Pointers to using Trace on the AVR One!

Go To Last Post
6 posts / 0 new
Author
Message
#1
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I sprung for the more expensive AVR One! because of the hardware trace capability. I am getting started with an EVK1105 board that already has the Mictor38 connector on it. I am using Studio 6.1.

I have read the on-line help and searched for a guide on the trace. The only guide I found was for a really old version of Studio. A lot has changed so it was not helpful.

Could someone point me to some current information on using trace?

Thanks.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I finally contacted Atmel only to learn that AtmelStudio does not support trace with a vague 'at this time'. I wish they would have been open about that because I would not have purchased an Avr One!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

uups - this is really bad! but I don't see a reason why not to use AVR32 Studio!
as long as you write clean code you should not need the trace unit anyway ;-)

-sb

PS.: take care of you FreeRTOS task's stack sizes

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Trace is one of those things that you don't always need, but usually when you need it, you need it bad.

For example, I had some code under load ending up in a read or write exception. That would have been a great candidate for trace.

It was a customized version of the BasicWebServer under heavy load. I have switched over to the LwIP WebServer and the issue seems to have gone away. I'm still getting up to speed on the AVR32 and tools.

I'm trying to leverage the free software out there so it won't all be clean code.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

Sure, I was just kidding. Anyway, tryout AVR32 Studio or buy a professional tool like this:
http://www.lauterbach.com/frames...

After checking the price for it (including the trace unit) you won't tell me that the Avr One is expensive but I totally understand that you wan't to use a feature you've payed for. Always interesting to hear what Atmel Studio does not support!

-sb

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Total votes: 0

I am a 16 year survivor of the big company aerospace software world so I have used and purchased Lauterbach systems before for other processors. I know how much they cost. I'm at a small company doing software for the industrial market now. I think the management might have a stroke to learn how much a lauterbach would cost.

You actually nailed what my problem seems to be. The default stack for the LEDx task from the Atmel demo was not big enough. I think it was sometimes catching interrupts and blowing the stack. This was corrupting TCB's and the failures were intermittent based on the over run.

I guess screwed up is screwed up but I was not thrilled to learn the TCB's are allocated adjacent to the stacks in FreeRTOS.