New Linux PowerPC development

New Linux PowerPC development

[Cindy Peters]

I am looking for some advice on the best PowerPC processor to use for a new
embedded board design. Some features that the board needs to support is a
hard drive ( i.e. IDE), 10/100BaseT Ethernet support, and a large size of
RAM (maybe about 1GByte or more). We have previously completed a design
using the MPC823 so we have the experience and the code available as far as
the initialization of the processor, boot code, ramdisk, and Linux kernel.
The MPC823, however, does not have an IDE or PCI interface for a hard disk.
We feel we would have to design an interface into an FPGA. It doesn't
support 100BaseT either. We are also looking at using either the
MPC8260/MPC8265 or the IBM 405GP. I have been browsing through the
mailing-list archives and have seen that these processors are both widely
used. I would like some feedback from people that have experience in using
these processors with Linux and what recommendations they have.

Thank you,

C. Peters
Adaptive Micro-Ware, Inc.

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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Grant Erickson]

On Tue, 24 Jul 2001, Cindy Peters wrote:
> I am looking for some advice on the best PowerPC processor to use for
> a new embedded board design. Some features that the board needs to
> support is a hard drive ( i.e. IDE), 10/100BaseT Ethernet support, and
> a large size of RAM (maybe about 1GByte or more). We have previously
> completed a design using the MPC823 so we have the experience and the
> code available as far as the initialization of the processor, boot
> code, ramdisk, and Linux kernel. The MPC823, however, does not have an
> IDE or PCI interface for a hard disk. We feel we would have to design
> an interface into an FPGA. It doesn't support 100BaseT either. We are
> also looking at using either the MPC8260/MPC8265 or the IBM 405GP. I
> have been browsing through the mailing-list archives and have seen
> that these processors are both widely used. I would like some feedback
> from people that have experience in using these processors with Linux
> and what recommendations they have.

Cindy,

I've been engaged in several PowerPC 405GP projects since IBM was at
Rev. A silicon and the hardware itself has come along nicely to date (now
at Rev. E) and has proven to have been an excellent choice in those
projects. Of particular benefit is the system integration it affords with
the PCI bridge, I2C controller, serial controller, SDRAM controller, and
Etherner MAC all on-chip.

As for software support, the GCC line (2.95.x is all I've used) and
binutils line all support the processor quite well. So, general
development should be a non-issue.

As others here have intimated, Linux support is pretty good, depending on
which kernel release you're using; however, it's still a bit bleeding edge
at this point and doesn't appear to have smoothly integrated itself into
the main PowerPC source tree. But, people are working hard on that issue
as I understand and this should fall into place in short time.

Regards,

Grant Erickson


--
 Grant Erickson                       University of Minnesota Alumni
  o mail:erick205@umn.edu                                 1996 BSEE
  o http://www.umn.edu/~erick205                          1998 MSEE


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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Dan Malek]

Cindy Peters wrote:

> The MPC823, however, does not have an IDE or PCI interface for a hard disk.

Sure it does.  Just use the PCMCIA.

> We feel we would have to design an interface into an FPGA.

This is also a solution many people use.  Lots less expensive and
less complex than a PCI adapter.

> .... It doesn't
> support 100BaseT either.

So, the 832 loses here :-).

> ..... We are also looking at using either the
> MPC8260/MPC8265 or the IBM 405GP.

Wow.  The 823, 405, 8260 span a huge range in performance and features
(and price).  You need to consider some other requirements to make this
decision.  If the 823 would be enough performance, you can step up to
the 860(D/T/P) and get more performance.  Depending upon the application,
the 860P can be higher performance than the 405 because it will offload
the integrated peripherals to the CPM.  The highest performance of the
bunch is the 82xx, which also includes hardware floating point, if that
is important.

> .... I would like some feedback from people that have experience in using
> these processors with Linux and what recommendations they have.

I've used them all, and they all have advantages and disadvantages.
You didn't list many requirements that would clearly show one is better
suited for your application.  Based on what you said, and past experience
with the 823, I would choose something from the 855/860 family.


	-- Dan

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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Ralph Blach]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1707 bytes --]

Dan,

You forgot to mention the internal full duplex PLB on the 405.  ON the
405GP,
the Ethernet, PCI, EBC and memory are connected with a full duplex PLB
64 bit bus.

Its not a performance slouch either.

