AM5728: [AM5728]: Unable to establish IPC between Linux example application and DSP example firmware

Martin Cvitic

Part Number: AM5728

Hello TI team,

I am in the process of setting up IPC between custom Linux application and custom firmware built using code composer studio but it didn't yield expected outcome due to IOMMU fault.

Their software stacks should be compatible since the buildsystem which build the Linux application is based on TI's 11.01 Processor SDK Linux (IPC stack version 3.52.00.01) and the firmware is based on TI's 5.01.00.11 Processor SDK RTOS (IPC stack version 3.52.0.00).

In order to verify IPC between the A15 host core and TMS320C66x DSP remote core, I have opted to run the example Linux application (app_host) and example firmware (messageq_single.xe66) but I was unable to establish proper message exchange between the cores even though LAD successfully recognizes all the cores. Also, the firmware is up and running but hadshake is nonetheless not possible. See the following figures for more troubleshooting context:

I have ran the NameServerApp application which ran successfully indicating that the IPC stack on the Linux side should be functional which lead me to conclued that the issue stems from the fimware side of the stack:

root@konecs:/sys/bus/platform/drivers/omap-rproc# /usr/bin/NameServerApp 
Entered NameServerApp_startup
LAD_connect() succeeded: ladHandle=0
Calling NameServer_setup()...
params.maxValueLen=4
params.maxNameLen=32
params.checkExisting=1
Created NameServer 'MyNS'
Got another handle to NameServer 'MyNS'
Created NameServer 'MyNS2'
Testing nsHandle
NameServer_addUInt32() returned 0x23800
Trying to add same key (should fail)...
    ...got expected Failure from NameServer_addUInt32()
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadbeef (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadbeef w/ NameServer_remove()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0xdeadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadc0de w/ NameServer_removeEntry()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0x0badc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(Key) succeeded
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar0, 0xbadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar0) returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar1, 0xbadc0df) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar1) returned 0, val=0xbadc0df (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar2, 0xbadc0e0) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar2) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e0 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar3, 0xbadc0e1) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar3) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e1 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar4, 0xbadc0e2) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar4) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e2 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar5, 0xbadc0e3) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar5) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e3 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar6, 0xbadc0e4) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar6) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e4 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar7, 0xbadc0e5) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar7) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e5 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar8, 0xbadc0e6) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar8) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e6 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar9, 0xbadc0e7) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar9) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e7 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(foobar0) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar1) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar2) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar3) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar4) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar5) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar6) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar7) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar8) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar9) succeeded
Testing nsHandle2
NameServer_addUInt32() returned 0x239b0
Trying to add same key (should fail)...
    ...got expected Failure from NameServer_addUInt32()
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadbeef (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadbeef w/ NameServer_remove()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0xdeadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadc0de w/ NameServer_removeEntry()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0x0badc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(Key) succeeded
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar0, 0xbadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar0) returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar1, 0xbadc0df) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar1) returned 0, val=0xbadc0df (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar2, 0xbadc0e0) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar2) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e0 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar3, 0xbadc0e1) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar3) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e1 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar4, 0xbadc0e2) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar4) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e2 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar5, 0xbadc0e3) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar5) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e3 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar6, 0xbadc0e4) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar6) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e4 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar7, 0xbadc0e5) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar7) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e5 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar8, 0xbadc0e6) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar8) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e6 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar9, 0xbadc0e7) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar9) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e7 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(foobar0) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar1) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar2) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar3) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar4) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar5) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar6) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar7) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar8) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar9) succeeded
Deleting nsHandle and nsHandle2...
Testing nsHandleAlias
NameServer_addUInt32() returned 0x23800
Trying to add same key (should fail)...
    ...got expected Failure from NameServer_addUInt32()
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadbeef (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadbeef w/ NameServer_remove()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0xdeadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadc0de w/ NameServer_removeEntry()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0x0badc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(Key) succeeded
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar0, 0xbadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar0) returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar1, 0xbadc0df) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar1) returned 0, val=0xbadc0df (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar2, 0xbadc0e0) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar2) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e0 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar3, 0xbadc0e1) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar3) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e1 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar4, 0xbadc0e2) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar4) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e2 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar5, 0xbadc0e3) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar5) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e3 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar6, 0xbadc0e4) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar6) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e4 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar7, 0xbadc0e5) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar7) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e5 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar8, 0xbadc0e6) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar8) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e6 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar9, 0xbadc0e7) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar9) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e7 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(foobar0) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar1) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar2) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar3) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar4) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar5) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar6) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar7) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar8) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar9) succeeded
