Re: Problem in Cross compiling Pwlib for LINUX

Re: Problem in Cross compiling Pwlib for LINUX

[Ale ppc]

Hi Arunkumar,


I have changed ptbuildopts.mak in this way :

    ENDLDLIBS += -lpthread -lcrypto -lresolv

    HAS_OPENSSL =
    HAS_OPENLDAP =
    HAS_EXPAT =
    HAS_SDL =
    TRY_1394AVC =
    TRY_1394DC =

and in ptbuildopts.h undefine :

    #define P_LDAP 1
    #define P_EXPAT 1
    #define P_SSL 1
    #define P_USE_SYSTEM_SWAB 1

I have erased the default library lber, dap, dap_r, ssl, expat, dl because I
did not need of them.
In fact then I have well cross-compiled openH323 src file.
To test my board I have used the callgen323 (v 1.2.6) application program
that came from openh323 sourceforge site.
I don't test other application prg.

Because I work fine with Motorola MPC82xx and ARM7TDMI tecnology, and we are
interested to port H323 on uClinux for ARM7 too. But we have found several
problems using siap-uClinx-xx cross-compile tool. If you know about related
problem can give me a search path to solve the question?

Regards,
Alessandro


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

question on PPC performance

[John Zhou]

Dear all,

I have an question on PPC performance:

I have linux running based on mpc8250 with 200/166/66 clock configuration. But, I found that every CPU instruction used about 5 ns when accessing SDRAM, otherwise, every CPU instruction used about 15 ns when accessing other devices such as port A/B/C/D, immr, etc, except accessing SDRAM.

Thanks any help!

John
=================================================
The function I used is:
void performance_test(void)
{
					unsigned long i, d1, d2;
					static unsigned long kkk;
					unsigned short time;
					volatile unsigned long* portC = ( volatile unsigned long*)0xF0010D50;

					volatile unsigned long * tmp = &kkk;
					*(volatile unsigned char*)0xF0010D80 &= ~0xB0;
					*(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D92 = 0x0002;
					*(volatile unsigned char*)0xF0010D80 |= 0x10;

 					*(volatile unsigned long*)0xF0010D44 &= ~0x00000002;
					d1 = *(volatile unsigned long*)0xF0010D50;
					d1 &= ~0x00000003;
					d2 = d1 | 0x00000002;
					d1 |= 0x00000001;

					*(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E = 0;
					for (i=0; i<1000; i++)
					{

						*portC = d1;
						*portC = d2;
					}
					time = *(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E;
					printk ("#test2: 2 access loop 1000 times use %dns\r\n", time*15);

					*(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E = 0;
					for (i=0; i<1000; i++)
					{

						*tmp = d1;
						*tmp = d2;
					}
					time = *(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E;
					printk ("#test3: 2 access loop 1000 times use %dns\r\n", time*15);
}

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

RE: question on PPC performance

[John Zhou]

my questions is:

why is it 15 ns when accessing other devices such as port A/B/C/D, immr, etc, except accessing SDRAM, but about 5 ns when accessing SDRAM?

Thanks in advance!
John

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
[mailto:owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org]On Behalf Of John
Zhou
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:22 PM
To: 'linuxppc-embedded'
Subject: question on PPC performance



Dear all,

I have an question on PPC performance:

I have linux running based on mpc8250 with 200/166/66 clock configuration. But, I found that every CPU instruction used about 5 ns when accessing SDRAM, otherwise, every CPU instruction used about 15 ns when accessing other devices such as port A/B/C/D, immr, etc, except accessing SDRAM.

Thanks any help!

