From: Jake P. <djs...@gm...> - 2009-11-24 21:35:38
|
Hi all, I'm new around these here parts, but I had a quick (probably stupid) question. I'm looking into creating a device with the Tobi-Duo dual-ethernet expansion board. My understanding is that in order to do anything with this I also need a COM module which mates with the expansion board via the two 70-pin connectors. My question is that both the COM module (say the plain ol' Overo Earth) and the Tobi-Duo have +5V barrel connectors. Does that mean I need two power supplies for my device? Or is the expansion board powered by the COM module via the two connectors? TYVM -- -jp I think man invented the car by instinct. deepthoughtsbyjackhandey.com |
From: Chris M. <ch...@fo...> - 2009-11-24 22:10:25
|
The overo COMs actually get power from their connection (the two 70-pin connectors) to the expansion board, they don't have a barrel of their own. Chris On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Jake Peavy <djs...@gm...> wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm new around these here parts, but I had a quick (probably stupid) > question. > > I'm looking into creating a device with the Tobi-Duo dual-ethernet expansion > board. My understanding is that in order to do anything with this I also > need a COM module which mates with the expansion board via the two 70-pin > connectors. > > My question is that both the COM module (say the plain ol' Overo Earth) and > the Tobi-Duo have +5V barrel connectors. > > Does that mean I need two power supplies for my device? Or is the expansion > board powered by the COM module via the two connectors? > > TYVM > > -- > -jp > > I think man invented the car by instinct. > > deepthoughtsbyjackhandey.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day > trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus > on > what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with > Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > > |
From: Jake P. <djs...@gm...> - 2009-11-24 22:21:29
|
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Chris MacDonald <ch...@fo...>wrote: > The overo COMs actually get power from their connection (the two > 70-pin connectors) to the expansion board, they don't have a barrel of > their own. > > Chris > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Jake Peavy <djs...@gm...> wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I'm new around these here parts, but I had a quick (probably stupid) > > question. > > > > I'm looking into creating a device with the Tobi-Duo dual-ethernet > expansion > > board. My understanding is that in order to do anything with this I also > > need a COM module which mates with the expansion board via the two 70-pin > > connectors. > > > > My question is that both the COM module (say the plain ol' Overo Earth) > and > > the Tobi-Duo have +5V barrel connectors. > > > > Does that mean I need two power supplies for my device? Or is the > expansion > > board powered by the COM module via the two connectors? > > > aha, I looked at the up close pics of the Overo Earth COM. of course you're right, no barrel connector. I guess that means you must use at least one expansion board? Thanks, -- -jp Just as irrigation is the lifeblood of the Southwest, lifeblood is the soup of cannibals. deepthoughtsbyjackhandey.com |
From: Chris M. <ch...@fo...> - 2009-11-24 23:14:07
|
Yup, you need to use some kind of expansion board. Gumstix offers a range of expansion boards (you mentioned the Tobi Duo) and all the drawings are available online (http://pubs.gumstix.com/boards/) with the intention that you can either use one of those boards, or with the help of the drawings and other documentation you can make your own to suit your needs. On the topic of the tobi and tobi duo though, I'd take some time and look though the list archives... I personally don't have experience with the ethernet interface on the tobi but from what I've read here performance isn't as good as it could be, and that may have some bearing on your purchasing decisions. Chris On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 2:21 PM, Jake Peavy <djs...