Linux support for MPC859T processor

Linux support for MPC859T processor

[Dmytro Bablinyuk]

We are trying to find a linux supplier who supports Motorola MPC859T
processor (actually it will be processor from Motorola but our custom
board).
We have contacted MontaVista and we discovered that the nearest
processor they support is MPC860.
Also we discovered that:

An MPC860 based board might be suitable for initial S/W development
purposes as the chip is very similar to the MPC859T we intend to use.
There are 7 variants of the '860 with different cache sizes and serial
communications capabilities.
The main differences between the '860 and the '859T that I am aware of are:

1.    The '860 runs at approximately half the speed of the '859T.
2.    The clocking generator for the 860 would require a different
configuration to the the '859 as a consequence of above.
3.    The '860 has an internal RTC function whereas the '859T does not.
4.    The '859T has a dedicated 10/100Mbps ethernet MAC whereas the '860
has to use the serial communication controllers for ethernet operations.
The available ethernet speeds depend on the particular variant of the '860.
Note some of the '860 variants include a dedicated 10/100Mbps ethernet MAC.
5.     The '859T core operates off a lower voltage (1.8V) for power
saving whereas the '860 core runs off a 3.3V supply.
Consequently the '860 draws approximately 2x the power of the '859T.

Apart from the differing core voltages the '860 and '859T appear to be
pin compatible

* Could somebody please give me an advice on how much S/W work might be
involved in the future to port linux from '860 to '859T based on 1-5
(see above)

* Can you suggest (based on above) any of 7 variants of the '860

Thank you


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

Re: Linux support for MPC859T processor

[Mark Hatle]

On userspace basis.. the 860 and the 859 are fully compatable.. The need for
859T changes may be in the kernel.  So anyone who sells/supports an 860 based
system can support your needs for application level.  (That includes MontaVista.)

The linux kernel of course is a different level of complexity.

--Mark

Dmytro Bablinyuk wrote:
>
> We are trying to find a linux supplier who supports Motorola MPC859T
> processor (actually it will be processor from Motorola but our custom
> board).
> We have contacted MontaVista and we discovered that the nearest
> processor they support is MPC860.
> Also we discovered that:
>
> An MPC860 based board might be suitable for initial S/W development
> purposes as the chip is very similar to the MPC859T we intend to use.
> There are 7 variants of the '860 with different cache sizes and serial
> communications capabilities.
> The main differences between the '860 and the '859T that I am aware of are:
>
> 1.    The '860 runs at approximately half the speed of the '859T.
> 2.    The clocking generator for the 860 would require a different
> configuration to the the '859 as a consequence of above.
> 3.    The '860 has an internal RTC function whereas the '859T does not.
> 4.    The '859T has a dedicated 10/100Mbps ethernet MAC whereas the '860
> has to use the serial communication controllers for ethernet operations.
> The available ethernet speeds depend on the particular variant of the '860.
> Note some of the '860 variants include a dedicated 10/100Mbps ethernet MAC.
> 5.     The '859T core operates off a lower voltage (1.8V) for power
> saving whereas the '860 core runs off a 3.3V supply.
> Consequently the '860 draws approximately 2x the power of the '859T.
>
> Apart from the differing core voltages the '860 and '859T appear to be
> pin compatible
>
> * Could somebody please give me an advice on how much S/W work might be
> involved in the future to port linux from '860 to '859T based on 1-5
> (see above)
>
> * Can you suggest (based on above) any of 7 variants of the '860
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
>
>


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

Re: Linux support for MPC859T processor

[Dmytro Bablinyuk]

Not a lot of our people experienced in PPC assembler (including myself).
Actually not a lot experienced with PPC at all.
Roughly, from your point of you, how major changes in the kernel could
be? Just your subjective opinion.