John
=================================================
The function I used is:
void performance_test(void)
{
					unsigned long i, d1, d2;
					static unsigned long kkk;
					unsigned short time;
					volatile unsigned long* portC = ( volatile unsigned long*)0xF0010D50;

					volatile unsigned long * tmp = &kkk;
					*(volatile unsigned char*)0xF0010D80 &= ~0xB0;
					*(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D92 = 0x0002;
					*(volatile unsigned char*)0xF0010D80 |= 0x10;

 					*(volatile unsigned long*)0xF0010D44 &= ~0x00000002;
					d1 = *(volatile unsigned long*)0xF0010D50;
					d1 &= ~0x00000003;
					d2 = d1 | 0x00000002;
					d1 |= 0x00000001;

					*(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E = 0;
					for (i=0; i<1000; i++)
					{

						*portC = d1;
						*portC = d2;
					}
					time = *(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E;
					printk ("#test2: 2 access loop 1000 times use %dns\r\n", time*15);

					*(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E = 0;
					for (i=0; i<1000; i++)
					{

						*tmp = d1;
						*tmp = d2;
					}
					time = *(volatile unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E;
					printk ("#test3: 2 access loop 1000 times use %dns\r\n", time*15);
}


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

RE: question on PPC performance

[VanBaren, Gerald (AGRE)]

...because you are NOT accessing SDRAM when you are accessing SDRAM.  You are accessing the processor's internal cache, which is running at 200MHz.  In fact, you probably are not even accessing internal cache -- IIRC, the 82xx has a write posting queue so, when you do a write, it gets queued but does not wait for the write to complete.  When you do a read of the same location, the bus interface goes gets the value out of the write queue, so you are only reading and writing a hidden internal register in the 82xx, not SDRAM and probably not even the internal cache.

Turn off the data cache and run your test again, you will be astounded at how slow it is.

When you are accessing a port, you need a bus transaction.  As your benchmark showed, it takes more time to access a built-in port via the 82xx internal bus.  Since your bus is clocked at 66MHz and you are measuring 15nS, it appears that accessing the built-in 82xx ports is running at the bus speed.

Your benchmark is very, very simplistic and you are getting correspondingly simplistic measurements.  I don't see any calculation or compensation in your benchmark for the overhead of the loop.  As pointed out above, it is not measuring what you think it is measuring.

gvb


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
> [mailto:owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org]On Behalf Of John
> Zhou
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:32 AM
> To: 'linuxppc-embedded'
> Subject: RE: question on PPC performance
>
>
>
> my questions is:
>
> why is it 15 ns when accessing other devices such as port
> A/B/C/D, immr, etc, except accessing SDRAM, but about 5 ns
> when accessing SDRAM?
>
> Thanks in advance!
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
> [mailto:owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org]On Behalf Of John
> Zhou
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:22 PM
> To: 'linuxppc-embedded'
> Subject: question on PPC performance
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> I have an question on PPC performance:
>
> I have linux running based on mpc8250 with 200/166/66 clock
> configuration. But, I found that every CPU instruction used
> about 5 ns when accessing SDRAM, otherwise, every CPU
> instruction used about 15 ns when accessing other devices
> such as port A/B/C/D, immr, etc, except accessing SDRAM.
>
> Thanks any help!
>
> John
> =================================================
> The function I used is:
> void performance_test(void)
> {
> 					unsigned long i, d1, d2;
> 					static unsigned long kkk;
> 					unsigned short time;
> 					volatile unsigned long*
> portC = ( volatile unsigned long*)0xF0010D50;
>
> 					volatile unsigned long
> * tmp = &kkk;
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> char*)0xF0010D80 &= ~0xB0;
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> short*)0xF0010D92 = 0x0002;
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> char*)0xF0010D80 |= 0x10;
>
>  					*(volatile unsigned
> long*)0xF0010D44 &= ~0x00000002;
> 					d1 = *(volatile
> unsigned long*)0xF0010D50;
> 					d1 &= ~0x00000003;
> 					d2 = d1 | 0x00000002;
> 					d1 |= 0x00000001;
>
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> short*)0xF0010D9E = 0;
> 					for (i=0; i<1000; i++)
> 					{
>
> 						*portC = d1;
> 						*portC = d2;
> 					}
> 					time = *(volatile
> unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E;
> 					printk ("#test2: 2
> access loop 1000 times use %dns\r\n", time*15);
>
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> short*)0xF0010D9E = 0;
> 					for (i=0; i<1000; i++)
> 					{
>
> 						*tmp = d1;
> 						*tmp = d2;
> 					}
> 					time = *(volatile
> unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E;
> 					printk ("#test3: 2
> access loop 1000 times use %dns\r\n", time*15);
> }
>
>


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

RE: question on PPC performance

[John Zhou]

Now, I have another question to be answered.