Chip
Dan Malek wrote:
>
> Cindy Peters wrote:
>
> > The MPC823, however, does not have an IDE or PCI interface for a hard disk.
>
> Sure it does.  Just use the PCMCIA.
>
> > We feel we would have to design an interface into an FPGA.
>
> This is also a solution many people use.  Lots less expensive and
> less complex than a PCI adapter.
>
> > .... It doesn't
> > support 100BaseT either.
>
> So, the 832 loses here :-).
>
> > ..... We are also looking at using either the
> > MPC8260/MPC8265 or the IBM 405GP.
>
> Wow.  The 823, 405, 8260 span a huge range in performance and features
> (and price).  You need to consider some other requirements to make this
> decision.  If the 823 would be enough performance, you can step up to
> the 860(D/T/P) and get more performance.  Depending upon the application,
> the 860P can be higher performance than the 405 because it will offload
> the integrated peripherals to the CPM.  The highest performance of the
> bunch is the 82xx, which also includes hardware floating point, if that
> is important.
>
> > .... I would like some feedback from people that have experience in using
> > these processors with Linux and what recommendations they have.
>
> I've used them all, and they all have advantages and disadvantages.
> You didn't list many requirements that would clearly show one is better
> suited for your application.  Based on what you said, and past experience
> with the 823, I would choose something from the 855/860 family.
>
>         -- Dan
>

[-- Attachment #2: Card for Ralph Blach --]
[-- Type: text/x-vcard, Size: 247 bytes --]

begin:vcard
n:Blach;Ralph
tel;work:919-543-1207
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:www.ibm.com
org:IBM MicroElectronics
adr:;;3039 Cornwallis		;RTP;NC;27709;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:rcblach@raleigh.ibm.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;15936
fn:Ralph Blach
end:vcard

RE: New Linux PowerPC development

[Cindy Peters]

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Malek [mailto:dan@mvista.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 12:27 PM
To: Cindy Peters
Cc: 'linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org'
Subject: Re: New Linux PowerPC development


Dan Malek wrote:

>Cindy Peters wrote:

>> The MPC823, however, does not have an IDE or PCI interface for a hard
disk.

>Sure it does.  Just use the PCMCIA.

>> We feel we would have to design an interface into an FPGA.

>This is also a solution many people use.  Lots less expensive and
>less complex than a PCI adapter.

We have just recently been instructed by management to stay with the MPC823
in order to re-use the previous software and hardware development as much as
possible. We are looking at using some VHDL IP provided by Open Cores (this
is very new) for the IDE interface. Are you familiar with this?

The VHDL code uses a processor independent interface called a wishbone
interface. I don't know much about it yet. I don't know if this is something
standard or just developed for Open Cores. Do you (or anyone else) know of
any driver software that may be available for this interface?

>	-- Dan

Also, I am trying to determine the approximate time it takes the 823 to
access memory (i.e. external EDO DRAM). Does anyone know?

I have downloaded the lmbench software to determine some benchmarking
information. I am not sure how to build it for the PPC. I have a cross
compiler development environment setup in a subdirectory. Can someone help
me with this?

Thanks.
Cindy


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

RE: New Linux PowerPC development

[Grant Erickson]

On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Cindy Peters wrote:
> I have downloaded the lmbench software to determine some benchmarking
> information. I am not sure how to build it for the PPC. I have a cross
> compiler development environment setup in a subdirectory. Can someone
> help me with this?

MontaVista reportedly has this as part of their at-cost HHL kit. However,
I am not aware of any monetarily-free bundles of this cross-compiled for
various architectures.

It's been on my to-do list to work on this; however, my experience thus
far is that this is not entirely straightforward to cross-compile based on
what's in the package at present.

I'm trying to do some PCMCIA CompactFlash vs. discrete flash + JFFS2
benchmarking, so I'll let you know if I get anywhere with it.

Regards,

Grant


--
 Grant Erickson                       University of Minnesota Alumni
  o mail:erick205@umn.edu                                 1996 BSEE
  o http://www.umn.edu/~erick205                          1998 MSEE


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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Matthew Locke]

Grant Erickson wrote:

> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Cindy Peters wrote:
>
>> I have downloaded the lmbench software to determine some benchmarking
>> information. I am not sure how to build it for the PPC. I have a cross
>> compiler development environment setup in a subdirectory. Can someone
>> help me with this?
>
>
> MontaVista reportedly has this as part of their at-cost HHL kit. However,
> I am not aware of any monetarily-free bundles of this cross-compiled for
> various architectures.

Our tool-chain is publicly available on our ftp site for several architectures (including 8xx). ftp://ftp.mvista.com


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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Cort Dougan]

Not the toolchain included with 2.0, though.

