Recent releases of CE removed "app.x64P" as it's a confusing
configuration. What you really want is "app_local.x64P", and look at
local.cfg (not app.cfg) for reference. If you want to be further
confused, read below the line. ;)
------------------------------------------
Mainly for _testing_ and internal debugging purposes, the CE dev team
additionally built the examples where codecs were configured to be
remote... AND the image included a Server. What this config generated
is an environment where the stubs and skels (the RPC under the VISA
calls) were introduced, and they both run on the same processor. I know
that sounds strange, but what that enabled is the ability to step
through (and debug!) the stubs/skels on a single processor, with one
debugger, in whatever environment was most convenient(Linux GDB, CCS for
64P, etc).
[ As many of you know, debugging in a dual-core environment isn't always
easy. Yes, I guess I did say that outloud. ]
For example, if we were trying to chase down a bug in a 'DSP-side'
skeleton, the typical config would require us to test on dual-core
hardware, an emulator, and some ARM/DSP setup. But, using this [strange
and customer-confusing] config we could build an environment where we
could debug this skeleton in a CCS simulator(!). Very powerful, but
also very confusing in general.
Again, we removed this from recent release... but the note might be
interesting for stub/skel developers, so it's worth describing "below
the line of confusion".
Chris
________________________________
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
com] On Behalf Of Ben White
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2007 5:23 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Codec Engine - Single CPU video_copy app
Hi,
Following the advice of a member a few months back I have gone
down the route of making a DSP side code engine app so I can run my
codec on a device that has no ARM side (in the future).
So, I have based this on the video_copy\singlecpu example in the
codec engine.
My question is why are there two applications generated for this
example, and what's the difference between them:
In the package.bld file:
for (var i = 0; i < Build.targets.length; i++) {
var targ = Build.targets[i];
print("building for target " + targ.name + " ...");
addExe("app", targ);
addExe("app", targ, "local");
//TODO addExe("app", targ, "remote");
}
So it generates an app.x64P, and an app_local.x64P. They have
slightly different .cfg files. Does anybody know what the difference
between the 2 are?
Thanks!
Ben
_______________________________________________
Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