Deleting nsHandleAlias...
params.maxValueLen=4
params.maxNameLen=32
params.checkExisting=1
Created NameServer 'MyNS'
Got another handle to NameServer 'MyNS'
Created NameServer 'MyNS2'
Testing nsHandle
NameServer_addUInt32() returned 0x239b0
Trying to add same key (should fail)...
    ...got expected Failure from NameServer_addUInt32()
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadbeef (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadbeef w/ NameServer_remove()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0xdeadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadc0de w/ NameServer_removeEntry()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0x0badc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(Key) succeeded
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar0, 0xbadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar0) returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar1, 0xbadc0df) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar1) returned 0, val=0xbadc0df (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar2, 0xbadc0e0) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar2) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e0 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar3, 0xbadc0e1) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar3) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e1 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar4, 0xbadc0e2) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar4) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e2 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar5, 0xbadc0e3) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar5) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e3 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar6, 0xbadc0e4) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar6) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e4 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar7, 0xbadc0e5) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar7) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e5 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar8, 0xbadc0e6) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar8) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e6 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar9, 0xbadc0e7) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar9) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e7 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(foobar0) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar1) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar2) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar3) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar4) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar5) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar6) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar7) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar8) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar9) succeeded
Testing nsHandle2
NameServer_addUInt32() returned 0x23800
Trying to add same key (should fail)...
    ...got expected Failure from NameServer_addUInt32()
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadbeef (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadbeef w/ NameServer_remove()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0xdeadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadc0de w/ NameServer_removeEntry()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0x0badc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(Key) succeeded
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar0, 0xbadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar0) returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar1, 0xbadc0df) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar1) returned 0, val=0xbadc0df (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar2, 0xbadc0e0) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar2) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e0 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar3, 0xbadc0e1) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar3) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e1 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar4, 0xbadc0e2) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar4) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e2 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar5, 0xbadc0e3) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar5) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e3 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar6, 0xbadc0e4) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar6) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e4 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar7, 0xbadc0e5) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar7) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e5 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar8, 0xbadc0e6) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar8) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e6 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar9, 0xbadc0e7) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar9) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e7 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(foobar0) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar1) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar2) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar3) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar4) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar5) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar6) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar7) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar8) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar9) succeeded
Deleting nsHandle and nsHandle2...
Testing nsHandleAlias
NameServer_addUInt32() returned 0x239b0
Trying to add same key (should fail)...
    ...got expected Failure from NameServer_addUInt32()
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadbeef (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadbeef w/ NameServer_remove()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0xdeadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xdeadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
Removing 0xdeadc0de w/ NameServer_removeEntry()...
NameServer_addUInt32(0x0badc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32() returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(Key) succeeded
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar0, 0xbadc0de) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar0) returned 0, val=0xbadc0de (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar1, 0xbadc0df) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar1) returned 0, val=0xbadc0df (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar2, 0xbadc0e0) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar2) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e0 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar3, 0xbadc0e1) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar3) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e1 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar4, 0xbadc0e2) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar4) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e2 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar5, 0xbadc0e3) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar5) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e3 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar6, 0xbadc0e4) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar6) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e4 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar7, 0xbadc0e5) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar7) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e5 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar8, 0xbadc0e6) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar8) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e6 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_addUInt32(foobar9, 0xbadc0e7) succeeded
NameServer_getUInt32(foobar9) returned 0, val=0xbadc0e7 (was 0x00c0ffee)
NameServer_remove(foobar0) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar1) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar2) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar3) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar4) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar5) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar6) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar7) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar8) succeeded
NameServer_remove(foobar9) succeeded
Deleting nsHandleAlias...
Testing long names...
Created NameServer 'LongNameabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890'
Trying to add a name that exceeds maxNameLen...
    ...got expected Failure from NameServer_addUInt32()
Deleting nsHandle...
Created NameServer 'LongNameabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890'
Trying to get a name that the remote cannot handle...
    ...got expected Failure from NameServer_getUInt32()
Deleting nsHandle...
Created NameServer 'LongNameabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1234567890'
Trying to use an instance name that the remote cannot handle...
    ...got expected Failure from NameServer_getUInt32()
Deleting nsHandle...
Calling NameServer_destroy()...
LAD_disconnect() succeeded

Can you please tell me what do I need to do in order to establish proper communication between the cores. First using the example software and then what do I need to take notice of (other than the usual like kernel configuration , DTS...) when building custom application and custom firmware in Code Composer Studio?