In Linux Kernel 2.4.x, where to configure cacheable or uncacheable area of
SDRAM? ( I used Kernel 2.4.1 )

Thanks any help!
John

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
[mailto:owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org]On Behalf Of
VanBaren, Gerald (AGRE)
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 9:33 PM
To: linuxppc-embedded
Subject: RE: question on PPC performance



...because you are NOT accessing SDRAM when you are accessing SDRAM.  You
are accessing the processor's internal cache, which is running at 200MHz.
In fact, you probably are not even accessing internal cache -- IIRC, the
82xx has a write posting queue so, when you do a write, it gets queued but
does not wait for the write to complete.  When you do a read of the same
location, the bus interface goes gets the value out of the write queue, so
you are only reading and writing a hidden internal register in the 82xx,
not SDRAM and probably not even the internal cache.

Turn off the data cache and run your test again, you will be astounded at
how slow it is.

When you are accessing a port, you need a bus transaction.  As your
benchmark showed, it takes more time to access a built-in port via the
82xx internal bus.  Since your bus is clocked at 66MHz and you are
measuring 15nS, it appears that accessing the built-in 82xx ports is
running at the bus speed.

Your benchmark is very, very simplistic and you are getting
correspondingly simplistic measurements.  I don't see any calculation or
compensation in your benchmark for the overhead of the loop.  As pointed
out above, it is not measuring what you think it is measuring.

gvb


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
> [mailto:owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org]On Behalf Of John
> Zhou
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:32 AM
> To: 'linuxppc-embedded'
> Subject: RE: question on PPC performance
>
>
>
> my questions is:
>
> why is it 15 ns when accessing other devices such as port
> A/B/C/D, immr, etc, except accessing SDRAM, but about 5 ns
> when accessing SDRAM?
>
> Thanks in advance!
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org
> [mailto:owner-linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org]On Behalf Of John
> Zhou
> Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:22 PM
> To: 'linuxppc-embedded'
> Subject: question on PPC performance
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> I have an question on PPC performance:
>
> I have linux running based on mpc8250 with 200/166/66 clock
> configuration. But, I found that every CPU instruction used
> about 5 ns when accessing SDRAM, otherwise, every CPU
> instruction used about 15 ns when accessing other devices
> such as port A/B/C/D, immr, etc, except accessing SDRAM.
>
> Thanks any help!
>
> John
> =================================================
> The function I used is:
> void performance_test(void)
> {
> 					unsigned long i, d1, d2;
> 					static unsigned long kkk;
> 					unsigned short time;
> 					volatile unsigned long*
> portC = ( volatile unsigned long*)0xF0010D50;
>
> 					volatile unsigned long
> * tmp = &kkk;
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> char*)0xF0010D80 &= ~0xB0;
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> short*)0xF0010D92 = 0x0002;
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> char*)0xF0010D80 |= 0x10;
>
>  					*(volatile unsigned
> long*)0xF0010D44 &= ~0x00000002;
> 					d1 = *(volatile
> unsigned long*)0xF0010D50;
> 					d1 &= ~0x00000003;
> 					d2 = d1 | 0x00000002;
> 					d1 |= 0x00000001;
>
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> short*)0xF0010D9E = 0;
> 					for (i=0; i<1000; i++)
> 					{
>
> 						*portC = d1;
> 						*portC = d2;
> 					}
> 					time = *(volatile
> unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E;
> 					printk ("#test2: 2
> access loop 1000 times use %dns\r\n", time*15);
>
> 					*(volatile unsigned
> short*)0xF0010D9E = 0;
> 					for (i=0; i<1000; i++)
> 					{
>
> 						*tmp = d1;
> 						*tmp = d2;
> 					}
> 					time = *(volatile
> unsigned short*)0xF0010D9E;
> 					printk ("#test3: 2
> access loop 1000 times use %dns\r\n", time*15);
> }
>
>


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/