> On userspace basis.. the 860 and the 859 are fully compatable.. The
> need for
> 859T changes may be in the kernel.  So anyone who sells/supports an
> 860 based
> system can support your needs for application level.  (That includes
> MontaVista.)
>
> The linux kernel of course is a different level of complexity.
>
>> We are trying to find a linux supplier who supports Motorola MPC859T
>> processor (actually it will be processor from Motorola but our custom
>> board).
>


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

Re: Linux support for MPC859T processor

[Mark Hatle]

Honestly, I don't know my guess is close to non to a small handful...  But I am
truely a novice when it comes to CPU/board bringup.. (I've assisted in it, but
my expertise and history is in userspace development.)  The things that can take
massive amounts of time on these new processors/boards are hardware bugs (cpu
and board) as well as device drivers for new on chip devices.  I have seen more
then one engineer going bald due to hardware bugs, especially a board that the
customer said "But it runs VxWorks, why doesn't it run Linux?"...

--Mark

Dmytro Bablinyuk wrote:
> Not a lot of our people experienced in PPC assembler (including myself).
> Actually not a lot experienced with PPC at all.
> Roughly, from your point of you, how major changes in the kernel could
> be? Just your subjective opinion.
>
>> On userspace basis.. the 860 and the 859 are fully compatable.. The
>> need for
>> 859T changes may be in the kernel.  So anyone who sells/supports an
>> 860 based
>> system can support your needs for application level.  (That includes
>> MontaVista.)
>>
>> The linux kernel of course is a different level of complexity.
>>
>>> We are trying to find a linux supplier who supports Motorola MPC859T
>>> processor (actually it will be processor from Motorola but our custom
>>> board).
>>
>>
>
>
>
>


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

Re: Linux support for MPC859T processor

[Dmytro Bablinyuk]

Yes, we are ready to have a big pain with porting, and we know that
there is a risk which we are trying to reduce.
Would the MontaVista give some hands on, for example, how to an internal
RTC function on '860 represent in the kernel ('859 doesn't have RTC
func) and how it's affect the kernel and how it could be "removed" etc?
So, we at least would know what shall we look for.
Also could you please tell me how assembler on '860 different from '859?
Would this affect booting?

> Honestly, I don't know my guess is close to non to a small handful...
> But I am truely a novice when it comes to CPU/board bringup.. (I've
> assisted in it, but my expertise and history is in userspace
> development.)  The things that can take massive amounts of time on
> these new processors/boards are hardware bugs (cpu and board) as well
> as device drivers for new on chip devices.  I have seen more then one
> engineer going bald due to hardware bugs, especially a board that the
> customer said "But it runs VxWorks, why doesn't it run Linux?"...
>
>> Not a lot of our people experienced in PPC assembler (including myself).
>> Actually not a lot experienced with PPC at all.
>> Roughly, from your point of you, how major changes in the kernel
>> could be? Just your subjective opinion.
>>
>>> On userspace basis.. the 860 and the 859 are fully compatable.. The
>>> need for
>>> 859T changes may be in the kernel.  So anyone who sells/supports an
>>> 860 based
>>> system can support your needs for application level.  (That includes
>>> MontaVista.)
>>>
>>> The linux kernel of course is a different level of complexity.
>>>
>>>> We are trying to find a linux supplier who supports Motorola MPC859T
>>>> processor (actually it will be processor from Motorola but our custom
>>>> board).
>>>


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

RE: Linux support for MPC859T processor

[Jean-Denis Boyer]

> 4.    The '859T has a dedicated 10/100Mbps ethernet MAC
> whereas the '860 has to use the serial communication controllers
> for ethernet operations.

OK for the 860, but the 860T has the Fast Ethernet Controller,
which is already supported (and very stable) in the kernel.

> * Could somebody please give me an advice on how much S/W
> work might be involved in the future to port linux from '860
> to '859T based on 1-5 (see above)

I don't see very much work. The first step is to make
the boot loader work. As long as your boot loader
correctly configure the various clocks, and pass this
information to the kernel through the board information
structure, the kernel should boot correctly. For the RTC,
we have never used this functionality on our 860T based boards.
For the core voltage, well, this is not related to the software.