@gm...> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Chris MacDonald <ch...@fo...> > wrote: >> >> The overo COMs actually get power from their connection (the two >> 70-pin connectors) to the expansion board, they don't have a barrel of >> their own. >> >> Chris >> >> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 1:35 PM, Jake Peavy <djs...@gm...> wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > I'm new around these here parts, but I had a quick (probably stupid) >> > question. >> > >> > I'm looking into creating a device with the Tobi-Duo dual-ethernet >> > expansion >> > board. My understanding is that in order to do anything with this I >> > also >> > need a COM module which mates with the expansion board via the two >> > 70-pin >> > connectors. >> > >> > My question is that both the COM module (say the plain ol' Overo Earth) >> > and >> > the Tobi-Duo have +5V barrel connectors. >> > >> > Does that mean I need two power supplies for my device? Or is the >> > expansion >> > board powered by the COM module via the two connectors? >> > > > aha, I looked at the up close pics of the Overo Earth COM. of course you're > right, no barrel connector. > > I guess that means you must use at least one expansion board? > > Thanks, > > -- > -jp > > Just as irrigation is the lifeblood of the Southwest, lifeblood is the soup > of cannibals. > > deepthoughtsbyjackhandey.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day > trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus > on > what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with > Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > > |
From: Steve S. <sa...@gm...> - 2009-11-25 00:32:46
|
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Chris MacDonald <ch...@fo...> wrote: > On the topic of the tobi and tobi duo though, I'd take some time and > look though the list archives... I personally don't have experience > with the ethernet interface on the tobi but from what I've read here > performance isn't as good as it could be, and that may have some > bearing on your purchasing decisions. I'm not aware of any significant performance issues with tobi. >From a local server I get 4.43 megabytes/sec transfer rate: root@omap3:~# wget http://192.168.0.220/oe/jeff-map.bin --16:27:12-- http://192.168.0.220/oe/jeff-map.bin => `jeff-map.bin.3' Connecting to 192.168.0.220:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 37,879,101 [application/octet-stream] 100%[====================================>] 37,879,101 4.43M/s ETA 00:00 16:27:26 (4.31 MB/s) - `jeff-map.bin.3' saved [37879101/37879101] The above writes the file to the microSD card. I repeated the test writing to ram disk and got 4.86 megabytes/sec: root@omap3:~# cd /tmp root@omap3:/var/volatile/tmp# wget http://192.168.0.220/oe/jeff-map.bin --16:27:35-- http://192.168.0.220/oe/jeff-map.bin => `jeff-map.bin' Connecting to 192.168.0.220:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 37,879,101 [application/octet-stream] 100%[====================================>] 37,879,101 4.86M/s ETA 00:00 16:27:42 (4.79 MB/s) - `jeff-map.bin' saved [37879101/37879101] Steve |
From: Chris M. <ch...@fo...> - 2009-11-25 00:49:41
|
Ah yes... sorry; after doing some looking myself I could really only find one thread and it was to do with the wireless, not the wired solution. On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 4:31 PM, Steve Sakoman <sa...@gm...> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Chris MacDonald > <ch...@fo...