Sign in
Search adsp
Subscribe to adsp
adsp by Keywords
AD1819 | AD7332 | ADSP-2106 | ADSP-21060 | ADSP-21065L | ADSP-2116 | ADSP-21160M | ADSP-2181 | ADSP-218x | ADSP-219 | ADSP-2199 | ADSP219 | BF531 | BF532 | BF533 | BF535 | Blackfin | FFT | JTAG | LDF | SDRAM | SHARC | SPORT | UART | VDSP++ | VisualDSP
Discussion Groups
Discussion Groups | Analog Devices DSPs | 21065L and SDRAM
Technical discussions related to Analog Devices DSPs (including Blackfin, TigerSHARC, SHARC and ADSP-21xx DSPs).
21065L and SDRAM - Andor Bariska - Jul 27 9:24:00 2000
|
Hi group, does anybody have experience using a two processor cluster of 21065L Rev. 0.2 with shared SDRAM? I have a feeling that because of its host of SDRAM bugs in the Anomaly List, a shared SDRAM setup using Rev. 0.2 doesn't work. Can anybody confirm or contradict? Regards, Andor Bariska WEISS ENGINEERING LTD. - Professional Digital Audio Products Florastrasse 42 8610 Uster Switzerland phone: +41 1 940 20 06, fax: +41 1 940 22 14 mailto: web: http://www.weiss.ch You *can* afford the best |
|
|
(You need to be a member of adsp -- send a blank email to adsp-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )
Re: 21065L and SDRAM - Kenneth Porter - Jul 27 17:54:00 2000
|
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:24:49 +0200, Andor Bariska wrote: > I have a feeling that because of its host of SDRAM bugs in the Anomaly > List, a shared SDRAM setup using Rev. 0.2 doesn't work. It's not a complete failure, but I wouldn't use 0.2 in an MP design. I had some mysterious problems when I tried to run code from SDRAM with 0.2, that were very intermittent and impossible to characterize, so I couldn't come up with a workaround. We finally banned 0.2 from our product and the problems disappeared. Do note that 0.3 still has a bug involving BMAX, so if you have latency issues be sure to look at the errata sheet for potential workarounds. Kenneth Porter Kensington Laboratories, Inc. mailto: http://www.kensingtonlabs.com |
(You need to be a member of adsp -- send a blank email to adsp-subscribe@yahoogroups.com )