Regards,
--------------------------------------------
 Jean-Denis Boyer, B.Eng., Technical Leader
 Mediatrix Telecom Inc.
 4229 Garlock Street
 Sherbrooke (Québec)
 J1L 2C8  CANADA
 (819)829-8749 x241
--------------------------------------------

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

Re: Linux support for MPC859T processor

[Conn Clark]

	From what you describe of the MPC859T I would say that porting the
kernel may not be too difficult. The motorola web page claims that the
MPC859T has a RTC. It sound like it is just a stripped down MPC866 with
just one SCC and one FEC. Without a data book its hard to say what may
need to change in the kernel to make it work, but I doubt it will be much.

	Unless the MPC859T has introduced new instructions assembly should be
identical to the MPC860.I also doubt that you would need to write a
single line of assembly. Perhaps you should look into 'PPCBoot' (
http://ppcboot.sourceforge.net ) or 'Das U Boot' (
http://sourceforge.net/projects/u-boot/ ) for starters. PPCBoot was a
godsend and abstracted a lot of the porting head aches for us.

	 In designing a propretary design I would suggest you look at the
kernel code and try and map your io pins in a similar manner as some
supported board. It eases the amount of work needed to port the kernel.
An In Circuit Emulator or BDM/JTAG debugger can be worth its weight in
gold in bringing up a propretary design. Just beware that quite a few
will not work once you get Linux up and going on your board. You also
may want the initial prototype design to accept socketed flash as well
as the rom/flash you intend on using in production. Sometimes getting a
BDM/JTAG debugger or ICE to do it is a major pain. A bootstrap header
that allows you to power and program the flash in the circuit might be
better because it can aid in production. Its just alot harder to design.

Good Luck and have fun ripping your hair out.

Conn

Dmytro Bablinyuk wrote:
>
> Yes, we are ready to have a big pain with porting, and we know that
> there is a risk which we are trying to reduce.
> Would the MontaVista give some hands on, for example, how to an internal
> RTC function on '860 represent in the kernel ('859 doesn't have RTC
> func) and how it's affect the kernel and how it could be "removed" etc?
> So, we at least would know what shall we look for.
> Also could you please tell me how assembler on '860 different from '859?
> Would this affect booting?
>
>> Honestly, I don't know my guess is close to non to a small handful...
>> But I am truely a novice when it comes to CPU/board bringup.. (I've
>> assisted in it, but my expertise and history is in userspace
>> development.)  The things that can take massive amounts of time on
>> these new processors/boards are hardware bugs (cpu and board) as well
>> as device drivers for new on chip devices.  I have seen more then one
>> engineer going bald due to hardware bugs, especially a board that the
>> customer said "But it runs VxWorks, why doesn't it run Linux?"...
>>
>>> Not a lot of our people experienced in PPC assembler (including myself).
>>> Actually not a lot experienced with PPC at all.
>>> Roughly, from your point of you, how major changes in the kernel
>>> could be? Just your subjective opinion.
>>>
>>>> On userspace basis.. the 860 and the 859 are fully compatable.. The
>>>> need for
>>>> 859T changes may be in the kernel.  So anyone who sells/supports an
>>>> 860 based
>>>> system can support your needs for application level.  (That includes
>>>> MontaVista.)
>>>>
>>>> The linux kernel of course is a different level of complexity.
>>>>
>>>>> We are trying to find a linux supplier who supports Motorola MPC859T
>>>>> processor (actually it will be processor from Motorola but our custom
>>>>> board).
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>
>
>


--

*****************************************************************
   If you live at home long enough, your parents will move out.
  (Warning they may try to sell their house out from under you.)
*****************************************************************

Conn Clark
Engineering Stooge				clark@esteem.com
Electronic Systems Technology Inc.		www.esteem.com


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

Re: Linux support for MPC859T processor

[Frank Robbins]

There is no RTC in terms of the normal 32Khz input now on the HIP6W family
Also the chip needs to come up to 40 Mhz operation after reset different
from the 860 15 Mhz minimum.

