• State
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 1 reply
  • Subscribers 98 subscribers
  • Views 1034 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Support feedback
Options
Options
Related

This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

Difference between LLD + CSL?

Tom Smith
Expert 2930 points

I have one question regarding C6474 EDMA. From TI’s website, it provides “EDMA3 LLD (Low Level Driver)” support for C6474. This link is shown below:

http://focus.ti.com/docs/toolsw/folders/print/c6474swpkg.html

And at the same time, we are using some EDMA functions from C6474 CSL (chip support library).

 I have never used EDMA3 LLD before. So I am wondering whether I should study LLD or just use CSL. Do you know what the differences are between them?

-Tom-

  • 0
    TI__Guru* 84110 points

    EDMA3 LLD provides greater functionality than the CSL for the C6474. For ongoing support, LLD is the best choice, and for ease of use, it is the best choice primarily because the function names are more intuitive.

    Resource management is handled by the LLD and not by CSL.

    Either can be used efficiently, but LLD has the potential for inefficiencies if you use a lot of the easy-to-use functions, like setting the destination parameters and then setting the source parameters, and so on, rather than just setting all the parameters in a single operation. A single operation is about all you get in the CSL, so it tends to be efficient automatically.

    With all that said, I started using CSL before LLD came around and I still use it because I have my own examples built around it. For new users, I would recommend the LLD because you get support from official TI releases. And the LLD is supported on every TI DSP that uses EDMA3 while CSL is not always supported.

    Regards,
    RandyP

     

    If you need more help, please reply back. If this answers the question, please click  Verify Answer  , below.