> wrote: > >> On the topic of the tobi and tobi duo though, I'd take some time and >> look though the list archives... I personally don't have experience >> with the ethernet interface on the tobi but from what I've read here >> performance isn't as good as it could be, and that may have some >> bearing on your purchasing decisions. > > I'm not aware of any significant performance issues with tobi. > > >From a local server I get 4.43 megabytes/sec transfer rate: > > root@omap3:~# wget http://192.168.0.220/oe/jeff-map.bin > --16:27:12-- http://192.168.0.220/oe/jeff-map.bin > => `jeff-map.bin.3' > Connecting to 192.168.0.220:80... connected. > HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK > Length: 37,879,101 [application/octet-stream] > > 100%[====================================>] 37,879,101 4.43M/s ETA 00:00 > > 16:27:26 (4.31 MB/s) - `jeff-map.bin.3' saved [37879101/37879101] > > The above writes the file to the microSD card. I repeated the test > writing to ram disk and got 4.86 megabytes/sec: > > root@omap3:~# cd /tmp > root@omap3:/var/volatile/tmp# wget http://192.168.0.220/oe/jeff-map.bin > --16:27:35-- http://192.168.0.220/oe/jeff-map.bin > => `jeff-map.bin' > Connecting to 192.168.0.220:80... connected. > HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK > Length: 37,879,101 [application/octet-stream] > > 100%[====================================>] 37,879,101 4.86M/s ETA 00:00 > > 16:27:42 (4.79 MB/s) - `jeff-map.bin' saved [37879101/37879101] > > Steve > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day > trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on > what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with > Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july > _______________________________________________ > gumstix-users mailing list > gum...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gumstix-users > |
From: Søren S. C. <li...@ss...> - 2009-11-25 22:18:08
|
> I'm not aware of any significant performance issues with tobi. I recently tested the OMAP3 LAN9221 performance using "iperf" running in a standard Angstrom distribution on an Overo based setup. Running against an Ubuntu Linux Server the results are: Write: ~95Mbit/s Read : ~70Mbit/s All in all quite OK. Running two identical OMAP3 LAN9221 sets against each other gives ~70MBit/s for both read and write, which kind of indicates that the ~70Mbit/s limit on read is set on the OMAP3 LAN9221 configuration... Using the "new" Overo u-boot with NET-support the performance drops to approximately the half. This drop is (most likely) caused by the GPMC configuration done in this U-boot-version, which seems to be rather low(=safe). I'll look into this in more detail (finding the correct GPMC values) as soon I get a little spare time... Best regards Søren --- SSC Solutions ApS - Denmark - www.ssc-solutions.dk |
From: ScottEllis <sco...@gm...> - 2009-12-15 11:48:14
|
So I followed your suggestion Soren and did some experimenting with the GPMC[5] register configuration in u-boot. It was good learning thanks! Here are some testing results so far. I am reading the GPMC regs for this in board_overo.c at the end of the function overo_init_smsc911x(). Still trying to figure out the GPMC_CONFIG7.BASEADDRESS difference and why configuring regs 2-6 isn't giving the same write speed as undef'ing CONFIG_CMD_NET in the uboot build. I'm continuing to plug away at this, but if you have any suggestions or observations that would be great. u-boot initialized (stock gumstix config) ============================ NET_GPMC_CONFIG1 0x00001000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG2 0x001e1e01 NET_GPMC_CONFIG3 0x00080300 NET_GPMC_CONFIG4 0x1c091c09 NET_GPMC_CONFIG5 0x04181f1f NET_GPMC_CONFIG6 0x00000fcf NET_GPMC_CONFIG7 0x00000f6c Write : iperf -c 192.168.10.5 -p 2134 [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 55.0 MBytes 46.1 Mbits/secgot the GPMC register values putting in some debug code in [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 55.1 MBytes 46.2 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 55.2 MBytes 46.3 Mbits/sec Read : iperf -s -p 2135 [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 52.7 MBytes 44.2 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 52.8 MBytes 44.3 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 52.6 MBytes 44.1 Mbits/sec remove u-boot initialization of nic (u-boot undef CONFIG_CMD_NET) GPMC_CONFIG2_5 - GPMC_CONFIG6_5 are at their reset defaults ============================ NET_GPMC_CONFIG1 