J721S2XSOMXEVM: Shared Memory Allocator Failed for SDK 11.1.04 QNX (TIOVX Shared Memory)

For more info, we are using ,

Hi Varadharaj,

Is there any change in the memory map or you are using default sdk ?

I see 0xa8000000 points to ipc_vring memory. I am looping in qnx expert to look into this.

Regards,
Gokul

Hi Gokul,

  Currently we are using SDK11.1 and QNX SDP7.1 .. we cannot go for the SDP8.0 to the project. We need to stay with SDP7.1 in EVM as well.

Hi Varadharaj Ellappan,

Varadharaj Ellappan said:

Dec 31 00:49:17.702          shmemallocator.196623                 slog    129  initSHM:Block[0] @ 0xa8000000 has free-mem = 0x1c00000 - 28 M

This does not seem correct. Instead of 0xa8000000, it must be 0x900000000. Also, the size must be 0x3C000000 (960 M).

Can you describe how you are building the PSDK QNX components?

Hope you are following the PSDK RTOS documentation to build the QNX components, including the shmemallocator? 

see https://software-dl.ti.com/jacinto7/esd/processor-sdk-qnx-j721s2/11_01_00_04/exports/docs/getting_started_j721s2.html#psdk-qnx-and-vision-apps-demos (section 2..2.1) . Note that we must have build variable VISION_APPS_BUILD_FLAGS_MAK = 1 before PSDK QNX components.

When building from SDK_builder, this build variable gets used. (see vision apps build documentation )

Let us know.

Thanks.

Praveen Rao :

What we observed is that neither the default QNX BSP nor the TI-provided .ti_build files clearly document the required starting address. When we inspected the sharedmemallocator, we found that the VISION_APPS_BUILD_FLAGS_MAK file is the only place where the 0x90000 address is defined.

TI’s documentation states that PSDK-QA should be built separately, and that sdk_builder/makesdk.sh should also be built separately. However, the build flag for the shared memory allocator is only applied when the root path is sdk_builder. This created confusion because TI suggested building PSDK-QA independently, which causes the flag not to be applied.

Eventually, we discovered that when building PSDK-QA separately, we must explicitly enable Vision Apps (e.g., export BUILD_VISION_APPS=1). Additionally, the BSP’s ti_evm.build must also start with the same 0x90000 address—something that is not documented anywhere.

Since this information is missing from TI’s documentation, it led to significant confusion. After we configured Vision Apps correctly and updated ti_evm.build to start at the correct address, everything finally started working. We hope this build sequence is indeed the correct one. attaching snapshot also this part also important 

Praveen Rao Accepted 

The documentation only lists build steps that should not be followed, but it does not explain the correct procedure. In the Vision Apps documentation, it only mentions the ./make_sdk.sh command, which never builds PSDK QA with Vision Apps enabled. This needs to be clearly documented.

The Vision Apps guide should explicitly state how to build various BSP configurations—for example, how and when to use make qnx or other required build commands. Currently, this purpose is not explained anywhere.

Regarding the carve-out settings, the TI-proposed carve-out values are not correct. As mentioned earlier, the correct address should be 0x9000, but this is not shown in the documentation.

Additionally, we are not working on a custom board; we are using the J721S2 EVM (mid-ECO revision).  Thanks for the Support 

Venkata Mahesh Kumar Jandhyala said:

The documentation only lists build steps that should not be followed, but it does not explain the correct procedure.

It clearly says to follow the Vision Apps user guide, not sure what need to be explict here.

Venkata Mahesh Kumar Jandhyala said:

In the Vision Apps documentation, it only mentions the ./make_sdk.sh command, which never builds PSDK QA with Vision Apps enabled. This needs to be clearly documented.

In the vision apps build guide, there is a section to build for QNX+RTOS. So we disagree with the statement - "which never builds PSDK QA with Vision Apps enabled".

Venkata Mahesh Kumar Jandhyala said:

Regarding the carve-out settings, the TI-proposed carve-out values are not correct. As mentioned earlier, the correct address should be 0x9000, but this is not shown in the documentation.

We are not sure what is incorrect. Can you give us more details on the code/documentation that is not correct? We will confirm if there is any discrepancy.

Venkata Mahesh Kumar Jandhyala said:

we are not working on a custom board; we are using the J721S2 EVM (mid-ECO revision)

Ok, good to know. Thanks.