| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
DiBosco
Joined: 19 Apr 2010
Posts: 5
|
| Debugger question |
 Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:37 am |
 |
|
Folks,
It's been years since I used PICs but have got a job to mod some code. Am ploughing my way through the code trying to understand the program, but am being severley handicapped by what seems to be a very flakey debugger.
I have an ICD2 rigged up to the target board and am programming around 18k of code it then debugging it. It takes about twenty seconds to load the actual code and another ten seconds or so for all the warnings to be clicked and it to be ready to hit the run button. Is that a normal time for that amount of code? Seems very slow, but then I'm used to a full JTAG interface and things like the Atmel one wire interface are fairly slow (not this bad though).
Secondly, every time I try to single step through code I get this error:
Access violation at address 0434E1F8. Write of address 0093FE58.
The only way to debug again is to shut the program down and go through the incredibly long reprogram time.
Is this normal for the CCS system? Does it just not work with single stepping? Is the ICD2 that's rubbish? The PIC on chip debug? Would I improve things with a different debug interface? It's like pulling teeth at the moment!
Many thanks for any help. |
|
 |
PCM programmer
Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 21708
|
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:11 pm |
|
|
What's your PIC and your CCS compiler version ?
Are you using Microchip ICD2 with MPLAB ?
(and not CCS ICD with their IDE). |
|
|
DiBosco
Joined: 19 Apr 2010
Posts: 5
|
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:15 pm |
|
|
| PCM programmer wrote: | What's your PIC and your CCS compiler version ?
Are you using Microchip ICD2 with MPLAB ?
(and not CCS ICD with their IDE). |
I have the very latest CCS, the 18F252 and AFAIK I'm using the CCS IDE which, from what I understand seems to rely quite a bit on MPLAB. I am definitely invoking the debugger from within CCS though and never booting MPLAB itself. |
|
|
DiBosco
Joined: 19 Apr 2010
Posts: 5
|
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:05 am |
|
|
| So no-one else sees this behaviour? Or does the silence indicate everyone does and it's just how it is? |
|
|
dyeatman
Joined: 06 Sep 2003
Posts: 1933
Location: Norman, OK
|
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:44 am |
|
|
I use the CCS IDE constantly with the ICD2 and most commonly used
16F/18F PICs out there including the 18F252, I have rarely seen the crash
problem. When I do it is usually one specific instruction that causes it.
There are some significant delays on startup and during debugging
but none I consider unworkable.
I do not use the MPLAB (don't even have it installed), it is not required or
needed unless it is your personal preference.
_________________
Google and Forum Search are some of your best tools!!!!
Last edited by dyeatman on Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
DiBosco
Joined: 19 Apr 2010
Posts: 5
|
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:53 am |
|
|
| dyeatman wrote: | I use the CCS IDE constantly with the ICD2 and I do not see this problem.
I do not use the MPLAB (don't even have it installed), it is not required or
needed unless it is your personal preference. |
Thanks for the reply. It's certainly not my personal preference. When I enquired about the compiler before I bought it I was told this by CCS themselves:
| Quote: | 2. You will also need to download the ICD 2, ICD 3 and REAL ICE interface module from the CCS Downloads Page. Note: If you do not have MPLAB already installed, you will need to so by visiting www.microchip.com.
|
Also, I am sure (but might have got confused) that when I installed CCS it also told me I need MPLAB installed. I would stress I am not using MPLAB, but CCS and hitting the debug button which only gives me one option which is PCW.
| Quote: | There are some significant delays on startup and during debugging
but none I consider unworkable. |
No, the delays aren't unworkable, I didn't mean to imply that. I do find it very slow though. |
|
|
sjb
Joined: 13 Apr 2010
Posts: 34
Location: UK
|
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:24 am |
|
|
Well I've had quite a few 'access violation' messages while using and debugging with the CCS IDE. Next time I'll make a note of the numbers.
Could it be that you are using Vista? I am, and I have been wondering if that was related.
I've been using both the ICD3 and the ICD-U64 from CCS. Nether seem especially slow, but the ICD3 does not work with CCS Supplied dev kit, and the ICD-U64 wont work with the Microchip dev kit - which might be a whole other discussion one day. |
|
|
DiBosco
Joined: 19 Apr 2010
Posts: 5
|
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 7:53 am |
|
|
| No, I'm using XP. CCS themselves are being very quiet on the whole affair. |
|
|
sjb
Joined: 13 Apr 2010
Posts: 34
Location: UK
|
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:56 am |
|
|
| DiBosco wrote: | | No, I'm using XP. CCS themselves are being very quiet on the whole affair. |
They have been answering my support questions, although I do still have some recent ones that have not had a reply yet.
If it's not the OS (and XP is probably the most tested, and hence most likely not to have a problem I guess), then could it be your hardware. Do you have a Microchip dev board or your own H/W that you are debugging? I think I have seen some problems relating to the circuitry on the /MCLR line. Whether the capacitance is too large or if there is not enough series resistance does seem to affect debug performance, although in my experience it just stops working when not right, rather than going slow. |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in