0x00001000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG2 0x00101001 NET_GPMC_CONFIG3 0x00020201 NET_GPMC_CONFIG4 0x10031003 NET_GPMC_CONFIG5 0x010f1111 NET_GPMC_CONFIG6 0x8f030000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG7 0x00000f41 Write : iperf -c 192.168.10.5 -p 2134 [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 102 MBytes 85.2 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 101 MBytes 85.1 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 101 MBytes 84.8 Mbits/sec Read : iperf -s -p 2135 [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.6 MBytes 72.6 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.8 MBytes 72.7 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.5 MBytes 72.5 Mbits/sec u-boot initialized CONFIG2-CONFIG6 to defaults left CONFIG1 and CONFIG7 alone patched include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/mem.h ============================ NET_GPMC_CONFIG1 0x00001000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG2 0x00101001 NET_GPMC_CONFIG3 0x00020201 NET_GPMC_CONFIG4 0x10031003 NET_GPMC_CONFIG5 0x010f1111 NET_GPMC_CONFIG6 0x8f030000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG7 0x00000f6c Write : iperf -c 192.168.10.5 -p 2134 [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 92.4 MBytes 77.5 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 92.8 MBytes 77.8 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 92.9 MBytes 77.9 Mbits/sec Read : iperf -s -p 2135 [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.9 MBytes 72.8 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.9 MBytes 72.7 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.9 MBytes 72.7 Mbits/sec GPMC[5] Differences In Detail GPMC_CONFIG1_5 ============== u-boot : 0x00001000 : GPMCFCLKDIVIDER = 0 TIMEPARAGRANULARITY = 0 MUXADDDATA = 0 DEVICETYPE = 0 DEVICESIZE = 1 WAITPINSELECT = 0 WAITMONITORINGTIME = 0 WAITWRITEMONITORINGTIME = 0 ATTACHEDDEVICEPAGELENGTH = 0 no uboot : 0x00001000 : GPMCFCLKDIVIDER = 0 (default) TIMEPARAGRANULARITY = 0 (default) MUXADDDATA = 0 DEVICETYPE = 0 (default) DEVICESIZE = 1 WAITPINSELECT = 0 WAITMONITORINGTIME = 0 (default) WAITWRITEMONITORINGTIME = 0 (default) ATTACHEDDEVICEPAGELENGTH = 0 (default) GPMC_CONFIG2_5 ============== u-boot : 0x001e1e01 : CSONTIME = 1 CSEXTRADELAY = 0 CSRDOFFTIME = 30 CSWROFFTIME = 30 no uboot : 0x00101001 : CSONTIME = 1 (default) CSEXTRADELAY = 0 (default) CSRDOFFTIME = 16 (default)got the GPMC register values putting in some debug code in CSWROFFTIME = 16 (default) GPMC_CONFIG3_5 ============== u-boot : 0x00080300 : ADVONTIME = 0 ADVEXTRADELAY = 0 ADVRDOFFTIME = 3 ADVWROFFTIME = 8 no uboot : 0x00020201 : ADVONTIME = 1 (default) ADVEXTRADELAY = 0 (default) ADVRDOFFTIME = 2 (default) ADVWROFFTIME = 2 (default) GPMC_CONFIG4_5 ============== u-boot : 0x1c091c09 : OEONTIME = 9 OEEXTRADELAY = 0 OEOFFTIME = 28 WEONTIME = 9 WEEXTRADELAY = 0 WEOFFTIME = 28 no uboot : 0x10031003 : OEONTIME = 3 (default) OEEXTRADELAY = 0 (default) OEOFFTIME = 16 (default) WEONTIME = 3 (default) WEEXTRADELAY = 0 (default) WEOFFTIME = 16 (default) GPMC_CONFIG5_5 ============== u-boot : 0x04181f1f : RDCYCLETIME = 31 WRCYCLETIME = 31 RDACCESSTIME = 24 PAGEBURSTACCESSTIME = 4 no uboot : 0x010f1111 : RDCYCLETIME = 17 (default) WRCYCLETIME = 17 (default) RDACCESSTIME = 15 (default) PAGEBURSTACCESSTIME = 1 (default) GPMC_CONFIG6_5 ============== u-boot : 0x00000fcf : BUSTURNAROUND = 15 CYCLE2CYCLEDIFFCSEN = 1 CYCLE2CYCLESAMECSEN = 1 CYCLE2CYCLEDELAY = 15 WRDATAONADMUXBUS = 0 WRACCESSTIME = 0 no uboot : 0x8f030000 : BURSTURNAROUND = 0 (default) CYCLE2CYCLEDIFFCSEN = 0 (default) CYCLE2CYCLESAMECSEN = 0 (default) WRDATAONADMUXBUS = 3 (default) WRACCESSTIME = 15 (default) GPMC_CONFIG7_5 ============== u-boot : 0x00000f6c : BASEADDRESS = 0x2C = A26 = 1, A25 = 0, A24 = 0 CSVALID = 1 MASKADDRESS = 0xF no uboot : 0x00000f41 : BASEADDRESS = 0x01 = A26 = 0, A25 = 0, A24 = 1 CSVALID = 1 MASKADDRESS = 0xF (default) -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Power-for-both-COM-_and_-expansion-board--tp26503706p26793556.html Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
