Chris Johns commented on a discussion: 
https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/230#note_112743


In regards to "the details are in the patch", I did not see this detail. This 
conversation makes it easier for others to see what is happening and how things 
are designed. I do not assuming everyone sees what you or I do.

Can the RPU determine if it is in lock step mode or which core it is?

I suggest a single BSP name `zynqmp_rpu` with defaults for a single address 
space block and basic initialization that can run the tests. INI options can 
then change the address map and the initialization as required.

A BSP name will go only so far before it does not help. There are too many 
combinations to expand into BSP names to be practical, for example 
`zynqmp_rpu_split_0_apu` etc. You would also need `zynqmp_apu_rpu_0` and 
`zynqmp_apu_rpu_0_1` etc if you wish to run all the APU codes with both RPU 
cores.

-- 
View it on GitLab: 
https://gitlab.rtems.org/rtems/rtos/rtems/-/merge_requests/230#note_112743
You're receiving this email because of your account on gitlab.rtems.org.


_______________________________________________
bugs mailing list
bugs@rtems.org
http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/bugs

Reply via email to