P.S.
Our custom Linux application and custom firware were properly exchanging messages on Linux kernel 4.19 and DSP IPC version 3.50.2.02 but in the current setup (Linux kernel 6.12 and DSP IPC version 3.52.0.00) the same Linux application and custom firmware are unable to communicate.

Best regards,
Martin

2 months ago

0 Josue Zamitiz-Ayala 2 months ago

TI__Mastermind 39956 points

Hello Martin Cvitic ,

Martin Cvitic said:
Their software stacks should be compatible since the buildsystem which build the Linux application is based on TI's 11.01 Processor SDK Linux (IPC stack version 3.52.00.01) and the firmware is based on TI's 5.01.00.11 Processor SDK RTOS (IPC stack version 3.52.0.00).

Can you help me understand this a little better? Are you using an older version of RTOS SDK with an updated IPC module?

The IPC directions from our SDK page clearly point at this issue:

There is a possibility that this will not work and it is not something we test against.

Please clarify.

-Josue

0 Martin Cvitic 1 month ago

Prodigy 50 points

Hi Josue,

I am using the latest RTOS SDK with the latest IPC module.
I have seen the directions from the SDK page, thanks for that.

Looks like there is a versioning issue in your meta-ti layer I think.

ipcdev is tagged to 3.52, while ipc-metadata and ipc-examples are stuck at tag 3.51 which causes a build with mixed up IPC stack versions since so ti-ipc-rtos is building ipcdev 3.52 source against 3.51 metadata and examples.

More precisely, commit 7ea7feede0603768a48431105760bbb8e764d112 ("ti-ipc.inc: Bump SRCREV to latest for ipcdev project") updated TI_IPC_SRCREV in ti-ipc.inc to commit 7f76e5cc, which corresponds to ipcdev tag 3.52.00.01 - https://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-ti/diff/?id=7ea7feede0603768a48431105760bbb8e764d112.

PV in ti-ipc-common.inc was not updated and still reads 3.51.00.00 (https://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-ti/tree/meta-ti-bsp/recipes-ti/ipc/ti-ipc-common.inc?h=scarthgap).

Nonetheless I have tried think that either PV in ti-ipc-common.inc should be bumped, or TI_IPC_SRCREV in ti-ipc.inc should be reverted to the 3.51.00.00 tag commit (36b2fe589de8d2d79db7c076c2ca3b0a7488fc15) until ipc-metadata and ipc-examples are also tagged at 3.52.

0 Josue Zamitiz-Ayala 1 month ago in reply to Martin Cvitic

TI__Mastermind 39956 points

Hello,

I am Out of Office until tomorrow due to US holiday.

Responses will be delayed.

Best Regards,

Josue Zamitiz-Ayala

0 Josue Zamitiz-Ayala 1 month ago in reply to Josue Zamitiz-Ayala

TI__Mastermind 39956 points

Hello Martin,

I will check in with dev and will let you know what they say. I will update the thread by Thursday

-Josue

+1 Josue Zamitiz-Ayala 1 month ago in reply to Josue Zamitiz-Ayala

TI__Mastermind 39956 points

Martin,

How are you using the SDK? Are you piecing your own together it yourself for your own project or are you using the Processor SDK as downloaded from https://www.ti.com/tool/download/PROCESSOR-SDK-LINUX-AM57X/11.01.02.01?

Our Dev believes that the message might mean that you are missing a processor SDK patch:

https://github.com/TexasInstruments/meta-tisdk/blob/am57x/meta-ti-foundational/recipes-kernel/linux/linux-ti-staging/v2-0001-TI-HACK-rpmsg-introduce-rpmsg_ns_msg_ext-structur.patch

-Josue

0 Martin Cvitic 1 month ago in reply to Josue Zamitiz-Ayala

Prodigy 50 points

Hello Josue,

I am using the Processor SDK which I already downloaded from the same link you provided.

Aslo, your Dev is correct, I had to patch the kernel but found it elsewhere and managed to run the example application and firmware properly.
I wasn't aware though that you have patches hosted on GitHub. They could be really useful.

Best regards,
Martin

0 Josue Zamitiz-Ayala 1 month ago in reply to Martin Cvitic

TI__Mastermind 39956 points

Good news Martin!

I am glad you could now run the example well!

Best,

Josue

Processors

Processors forum

AM5728: [AM5728]: Unable to establish IPC between Linux example application and DSP example firmware