• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Subscribers 98 subscribers
  • Views 954 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.

Build fail with custom 66AK2H06 platform

Kjetil Østerås
Intellectual 370 points
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: 66AK2H06

Hi,

We are building a dsp application for the 66AK2H06 chip, so I want to create a custom RTSC platform for this setup. So I open up CCS and go to Tools -> RTSC Tools -> Platform -> New. I choose these settings:

Device Family = c6000
Device Name = TMS320C66AK2H06

Now when I try to build using this custom platform as the target I get an error that says:

...
ti.ipc.remoteproc.Resource.xdt - unable to provide resource table (TMS320C66AK2H06, 6600)
...

So it seems that the ti.ipc.remoteproc.Resource module does not support the TMS320C66AK2H06 chip yet, is this true? I have tried the ipc module from mcsdk 3.0.4.18 which is ipc 3.0.4.29, and I have also tried ipc version 3.22.2.11 from this website http://downloads.ti.com/dsps/dsps_public_sw/sdo_sb/targetcontent/ipc/ but they both give me the same error.

Is there a known workaround for this issue?

5226.7607.buildlog.txt

  • 0
    TI__Guru* 81335 points

    Hi,

    Moved this thread to TI-RTOS forum for faster response.

    Thank you.

  • 0
    TI__Mastermind 18260 points

    Kjetil Østerås said:
    ti.ipc.remoteproc.Resource.xdt - unable to provide resource table (TMS320C66AK2H06, 6600)

    Kjetil,

    The Ipc 3.22.02.11 product supports the following Keystone devices:
        TMS320C66AK2E05 - 1 DSP core
        TMS320TCI6630K2L - 4 DSP cores
        TMS320TCI6636/TMS320TCI6638 - 8 DSP cores

    I see from the K2H product page that you linked that it can have 4 or 8 DSP cores.  Can you try using one of the above devices in Ipc configuration?

    The above devices correspond to different PLATFORM names in <ipc>/products.mak, so you would want to set PLATFORM to the corresponding name in products.mak (available choices are listed in comments just above PLATFORM =).

    Regards,

    - Rob

  • 0 in reply to Robert Tivy
    Intellectual 370 points

    Hi Robert,

    What do you mean by setting PLATFORM to the corresponding name in products.mak? I tried changing the platform.mak file so it says:

    PLATFORM ?= tci66c8

    However the build still fails after changing this since the ti.ipc.remoteproc.Resource.xdt relies on values from the xdc configuration file. The only way I could get it to build propperly is to create a custom platform based on the TMS320TCI6638 chip, this builds and seems to run. But I don't have a good feeling about building for a platform that is different than the one I'm actually running the code on. I guess this can have some unwanted side effects.

    Do you know when the ipc module will support the 66AK2H devices?

  • 0 in reply to Kjetil Østerås
    TI__Mastermind 18260 points

    Kjetil Østerås said:
    What do you mean by setting PLATFORM to the corresponding name in products.mak? I tried changing the platform.mak file so it says:

    PLATFORM ?= tci66c8

    The Ipc product itself uses a file named 'products.mak' for various build parameters.  I'm not sure how your MCSDK file platform.mak fits into that.

    The file ipc-bios.bld maps the "PLATFORM" variable from products.mak (or PLATFORM can be defined on the XDC command line) to an actual RTSC platform.  I see that it maps the PLATFORM name TCI6636 to the RTSC platform "ti.platforms.evmTCI6636K2H".  Here's a link to that platform's definition: http://rtsc.eclipse.org/cdoc-tip/index.html#ti/platforms/evmTCI6636K2H/Platform.html.

    It would seem that you want to use TCI6636 from an Ipc tree perspective.

    Kjetil Østerås said:
    The only way I could get it to build propperly is to create a custom platform based on the TMS320TCI6638 chip, this builds and seems to run. But I don't have a good feeling about building for a platform that is different than the one I'm actually running the code on

    There is not much in the Ipc product that cares about the actual platform.  Most platform-specific information comes via the .cfg file, and Ipc just uses what it's told to use.  The main thing that PLATFORM is used for is host-side ARM stuff, mostly MultiProc's remote core ID list (the DSP's concept of MultiProc's core list comes from the .cfg file itself).

    Does this make sense?

    I would recommend that you use TCI6636 as your PLATFORM.

    Regards,

    - Rob