From: Søren S. C. <li...@ss...> - 2009-12-15 21:28:35
|
Hi Scott, I'm not sure I fully understand your current problem/question. If I get it right you are searching for an explanation why you get 85Mb/s write speed in one test and 77Mb/s in the other one - Right? In case GPMC_CONFIG1-6 are identical I currently have no brilliant ideas what this is cause by. GPMC_CONFIG7 shouldn't affect this. Are you in total control of the network segment where you ran the test? Or could it be other users was using bandwidth on the network while running the test and getting 77Mb/s? Maybe u-boot is configuring something in the LAN9221 chip itself which slows it down afterward in Linux? I haven't checked, but it might be worth checking if u-boot actually writes something in the LAN9221 chip, which configures how it will output data to the GPMC bus... Please let me know in case I got the question right and as well when you have nailed the problem - I'm actually a bit curious myself :-) Søren -----Original Message----- From: ScottEllis [mailto:sco...@gm...] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 12:50 PM To: gum...@li... Subject: Re: [Gumstix-users] Power for both COM _and_ expansion board? So I followed your suggestion Soren and did some experimenting with the GPMC[5] register configuration in u-boot. It was good learning thanks! Here are some testing results so far. I am reading the GPMC regs for this in board_overo.c at the end of the function overo_init_smsc911x(). Still trying to figure out the GPMC_CONFIG7.BASEADDRESS difference and why configuring regs 2-6 isn't giving the same write speed as undef'ing CONFIG_CMD_NET in the uboot build. I'm continuing to plug away at this, but if you have any suggestions or observations that would be great. u-boot initialized (stock gumstix config) ============================ NET_GPMC_CONFIG1 0x00001000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG2 0x001e1e01 NET_GPMC_CONFIG3 0x00080300 NET_GPMC_CONFIG4 0x1c091c09 NET_GPMC_CONFIG5 0x04181f1f NET_GPMC_CONFIG6 0x00000fcf NET_GPMC_CONFIG7 0x00000f6c Write : iperf -c 192.168.10.5 -p 2134 [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 55.0 MBytes 46.1 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 55.1 MBytes 46.2 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 55.2 MBytes 46.3 Mbits/sec Read : iperf -s -p 2135 [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 52.7 MBytes 44.2 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 52.8 MBytes 44.3 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 52.6 MBytes 44.1 Mbits/sec remove u-boot initialization of nic (u-boot undef CONFIG_CMD_NET) GPMC_CONFIG2_5 - GPMC_CONFIG6_5 are at their reset defaults ============================ NET_GPMC_CONFIG1 0x00001000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG2 0x00101001 NET_GPMC_CONFIG3 0x00020201 NET_GPMC_CONFIG4 0x10031003 NET_GPMC_CONFIG5 0x010f1111 NET_GPMC_CONFIG6 0x8f030000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG7 0x00000f41 Write : iperf -c 192.168.10.5 -p 2134 [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 102 MBytes 85.2 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 101 MBytes 85.1 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 101 MBytes 84.8 Mbits/sec Read : iperf -s -p 2135 [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.6 MBytes 72.6 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.8 MBytes 72.7 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.5 MBytes 72.5 Mbits/sec u-boot initialized CONFIG2-CONFIG6 to defaults left CONFIG1 and CONFIG7 alone patched include/asm-arm/arch-omap3/mem.h ============================ NET_GPMC_CONFIG1 0x00001000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG2 0x00101001 NET_GPMC_CONFIG3 0x00020201 NET_GPMC_CONFIG4 0x10031003 NET_GPMC_CONFIG5 0x010f1111 NET_GPMC_CONFIG6 0x8f030000 NET_GPMC_CONFIG7 0x00000f6c Write : iperf -c 192.168.10.5 -p 2134 [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 92.4 MBytes 77.5 