• State Resolved
  • +1 person also asked this people also asked this
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 9 replies
  • Subscribers 101 subscribers
  • Views 566 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.

Original question:

TDA4VM: Remoteproc support for MCU R5Fs (contd.)

TDA4VM: start MCU1_1 in split mode

PEIREN YANG
Prodigy 45 points

Part Number: TDA4VM
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: TDA4VH

Hello TI,

I tried to start the MCU1_1 in split mode, according to https://e2e.ti.com/support/processors-group/processors/f/processors-forum/1079513/tda4vm-remoteproc-support-for-mcu-r5fs-contd this should be now possible. Could you please confirm it and hint how to do it with the 8.6 SDK?

Thank you for your help and best regards,

Peiren

  • 0
    TI__Guru** 124585 points

    Hi Peiren,

    The MCU1_1 core shutdown required to boot the MCU1_1 in remoteproc mode in Linux kernel  is still not available in SDK yet (absent from the soon-to-be-released 9.0 SDK as well).

    You can rely on SBL to boot the MCU1_1 in Split-mode. Is that an option for you?

    regards

    Suman

  • 0 in reply to Suman Anna
    Prodigy 45 points

    Hi Suman,

    thanks for your answer. No, SBL according to my requirement is not a feasible solution. I need to wait for a stable startup of Linux on A72 and then start MCU1_1 core via remoteproc. Since it is a little bit urgent for me to create a prototype use case as described. Could you please tell me how soon will the 9.0 SDK be released? And is it possible to update the TI git repositories inside SDK 8.6 (checkout to some feature branches) to temporarily get the MCU1_1 running in Split-mode and control it via remoteproc?

    Thank you very much and best regards,

    Peiren

  • 0 in reply to PEIREN YANG
    Prodigy 45 points

    Hi Suman,

    sorry I misunderstood it regards the 9.0 SDK. Will this function be supported in the near future? Is there any kernel patches to realize it temporarily?

    Thank you very much and best regards,

    Peiren

  • 0 in reply to PEIREN YANG
    TI__Guru** 124585 points

    Hi Peiren,

    PEIREN YANG said:
    Will this function be supported in the near future? Is there any kernel patches to realize it temporarily?

    This is a fix required in R5 SPL (not kernel) to shut down the MCU1_1 core first that was booted by ROM.

    There are no readily available patches for this.  

    regards

    Suman

  • 0 in reply to Suman Anna
    TI__Guru 50045 points

    Hi Peiren,

    My understanding is that for the safety requirement, BIST (built-in self test) is required on your platform.

    To run BIST at the boot, our recommendation is to use SBL, instead of SPL. We don't have reference BIST example with SPL.

    Regards,
    Stanley

  • 0 in reply to Stanley Liu
    Prodigy 45 points

    Hi Stanley,

    BIST is not essential in my platform, as we don't restart the system often over a long period. Instead, having full control of MCU1_1 inside Linux is the target we need to achieve.

    Regards,

    Peiren

  • 0 in reply to Suman Anna
    Prodigy 45 points

    Hi Suman,

    with some modifications from other threads, I was able to start MCU1_1 in split mode and see it in Linux remoteproc, but it is in attached state. As you previously mentioned, there is a missing fix in R5 SPL to shut down MCU1_1.  I was wondering, how much effort do you think it would take to implement this fix. Would it be a quick and simple task requiring only a few lines of code, or would it be a more involved process?

    Regards,

    Peiren

  • +1 in reply to PEIREN YANG
    TI__Guru 50843 points

    As per the latest SDK roadmap, the SPL support for MCU1_1 in split mode is going to be released as part of SDK 9.1 (TDA4VM) and SDK 9.2 ( remaining platforms including TDA4VH).

    Please let us know if we can close this E2E ticket.

    Thanks.

  • 0 in reply to Praveen Rao
    Prodigy 45 points

    Thanks Praveen, your reply answered the question.