Hi Wes,
The problem shows up with both the latest pull from ska-sa and an earlier
one from a couple of months ago. The crashing bof crashes with both and the
working bof works with both. That's why I'm wondering if it's some
interaction with the ADC5G since I presume your designs are mostly with the
katADC?

Has anyone else compiled/run bofs using ADC5G with these latest changes?

Glenn


On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Wesley New <wes...@ska.ac.za> wrote:

> Hi Glenn,
>
> We are running many bof files with that change and are doing plenty of
> register and bram reads and writes and have not experienced any issues with
> these bus accesses. What version of TCPBorphServer are you running?
>
> Wes
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 3:28 PM, G Jones <glenn.calt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> It should have occurred to me sooner, but I checked through the commit
>> logs for mlib_devel and remembered I had updated from ska-sa a couple of
>> weeks ago to get the bugfix for the rcs block. In doing so, I had also
>> pulled down this commit:
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/ska-sa/mlib_devel/commit/bad95b18fe79146d288607e5fe3c0360c071c2ad
>> "Simplified the EPB to OPB 32bit bus cycle and now supports legacy byte
>> enable support for ROACH 1 modules on ROACH 2."
>>
>> which sounds suspicious since the problem seemed to be related to reading
>> writing brams/software registers.
>>
>> Indeed, when I switched over to the commit right before that one and
>> compiled the same test design, I ended up with a boffile that has not yet
>> crashed (the bad bof would have certainly crashed by now).
>>
>> The design is simply two ADC5Gs connected to a snapshot blocks. The ADCs
>> are clocked at 2880 MHz, so the FPGA is running at 180 MHz.  I'm not sure
>> if the problem is some interaction between the ADC5Gs and this commit, or
>> the clock rate or what.
>>
>> Henno, can you double check the code in this commit and see if you can
>> ascertain where the bug might be?
>>
>> Glenn
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 12:00 PM, G Jones <glenn.calt...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> For some unknown reason, boffiles I generate with my toolflow cause
>>> ROACH 2's to freeze up after a few minutes (I think related to I/O to
>>> software registers and shared BRAMs rather than any specific amount of
>>> time). I don't know of any changes I made to my toolflow since the
>>> last time I compiled working boffiles. Previously working boffiles
>>> still work, but recompiled designs do not work. The symptom is that
>>> the python katcp client stops responding. SSHing to the ROACH and
>>> running ps shows that tcpborphserver3 is no longer running. It finally
>>> occurred to me to check dmesg, and on all crashed ROACHs, I see this
>>> in the demsg:
>>>
>>> ...
>>> About to toggle cpu_rdy pin<7>r2case_event(): Got type 11, code 8, value
>>> 1
>>> attempting led toggle
>>> About to toggle cpu_rdy pin<7>r2case_event(): Got type 11, code 8, value
>>> 0
>>> attempting led toggle
>>> About to toggle cpu_rdy pinMachine check in kernel mode.
>>> Data Read PLB Error
>>> Oops: Machine check, sig: 7 [#1]
>>> PowerPC 44x Platform
>>> Modules linked in:
>>> NIP: 0fea4048 LR: 0fea3f88 CTR: 00000004
>>> REGS: ef00bf10 TRAP: 0214   Not tainted  (3.7.0-rc2+)
>>> MSR: 0002d000 <CE,EE,PR,ME>  CR: 20000224  XER: 00000000
>>> TASK = efb54060[516] 'tcpborphserver3' THREAD: ef00a000
>>> GPR00: 00000000 bfcb7290 48031e20 10628bf9 4802c010 00000004 00000018
>>> 7f7f7f7f
>>> GPR08: 00000000 10628bf0 10628ba0 0fea3f80 20000222 1006ba18 00000000
>>> 00000000
>>> GPR16: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
>>> 00000000
>>> GPR24: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000004 10628bf9 10628bf9 0ff91ff4
>>> 4802c011
>>> NIP [0fea4048] 0xfea4048
>>> LR [0fea3f88] 0xfea3f88
>>> Call Trace:
>>> ---[ end trace 59d28c137ef7dde2 ]---
>>>
>>> roach VMA close
>>> roach release mem called
>>>
>>> -----
>>>
>>> If I then try to reboot the ROACH with shutdown -r now, it hardfreezes
>>> and requires a power cycle to get it running again.
>>>
>>> Any ideas where to look for this problem?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Glenn
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to