} Our tool-chain is publicly available on our ftp site for several architectures (including 8xx). ftp://ftp.mvista.com


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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Mark Hatle]

We were going to release it, but if you read the lmbench license you
will find out that contrary to popular belief it is not considered "free
software".  Basically if you use lmbench for commerical purposes, or
need to patch it to allow for it to cross compiler, or change it in
anyway, you are not allowed to do anything with it.

So the short answer is we said "screw it", decided not to ship it.  We
will give our patches and tools to (paying) customers on request, but it
just isn't worth our while to deal with these restrictions for the open
source release.  (Sorry..)

FYI, lmbench is actually pretty easy to cross compile.  If I remember
right just do:
make CC=(compiler)
make CC=(compiler) results
make CC=(compiler) rerun

--Mark Hatle
MontaVista Software, Inc.

Grant Erickson wrote:
>
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Cindy Peters wrote:
> > I have downloaded the lmbench software to determine some benchmarking
> > information. I am not sure how to build it for the PPC. I have a cross
> > compiler development environment setup in a subdirectory. Can someone
> > help me with this?
>
> MontaVista reportedly has this as part of their at-cost HHL kit. However,
> I am not aware of any monetarily-free bundles of this cross-compiled for
> various architectures.
>
> It's been on my to-do list to work on this; however, my experience thus
> far is that this is not entirely straightforward to cross-compile based on
> what's in the package at present.

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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Matthew Locke]

Cindy Peters wrote:

 > We have just recently been instructed by management to stay with the
 >  MPC823 in order to re-use the previous software and hardware
 > development as much as possible. We are looking at using some VHDL
 > IP provided by Open Cores (this is very new) for the IDE interface.
 >  Are you familiar with this?
 >
 > The VHDL code uses a processor independent interface called a
 > wishbone interface. I don't know much about it yet. I don't know if
 >  this is something standard or just developed for Open Cores. Do
 > you (or anyone else) know of any driver software that may be
 > available for this interface?
 >

Having done several non-standard IDE interfaces before, I can say PIO
mode for the IDE OpenCore would be straight forward to implement. DMA is
always a bit more complicated.  I took a quick look thru the OpenCore
documentation.  It looks like the core would work on the 8xx bus with
few modifications.


 > I have downloaded the lmbench software to determine some benchmarking
information. I am not sure how to build it for the PPC. I have a cross
 > compiler development environment setup in a subdirectory. Can someone
help
 > me with this?

Sure, download our Journeyman product for 8xx, it includes
cross-compilers and 8xx userland.  ftp://ftp.mvista.com


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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Mark Hatle]

Cort Dougan wrote:
>
> Not the toolchain included with 2.0, though.
>
> } Our tool-chain is publicly available on our ftp site for several architectures (including 8xx). ftp://ftp.mvista.com
>

Yes it is.  ftp://ftp.mvista.com/pub/Journeyman/cd2/ contains the tools
and userland for the PowerPC 405, 7xx, 82xx and 8xx processors.

--Mark Hatle
MontaVista Software, Inc.

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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Tom Rini]

On Tue, Jul 31, 2001 at 05:41:28PM -0600, Cort Dougan wrote:

> } Our tool-chain is publicly available on our ftp site for several architectures (including 8xx). ftp://ftp.mvista.com
>
> Not the toolchain included with 2.0, though.

Er:
ftp://ftp.mvista.com/pub/Journeyman/cd2/ppc_{405,8xx,82xx,7xx}/tools/redhat{62,70}/
Are the cross tools for RedHat 6.2 and RedHat 7.0

I'm pretty sure the SRPMS in the 'source' dir are for making those too :)

--
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[Cort Dougan]

Well, hot-dog then!  I was looking at the CDKit.  Thanks.

} Yes it is.  ftp://ftp.mvista.com/pub/Journeyman/cd2/ contains the tools
} and userland for the PowerPC 405, 7xx, 82xx and 8xx processors.
}
} --Mark Hatle
} MontaVista Software, Inc.
}

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

Re: New Linux PowerPC development

[James F Dougherty]

And, might I add, it rocks!

		-James

>
> Cort Dougan wrote:
> >
> > Not the toolchain included with 2.0, though.
> >
> > } Our tool-chain is publicly available on our ftp site for several
architectures (including 8xx). ftp://ftp.mvista.com
> >
>
> Yes it is.  ftp://ftp.mvista.com/pub/Journeyman/cd2/ contains the tools
> and userland for the PowerPC 405, 7xx, 82xx and 8xx processors.
>
> --Mark Hatle
> MontaVista Software, Inc.
>
>

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