Xilinx IP core drivers for RTEMS- Keith Robertson still around?
kjrobert at alumni.uwaterloo.ca
Wed Nov 8 18:18:28 UTC 2006
gregory.menke at gsfc.nasa.gov wrote:
> I'm about ready with a bunch of pretty well tested gen405 changes
> against the RTEMS tree;
> - source & makefiles ported to cvs head
> - rewritten uart driver, supports multiple uarts, exploits full
> configured tx fifo depth buffering, polling mode only.
> - considerably re-written soft core xilemac driver, supports up to 8
> simultaneous instances of the mac with 32 or 64 bit packet fifos- no
> DMA support yet. No hard core mac support in this driver.
> - updated opc interrupt controller vectoring
> - updated and simplified runtime memory map (workspace & heap
> allocations are better defined and more simply controlled).
> To bring up RTEMS on a Virtex 4 ppc, the only thing that needs doing is
> ensuring the given base addresses for the uart & interrupt controllers
> are specified. For the soft mac, the address can be given in the driver
> control struct, others are for the moment hardcoded in bsp .h files.
> I was thinking I could send out a provisional .diff since these are more
> than simple changes, avoiding too much upheaval by commiting directly to
> the cvs tree.
I'd be interested in any/all of these updates if you're able to provide
them at this point. I've also significantly changed the soft core
xilemac driver (32/64 bit fifo autodetection, much better code design,
bug fixes), although it sounds like your changes incorporate that plus more.
I'm particularly interested in your rtems infrastructure changes,
(makefiles, workspace/heap configuration, and the like) I was never
particularly happy with the way the gen405 did all that.
Might we consider a new xilinx or virtex bsp rather than submitting to
the gen405 one?
A couple of questions as well:
1) Is your updated port still using the old exception mechanism?
2) If you are using the new exception mechanism, do you handle/use the
critical interrupt simultaneously with the external interrupt? If not,
have you given any consideration as to how to support it?
More information about the users