Author Topic: Modern day M68K development  (Read 1254 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Gribo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 529
  • Country: ca
Modern day M68K development
« on: April 15, 2021, 01:35:57 pm »
Hello all,
 I got a task to develop test firmware for a board with a 68332 MCU, I have the PEmicro Multilink FX adapter, and would like to setup a toolchain. Sadly, Codesourcery lite is no longer available.

What are my options? I am using windows 10.
I am available for freelance work.
 


Offline SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7748
  • Country: fr
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2021, 03:57:38 pm »
I have used the toolchain provided here: https://gnutoolchains.com/m68k-elf/
and it works fine.
 

Offline Gribo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 529
  • Country: ca
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2021, 01:12:40 pm »
Thanks for the info.
I have installed the toolchain, and got Eclipse to create a project with all the headers, now it seems I am missing some resources.
I installed version 4.8 of the toolchain.
I am available for freelance work.
 

Offline Harjit

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 127
  • Country: us
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #4 on: April 17, 2021, 03:32:59 pm »
There is some good information here: https://wiki.control.fel.cvut.cz/nms/cpuarch/m68k/mo_cpu2-quick-start.html

Has anyone found an inexpensive USB BDM tool? This is for a hobby project.
 

Offline bingo600

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1657
  • Country: dk
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2021, 05:47:19 pm »
Those are classic Newlib ... DIY routines , missing.
You have to implement them your self

/Bingo
 

Offline westfw

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3566
  • Country: us
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #6 on: April 18, 2021, 09:14:17 am »
Quote
it seems I am missing some resources.
newlib in its full form likes to have resources that aren't that applicable to a small embedded system.
Figure out how to use newlib-nano instead, and it should be happier!
Probably something like "--specs=nano.specs --specs=nosys.specs" in the link command (may also require that you re-build newlib...)
 

Offline Harjit

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 127
  • Country: us
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #7 on: September 26, 2021, 09:41:55 pm »
I'd love to know what you ended up doing, what worked/is working, what didn't work.

I've spent a bunch of time trying to figure out what to do about a BDM interface.

I posted this info. in another thread but in case you don't see it. The repository below allows for using an STM32 blue pill board for the BDM interface for an MC68332. In looking through the code, it should be a matter of a few hours to change it to use an FTDI part.

Python based using STLink for USB Blaster function:
https://github.com/Najsztub/BDM_UsbBlaster

Using an FTDI part from Python:
https://iosoft.blog/2018/12/02/ftdi-python-part-1/

Also, LLVM is adding M68K support.

 

Online Doctorandus_P

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1828
  • Country: nl
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #8 on: September 26, 2021, 10:06:16 pm »
There are a bunch of projects and blog posts on hackaday that respond to search terms like "motorola 68000" and "68k", and probably most of them are open source such as https://rosco-m68k.com/ or close to open source. You can have a look at what for software those projects use for development.
 

Offline Gribo

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 529
  • Country: ca
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #9 on: September 27, 2021, 07:19:02 pm »
I ended doing write/compile/prog/debug cycles with logs to the UART. Couldn't get the debugger to step through code or insert breakpoints. Luckily, the code was very small.
I am available for freelance work.
 

Offline rstofer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8658
  • Country: us
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #10 on: September 28, 2021, 09:18:29 am »
I think those missing routines belong in syscalls.c  You don't need to implement functions like sbrk but the symbol needs to be defined.  An empty function is all it takes

https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/459975/role-of-syscalls-c

Just to give you a flavor with no intention that it is correct for your use, I have attached one of my syscalls.c files



 

Offline Benta

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3594
  • Country: de
Re: Modern day M68K development
« Reply #11 on: September 28, 2021, 04:57:08 pm »
Don't forget to set the compiler to generate code for CPU32.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf