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.

TDA4AL-Q1: Delay in response during ICMP ping test

Part Number: TDA4AL-Q1

Tool/software:

PC → QNX TDA4AL Board ping test
Doing a test in this situation. It checks the response time on the QNX board displayed on the PC. On average, it takes 0.09 ms to respond, but the delayed response of 20 to 100 ms occurs intermittently.
A function called cpsw_MonitorPhy is called every two seconds on the qnx driver.

Symptoms are as follows.

Case 1. If you annotate Enet_periodicTick, there is no delay response.

Case 2. If only mutex_lock and unlock in Enet_periodicTick function are annotated, there is a delay response.
(It doesn't seem to be a mutex effect)

case 3. Network fails to annotate TI function Enet_getPerHandle or EnetPer_periodicTick

Enet_getPerHandle, EnetPer_periodicTick seems to be a problem, but I wonder if functions like delay are used within that function.

  • Hello,

    Can you tell us the following to help understand the issue:

    1.  QNX SDP version
    2.  QNX BSP version being used
    3. TI PSDK QNX version being used
    4. Are you using io-pkt and io-sock network stack?

    Thanks.

  • After reading the descriptions, we understand you are using the io-pkt devnp driver.

    We don't think Enet_getPerHandle would cause any problem, since it is a simple inline function. So, it could be the EnetPer_periodicTick, which maps to the Cpsw_periodicTick, could be the problem.

    We will check internally with our team and get back with their feedback.

    Thanks.

  • Thank you for your reply

    1.  QNX SDP version -> QNX710
    2.  QNX BSP version being used -> BSP_ti-j721s2-tda4vmeco-evm_br-710_be-710_SVN970946_JBN9
    3. TI PSDK QNX version being used -> ti-processor-sdk-rtos-j721s2-evm-09_02_00_05
    4. Are you using io-pkt and io-sock network stack? -> io-pkt-v6-hc

  • Thanks for the details. We concur with them.

    The team is still looking into this. Will revert once we have their feedback.

    Thanks.