• State Resolved
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 3 replies
  • Subscribers 97 subscribers
  • Views 444 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.

66AK2H14: Timers interrupts documentation error

Clement FR
Genius 4750 points

Part Number: 66AK2H14

Hello everyone

In the 66AK2H14 Data manual (SPRS866G, nov 2012) I think there is a mistake in the documentation about the timers interrupts

In table 8.24 CIC0 Event Inputs

if we go to this part of the table

Issues

1) the description of interrupts 442 and 444 doesn't match : it says interrupt high but the timer is named "INTL" (so 'low')

2) there is no TIMER_16_INTH ; TIMER_17_INTH ; TIMER_18_INTH ; TIMER_19_INTH

3) it is surprising to see TIMER_14_ and TIMER_15_ as they are already present in 'Table 8-22. System Event Mapping — C66x CorePac Primary Interrupts'

I think the table should be

433 TIMER_12_INTL
434 TIMER_12_INTH
435 TIMER_13_INTL
436 TIMER_13_INTH
437 TIMER_16_INTL
438 TIMER_16_INTH
439 TIMER_17_INTL
440 TIMER_17_INTH
441 TIMER_18_INTL
442 TIMER_18_INTH
443 TIMER_19_INTL
444 TIMER_19_INTH

which would make much more sense

--> Do you agree with the documentation error and the proposed correction ?

Best regards
Clement

  • 0
    TI__Guru**** 161600 points

    Hi Clement,

    I think you are correct. But let me confirm with the design team.

    Best Regards,
    Yordan

  • 0 in reply to Yordan Kovachev
    TI__Guru* 95265 points

    Clement,

    Thanks for your findings in the K2H timer interrupt table to C66x core. I checked with the design team:

    The table in the 66AK2H14 Data manual (SPRS866G, Nov 2012) is the final version and it was what implemented in silicon:

    • The “High” interrupts for timer 16, 17, 18 and 19 are routed to ARM_GIC only.
    • Timer 14 and 15 appearing as both primary interrupts, listing them as secondary is probably just an oversight.

    I will file a ticket to correct this.

    Regards, Eric

  • 0 in reply to lding
    Genius 4750 points

    OK

    thanks for checking with the design team. It's a little surprising though.

    anyway we'll use only the timers connected as primary interrupts in our application.

    regards