don’t mind, I am going to put a
   pointer to your page.
   And you are of course welcome to participate anytime.
   Don’t expect too much for the moment. The forum has just started last week,
   and there are few people actually participating. It will take time, but if this can
   help collecting and sharing info, it would be great.

   Thanks,

   Pascal