That makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately, many things that make sense to me 
ultimately turn out to not be true. Does the definitive answer here lie 
with Gerald? I wonder if he (still) monitors this group...

Regarding the PRUSS I have many questions. I'm really trying to nail down 
the timing/latency/determinism of PRU execution and IO. Your work measuring 
latency of IO and # PRU clocks has been very helpful (Thank you for your 
posts). Still, I wish for validation of what has been measured with 
architectural/design detail. Much of the data available (even from TI) 
seems to be conflicting.


On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 8:12:08 PM UTC-8, Charles Steinkuehler 
wrote:
>
> On 2/7/2017 8:04 PM, ags wrote: 
> > I'm working on using the PRU for critical signal timing, paired with 
> userland 
> > code that loads data into the PRU local memory. 
> > 
> > I've done a lot of research learning about latency wrt local and system 
> > resources, L3/4 fabric delays, etc. In each case, I haven't seen any 
> difference 
> > in the read/write (load/store from the PRU sense) time (PRU cycles) 
> between the 
> > PRU core-specific 8k DRAM and the shared 12k DRAM. I also see that PRU0 
> can 
> > access PRU1's 8k DRAM, and vice versa. So in effect the 8k DRAM is also 
> shared 
> > between the two PRU cores. So other than providing more memory than the 
> 8k for 
> > each PRU core, why would one use the 12k DRAM? 
> > 
> > [Note: I haven't seen any posts measuring latency of load/store from one 
> PRU 
> > core to the other PRU core's DRAM. Could that be the advantage of the 
> 12k shared 
> > DRAM - same timing when being accessed by either PRU core? If both cores 
> are 
> > accessing either the shared 12k or core-specific 8k DRAM concurrently, 
> would 
> > that cause one to stall?] 
>
> The available TRM is a bit light on specifics, but I would expect the 
> 8K DRAM for each core is single port memory and is highly likely to 
> incur wait states if both PRU cores are trying to read from the same 
> memory bank.  I would expect the 12K shared memory to be at least 
> 2-port (so both PRUs could access it simultaneously without incurring 
> wait states) and possibly triple ported (so the ARM core could access 
> the memory without potential wait states). 
>
> ...and of course 12K is bigger than 8K!  :) 
>
> -- 
> Charles Steinkuehler 
> [email protected] <javascript:> 
>

-- 
For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"BeagleBoard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beagleboard/72ce7f9d-b497-47a8-a353-03ca30d1aa0d%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to