<mcc111[m]>
It is! And once again UPS's online communications are simply misleading.
jstein has joined #glasgow
galibert[m] has quit [Quit: Idle timeout reached: 172800s]
Nekron[m] has joined #glasgow
<Nekron[m]>
I've got also shipment notification for FedEx (delivery to Germany)... so very excited!
zerobytesecurity has joined #glasgow
<zerobytesecurity>
mine shippped to now what to do first?
<zerobytesecurity>
s/shippped/shipped/, s/to/too/
<jn>
hmm, i'm probing a JTAG port, and the result is TAP #0: IR[8] BYPASS. any idea how to make it show up with an IDCODE?
<whitequark[cis]>
you can't
<whitequark[cis]>
if it shows BYPASS there is no IDCODE in the silicon
<whitequark[cis]>
IDCODE/BYPASS are basically prefix coded. you reset the device and if DR starts with 1 it's IDCODE followed by 31 identification bits, with 0 it's BYPASS (i may have swapped 0/1)
<whitequark[cis]>
s/device/TAP/
<whitequark[cis]>
it's somewhat upsetting that (a) IDCODE presence is not mandated and (b) the IR pattern for IDCODE is not fixed by the spec
<jn>
but it might still work for debugging if i find a bypass?
meklort has quit [Quit: ZNC 1.7.5+deb4 - https://znc.in]
meklort has joined #glasgow
<whitequark[cis]>
<jn> "but it might still work for..." <- can you explain what you're doing in more detail?
<jn>
i have a cisco switch from circa 2002, with a powerpc SoC (MPC8245) on it. i found the connector that is likely connected to the processor jtag. glasgow's jtag-pinout found a pinout, then jtag-probe found the bypass mentioned above
<jn>
my plan is to attach another debug adapter that supports this SoC, and trace the communication, to reverse-engineer the jtag-based debug protocol