Re: [uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-11-12 Thread Steve deRosier
I think it was already suggested: you need to enable flow-control. Either hardware if you've got the pins setup right on that port or software (xon/xoff) if you don't. On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Raju B wrote: > Hi Michael, > > I have tried with baudrate = 9600 and 19200, then it is worki

Re: [uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-11-12 Thread Raju B
Hi Michael, I have tried with baudrate = 9600 and 19200, then it is working fine(i.e getting data, no overruns). but i want to use high speed(115200). can u please give any suggestion to over come this. Thanks &r Regards, Raju On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:06 PM, Michael Durrant wrote: > Raju, >

Re: [uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-11-09 Thread Raju B
Hi Michael Thank You, I will try and get back you. Thanks & Regards, Raju On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 10:06 PM, Michael Durrant wrote: > Raju, > > I would expect data overruns causing lost characters if your CPU > utilization is high and your kernel > driver can't get back to servicing the UART IR

Re: [uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-11-07 Thread Michael Durrant
Raju, I would expect data overruns causing lost characters if your CPU utilization is high and your kernel driver can't get back to servicing the UART IRQ fast enough. Your MCF523x part appears to have only a small FIFO buffer (a shift register and 3 receiver registers). So if the data rate

Re: [uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-11-06 Thread Raju B
Hi Michael, is there any mistakes in coldfire kernel level?. can u please help me to overcome this issue. Thanks & Regards, Raju B On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Raju B wrote: > Hi Michael, > > The ColdFire is 523x and using UART serial interface. > > Thanks & regards, > Raju B

Re: [uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-11-06 Thread Raju B
Hi Michael, The ColdFire is 523x and using UART serial interface. Thanks & regards, Raju B On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Michael Durrant wrote: > > Raj, > > Which ColdFire are you using? > Which serial interface are you seeing this with (UART/SPI/I2C/..)? > > Michael > > > On 11/05/2013

Re: [uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-11-05 Thread Michael Durrant
Raj, Which ColdFire are you using? Which serial interface are you seeing this with (UART/SPI/I2C/..)? Michael On 11/05/2013 07:40 AM, Raju B wrote: whenever i am trying to receive data from serial communication continuously in uClinux, I am getting every 10th byte is overwrite by 11 byte an

Re: [uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-11-05 Thread Raju B
whenever i am trying to receive data from serial communication continuously in uClinux, I am getting every 10th byte is overwrite by 11 byte and so on Iam using freescale coldfire processor. Could you any body please help me to resolve this issue. Thanks & Regards, Raj On Fri, Sep 13, 201

[uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-09-27 Thread Bair, Richard
Still struggling with 2.6.38 kernel and memory allocation. We've been RTFMing but still aren't able to run on 2.6.38. Any insight much appreciated. BACKGROUND: === - Application is unchanged and runs on 2.6.26 and not on 2.6.38. Both versions are based on Freescale BSP releases. - App

Re: [uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-09-13 Thread Lennart Sorensen
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:28:52AM -0400, Bair, Richard wrote: > I have a 4.7MB application that runs on the 2.6.26 kernel (Freescale BSP) and > am working to make it run on the 2.6.38 kernel released in the ColdFire BSP > in Feb 2012. I'm concerned about memory allocation as my first attempt to

[uClinux-dev] 2.6.38 in Freescale Feb 2012 BSP

2013-09-13 Thread Bair, Richard
I have a 4.7MB application that runs on the 2.6.26 kernel (Freescale BSP) and am working to make it run on the 2.6.38 kernel released in the ColdFire BSP in Feb 2012. I'm concerned about memory allocation as my first attempt to run on the 38 kernel appears to be using 2^n memory allocation vs.