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 92.8 MBytes 77.8 Mbits/sec [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 92.9 MBytes 77.9 Mbits/sec Read : iperf -s -p 2135 [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.9 MBytes 72.8 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.9 MBytes 72.7 Mbits/sec [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 86.9 MBytes 72.7 Mbits/sec GPMC[5] Differences In Detail GPMC_CONFIG1_5 ============== u-boot : 0x00001000 : GPMCFCLKDIVIDER = 0 TIMEPARAGRANULARITY = 0 MUXADDDATA = 0 DEVICETYPE = 0 DEVICESIZE = 1 WAITPINSELECT = 0 WAITMONITORINGTIME = 0 WAITWRITEMONITORINGTIME = 0 ATTACHEDDEVICEPAGELENGTH = 0 no uboot : 0x00001000 : GPMCFCLKDIVIDER = 0 (default) TIMEPARAGRANULARITY = 0 (default) MUXADDDATA = 0 DEVICETYPE = 0 (default) DEVICESIZE = 1 WAITPINSELECT = 0 WAITMONITORINGTIME = 0 (default) WAITWRITEMONITORINGTIME = 0 (default) ATTACHEDDEVICEPAGELENGTH = 0 (default) GPMC_CONFIG2_5 ============== u-boot : 0x001e1e01 : CSONTIME = 1 CSEXTRADELAY = 0 CSRDOFFTIME = 30 CSWROFFTIME = 30 no uboot : 0x00101001 : CSONTIME = 1 (default) CSEXTRADELAY = 0 (default) CSRDOFFTIME = 16 (default)got the GPMC register values putting in some debug code in CSWROFFTIME = 16 (default) GPMC_CONFIG3_5 ============== u-boot : 0x00080300 : ADVONTIME = 0 ADVEXTRADELAY = 0 ADVRDOFFTIME = 3 ADVWROFFTIME = 8 no uboot : 0x00020201 : ADVONTIME = 1 (default) ADVEXTRADELAY = 0 (default) ADVRDOFFTIME = 2 (default) ADVWROFFTIME = 2 (default) GPMC_CONFIG4_5 ============== u-boot : 0x1c091c09 : OEONTIME = 9 OEEXTRADELAY = 0 OEOFFTIME = 28 WEONTIME = 9 WEEXTRADELAY = 0 WEOFFTIME = 28 no uboot : 0x10031003 : OEONTIME = 3 (default) OEEXTRADELAY = 0 (default) OEOFFTIME = 16 (default) WEONTIME = 3 (default) WEEXTRADELAY = 0 (default) WEOFFTIME = 16 (default) GPMC_CONFIG5_5 ============== u-boot : 0x04181f1f : RDCYCLETIME = 31 WRCYCLETIME = 31 RDACCESSTIME = 24 PAGEBURSTACCESSTIME = 4 no uboot : 0x010f1111 : RDCYCLETIME = 17 (default) WRCYCLETIME = 17 (default) RDACCESSTIME = 15 (default) PAGEBURSTACCESSTIME = 1 (default) GPMC_CONFIG6_5 ============== u-boot : 0x00000fcf : BUSTURNAROUND = 15 CYCLE2CYCLEDIFFCSEN = 1 CYCLE2CYCLESAMECSEN = 1 CYCLE2CYCLEDELAY = 15 WRDATAONADMUXBUS = 0 WRACCESSTIME = 0 no uboot : 0x8f030000 : BURSTURNAROUND = 0 (default) CYCLE2CYCLEDIFFCSEN = 0 (default) CYCLE2CYCLESAMECSEN = 0 (default) WRDATAONADMUXBUS = 3 (default) WRACCESSTIME = 15 (default) GPMC_CONFIG7_5 ============== u-boot : 0x00000f6c : BASEADDRESS = 0x2C = A26 = 1, A25 = 0, A24 = 0 CSVALID = 1 MASKADDRESS = 0xF no uboot : 0x00000f41 : BASEADDRESS = 0x01 = A26 = 0, A25 = 0, A24 = 1 CSVALID = 1 MASKADDRESS = 0xF (default) |
From: ScottEllis <sco...@gm...> - 2009-12-17 13:11:48
|
Yes, it was just my network. Consistent 93 Mbit/sec write, 72 Mbit/sec read when I just use a crossover and no u-boot configuration of the GPMC regs 2-6. 46 Mbit/sec write, 44 Mbit/sec read with the default u-boot. Thanks. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Power-for-both-COM-_and_-expansion-board--tp26503706p26827782.html Sent from the Gumstix mailing list archive at Nabble.com. |
From: Søren S. C. <li...@ss...> - 2009-12-18 16:07:06
|
Hi Scott, > Yes, it was just my network. > Consistent 93 Mbit/sec write, 72 Mbit/sec read when I just use a > crossover and no u-boot configuration of the GPMC regs 2-6. > 46 Mbit/sec write, 44 Mbit/sec read with the default u-boot. Glad that I could help. Have you had any chance to dig into finding proper timings for the LAN9221-chip? I mean it's not really nice just relying on ROM-code defaults - On the other hand I think it can be done better than with the current u-boot data, which might be inherited from a other older chip... Likewise I would like to get the read speed up to ~100Mbps like the write... I unfortunately haven't yet had time to look into this. Please let me know in case you do it at some time. In case not, I will keep in on my TODO-list for something to be done sometime in the future :-) Best regards Søren --- SSC Solutions ApS - Denmark - www.ssc-solutions.dk |