<div dir="ltr"><div> In USA, the original version of mvme5500 is still available for purchasing.<br></div><div>I was in the process of adding the software support for the new NIC on<br></div><div>the mvme5500 board, then here is the discussion.....<br>
</div><div><br> According to the manufacture specification of the Discovery<br>system controllers (i.e. controllers for mvme5500 and mvme6100),<br> "GPP interrupt value register" should be used to monitor the interrupts.<br>
However, Beatnik BSP uses the "GPP interrupt cause register" to<br>monitor the interrupts. I started to write a disco BSP to add supports<br>for discovery based boards such as mvme6100 to be run-time<br>compatible with the mvme5500 BSP that I wrote.<br>
<br>1) I prefer to follow the manufacture's specification.<br></div><div>2) I read the code of the beatnik network drivers years ago. <br>
</div><div>The code for the 100 MHz NIC on mvme5500 and 1 GHz NIC<br></div><div>on mvme6100 was patched with workarounds. If I recall<br></div><div>correctly, I tested the network performance of the beatnik BSP on the<br>
100 MHz NIC on an image processing application, it delivered only<br></div><div>50% of performance as compared with that of the mvme5500 BSP.<br></div><div>I do not recall if I tested the performance of beatnik BSP on mvme6100.<br>
<br></div><div>With the assigned tasks I had back then,<br></div><div>a) I needed to test the performance, especially that of the DMA,<br>on the mvme6100 without compromising its performance and the<br>code (i.e. no workarounds !!! ).<br>
</div><div>b) It is painless to add supports for other discovery based boards because<br></div><div>I had the mvme5500 BSP handy.<br></div><div><br></div><div> The mvme5500 BSP supports the operations at NSLS smoothly. I never<br>
</div><div>needed to write any workarounds in my applications, including the code<br>for DMA. If there were any bug in the applications, I could be so confident<br>that it was not due to the BSP. The mvme6100 functions smoothly with the<br>
disco BSP, too. However, the performance delivered by the mvme5500 BSP<br>is fast enough for most of my applications. <br></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,<br></div><div>Kate Feng<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Peter Dufault <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dufault@hda.com" target="_blank">dufault@hda.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Till, does SLAC use a mixture of 5500 and 6100 painlessly with Beatnik? I've told my client that uses the MVME5500 with Beatnik to get a 6100 in-house and test it out with their RTEMS software. As long as things are changing on the MVME5500 (slower cache, different ethernet controller) they should evaluate using the 6100 instead (faster processor, two gig-E ethernets, etc) to see if that can be used on new systems and as a replacement part (with the replacement maybe tied to recent software releases, they can hoard the older boards for really old systems).<br>
<div><br>
On Jan 16, 2014, at 12:04 , Till Straumann <<a href="mailto:strauman@slac.stanford.edu" target="_blank">strauman@slac.stanford.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> FWIW: the driver I ported for the beatnik BSP is almost 10 years old<br>
> and it seems to support the 82545GM (IDs 0x1026, 0x1027, 0x1028).<br>
> You could use this BSP or you could also use the driver from the<br>
> libbsdport addon package (which is newer than the one in beatnik).<br>
<br>
</div>Peter<br>
-----------------<br>
Peter Dufault<br>
HD Associates, Inc. Software and System Engineering<br>
<div><div><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
rtems-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:rtems-users@rtems.org" target="_blank">rtems-users@rtems.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-users" target="_blank">http://www.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/rtems-users</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>