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.

RTSC Platform for OMAP-L138

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: OMAP-L138, OMAPL138

Hello,

How I can create a new platform configuration for OMAP-L138 using CCSv5 GUI which will enable both the ARM and the DSP cores configuration?

  • I think I answered this question in another thread: http://e2e.ti.com/support/embedded/bios/f/355/p/268468/938293.aspx#938293.
    If not, please let me know.

  • Not exactly. When you are viewing existing expOMAPL138 platform configuration you can choose one of two cores like below:

    I am wondering how I can create a new platform configuration to have as well possibility of choosing one of two cores in OMAP (ARM and DSP). If you will check the 'C:\ti\xdctools_3_23_02_47\packages\ti\platforms\evmOMAPL138\Platform.xdc' file you can see that it is much different from the file that is generated by the CCS platform configuration tool. Was it made 'by hand' or using this graphical tool in CCS ?

  • The platforms in xdctools/packages directory are all created manually, and that's why they can have multiple cores. The Platform Wizard creates simpler platforms that do not support multiple cores. You could use the existing OMAPL138 platform as a starting point and change it manually. It would require writing some code in Platform.xs that will recognize if you are building for DSP or ARM and adjust DDR settings accordingly, and then you would need to build that new platform package with the xdc command line tool.

    Depending on how familiar with XDCtools yo are, it could be an easy task, but I am not sure why would you want to do that instead of creating two platforms with the Platform Wizard, one OMAPL138DSP and one OMAPL138ARM, for example. If you still want to create a platform manually, I can help you.

  • Well if there is a significant work to do it manually then I will resign from configuring it like that or move it later into the future. The reason why I would like to have it like that is a consistent configuration. What I mean is I would like to have one platform configuration file instead of two 'cores configuration files' named 'platform configuration files' which together will give platform configuration.