Careful debugging....

RedBoot is nice to as a loader

Frank

----- Original Message -----
From: "Conn Clark" <clark@esteem.com>
To: "Dmytro Bablinyuk" <dmytro.bablinyuk@tait.co.nz>
Cc: "May Ling List" <linuxppc-embedded@lists.linuxppc.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2003 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: Linux support for MPC859T processor


>
> From what you describe of the MPC859T I would say that porting the
> kernel may not be too difficult. The motorola web page claims that the
> MPC859T has a RTC. It sound like it is just a stripped down MPC866 with
> just one SCC and one FEC. Without a data book its hard to say what may
> need to change in the kernel to make it work, but I doubt it will be much.
>
> Unless the MPC859T has introduced new instructions assembly should be
> identical to the MPC860.I also doubt that you would need to write a
> single line of assembly. Perhaps you should look into 'PPCBoot' (
> http://ppcboot.sourceforge.net ) or 'Das U Boot' (
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/u-boot/ ) for starters. PPCBoot was a
> godsend and abstracted a lot of the porting head aches for us.
>
> In designing a propretary design I would suggest you look at the
> kernel code and try and map your io pins in a similar manner as some
> supported board. It eases the amount of work needed to port the kernel.
> An In Circuit Emulator or BDM/JTAG debugger can be worth its weight in
> gold in bringing up a propretary design. Just beware that quite a few
> will not work once you get Linux up and going on your board. You also
> may want the initial prototype design to accept socketed flash as well
> as the rom/flash you intend on using in production. Sometimes getting a
> BDM/JTAG debugger or ICE to do it is a major pain. A bootstrap header
> that allows you to power and program the flash in the circuit might be
> better because it can aid in production. Its just alot harder to design.
>
> Good Luck and have fun ripping your hair out.
>
> Conn
>
> Dmytro Bablinyuk wrote:
> >
> > Yes, we are ready to have a big pain with porting, and we know that
> > there is a risk which we are trying to reduce.
> > Would the MontaVista give some hands on, for example, how to an internal
> > RTC function on '860 represent in the kernel ('859 doesn't have RTC
> > func) and how it's affect the kernel and how it could be "removed" etc?
> > So, we at least would know what shall we look for.
> > Also could you please tell me how assembler on '860 different from '859?
> > Would this affect booting?
> >
> >> Honestly, I don't know my guess is close to non to a small handful...
> >> But I am truely a novice when it comes to CPU/board bringup.. (I've
> >> assisted in it, but my expertise and history is in userspace
> >> development.)  The things that can take massive amounts of time on
> >> these new processors/boards are hardware bugs (cpu and board) as well
> >> as device drivers for new on chip devices.  I have seen more then one
> >> engineer going bald due to hardware bugs, especially a board that the
> >> customer said "But it runs VxWorks, why doesn't it run Linux?"...
> >>
> >>> Not a lot of our people experienced in PPC assembler (including
myself).
> >>> Actually not a lot experienced with PPC at all.
> >>> Roughly, from your point of you, how major changes in the kernel
> >>> could be? Just your subjective opinion.
> >>>
> >>>> On userspace basis.. the 860 and the 859 are fully compatable.. The
> >>>> need for
> >>>> 859T changes may be in the kernel.  So anyone who sells/supports an
> >>>> 860 based
> >>>> system can support your needs for application level.  (That includes
> >>>> MontaVista.)
> >>>>
> >>>> The linux kernel of course is a different level of complexity.
> >>>>
> >>>>> We are trying to find a linux supplier who supports Motorola MPC859T
> >>>>> processor (actually it will be processor from Motorola but our
custom
> >>>>> board).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
> *****************************************************************
>    If you live at home long enough, your parents will move out.
>   (Warning they may try to sell their house out from under you.)
> *****************************************************************
>
> Conn Clark
> Engineering Stooge clark@esteem.com
> Electronic Systems Technology Inc. www.esteem.com
>
>
>


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