[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR
From: |
Brian Dean |
Subject: |
Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR |
Date: |
Mon, 29 Aug 2005 18:11:24 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 11:05:04PM +0200, Joerg Wunsch wrote:
> Read times (according to avrdude's progress bar + time display) to
> read a full ATmega128:
>
> stk500[v1] 41 s
> stk500v2 15 s
> jtag2fast 25 s
> jtag2/USB 13 s
Hmmm, wonder what's wrong with my setup? Here's what I get:
Programmer Type : STK500V2
Description : Atmel STK500 V2
Hardware Version: 15
Firmware Version: 2.1
Topcard : Unknown
Vtarget : 0.0 V
Varef : 5.0 V
Oscillator : 3.686 MHz
SCK period : 10.9 us
...
avrdude: reading flash memory:
Reading | ################################################## | 100% 332.91s
Over 5 and a half minutes to do the same thing yours does in 15
seconds.
It should be noted that this is an "AVRISP" I am using, not an STK500.
Also, I did not update the firmware on this device, it came installed
with Rev 2.1 from Digi-Key where I recently bought it.
Even under the V1 protocol, a real STK500 is faster than an AVRISP,
though. Is it possible that the AVRISP just very slow under V2? I
hope there is another explanation - as Bernard suggested perhaps my
oscillator is not set correctly or something. Do the above hardware
settings look right? What do yours show, Joerg? Bernard?
Note that I did check two seperate systems - first on my MacOS X using
a USB->RS232 dongle, and second on my FreeBSD 5.4 system using the
motherboard serial port and the timing is nearly identical, so I think
we can eliminate the host system as the problem.
OK, well, feeling a little dangerous, I just set the SCK period down
to 1.1 us - the fastest allowed, and that dropped the read time down
to 27 seconds - much more appetizing. Is it safe to do this? I did
do a program and verify and it checked out OK.
-Brian
--
Brian Dean
ATmega128 based MAVRIC controllers
http://www.bdmicro.com/
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, (continued)
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, E. Weddington, 2005/08/29
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, E. Weddington, 2005/08/29
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Brian Dean, 2005/08/28
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Joerg Wunsch, 2005/08/28
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Bernard Fouché, 2005/08/28
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Brian Dean, 2005/08/28
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Brian Dean, 2005/08/28
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Bernard Fouché, 2005/08/29
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Joerg Wunsch, 2005/08/29
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Joerg Wunsch, 2005/08/29
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR,
Brian Dean <=
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Galen Seitz, 2005/08/29
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Joerg Wunsch, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Brian Dean, 2005/08/29
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Joerg Wunsch, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Bernard Fouché, 2005/08/30
- Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Bernard Fouché, 2005/08/29
Re: [avrdude-dev] Re: WinAVR, Joerg Wunsch, 2005/08/28