<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic S32Z RTU0 core0 performance issue in S32Z/E</title>
    <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2356091#M304</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I am running some test code on S32Z270 RTU0 core 0 (R52) with RTU0_CORE_CLK set to 1GHz where the execution time seems to too long.&amp;nbsp; In comparison I am running the same code on SS32K388 core 0 (CM7) with core clock set 320MHz.&amp;nbsp; Given the clock frequency increase I would have expected some faster execution but instead the execution time is longer.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Build/compilation flags are held identical for both binaries (see attached txt file buildinfo.h)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(1) Since the clock configuration in the S32 Configuration Tool is kind of sophisticated for the S32Z how can I make sure the RTU0 core 0 clock frequency is 1GHz as intended?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have routed out the RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK via MC_CGM_3_MUX4_CSC (e.g., SEL_CTL = 0x3D) to CLKOUT_4 (PAD_040 of BGA594) including a divider of 10 in MC_CGM_3_MUX4_DC_0 (e.g., DIV = 0x9).&amp;nbsp; See also attached register readings.&amp;nbsp; If I measure 50MHz at CLKOUT_4, can I presume that (a) RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK is 500MHz and (b) RTU0_CORE_CLK is 1GHz?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CGM_3_MUX_4_Register_Configuration.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383545i36C238F396D827E8/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CGM_3_MUX_4_Register_Configuration.png" alt="CGM_3_MUX_4_Register_Configuration.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CLOCKOUT4_Measurements_RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK_50MHz.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383548iC98078EC49FA7E3B/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CLOCKOUT4_Measurements_RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK_50MHz.png" alt="CLOCKOUT4_Measurements_RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK_50MHz.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(2) I have measured the execution time of pin writes to GPIO using S32Z RTD2.0.1 and measuring high/low times of scope channel CH5 - TESTFLAG which is roughly 3.4us. Is there the possibility that you could confirm whether they seem to be alright or too slow?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Screenshot 2026-04-25 123853.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383551i953CE096312FD10E/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Screenshot 2026-04-25 123853.png" alt="Screenshot 2026-04-25 123853.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Setting_GPIO_Low_3.4us.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383549i34C2E01D659469F5/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Setting_GPIO_Low_3.4us.png" alt="Setting_GPIO_Low_3.4us.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Setting_GPIO_High_3.4us.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383550i91DC76C42E27B98D/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Setting_GPIO_High_3.4us.png" alt="Setting_GPIO_High_3.4us.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(3) I am not sure what I am missing.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2026 16:45:24 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>DirkEtzler</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2026-04-25T16:45:24Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>S32Z RTU0 core0 performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2356091#M304</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I am running some test code on S32Z270 RTU0 core 0 (R52) with RTU0_CORE_CLK set to 1GHz where the execution time seems to too long.&amp;nbsp; In comparison I am running the same code on SS32K388 core 0 (CM7) with core clock set 320MHz.&amp;nbsp; Given the clock frequency increase I would have expected some faster execution but instead the execution time is longer.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Build/compilation flags are held identical for both binaries (see attached txt file buildinfo.h)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(1) Since the clock configuration in the S32 Configuration Tool is kind of sophisticated for the S32Z how can I make sure the RTU0 core 0 clock frequency is 1GHz as intended?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have routed out the RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK via MC_CGM_3_MUX4_CSC (e.g., SEL_CTL = 0x3D) to CLKOUT_4 (PAD_040 of BGA594) including a divider of 10 in MC_CGM_3_MUX4_DC_0 (e.g., DIV = 0x9).&amp;nbsp; See also attached register readings.&amp;nbsp; If I measure 50MHz at CLKOUT_4, can I presume that (a) RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK is 500MHz and (b) RTU0_CORE_CLK is 1GHz?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CGM_3_MUX_4_Register_Configuration.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383545i36C238F396D827E8/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CGM_3_MUX_4_Register_Configuration.png" alt="CGM_3_MUX_4_Register_Configuration.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="CLOCKOUT4_Measurements_RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK_50MHz.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383548iC98078EC49FA7E3B/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="CLOCKOUT4_Measurements_RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK_50MHz.png" alt="CLOCKOUT4_Measurements_RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK_50MHz.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(2) I have measured the execution time of pin writes to GPIO using S32Z RTD2.0.1 and measuring high/low times of scope channel CH5 - TESTFLAG which is roughly 3.4us. Is there the possibility that you could confirm whether they seem to be alright or too slow?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Screenshot 2026-04-25 123853.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383551i953CE096312FD10E/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Screenshot 2026-04-25 123853.png" alt="Screenshot 2026-04-25 123853.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Setting_GPIO_Low_3.4us.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383549i34C2E01D659469F5/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Setting_GPIO_Low_3.4us.png" alt="Setting_GPIO_Low_3.4us.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Setting_GPIO_High_3.4us.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383550i91DC76C42E27B98D/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Setting_GPIO_High_3.4us.png" alt="Setting_GPIO_High_3.4us.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(3) I am not sure what I am missing.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 25 Apr 2026 16:45:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2356091#M304</guid>
      <dc:creator>DirkEtzler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-04-25T16:45:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: S32Z RTU0 core0 performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2356207#M305</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi，&lt;SPAN&gt;DirkEtzler&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thank you for contacting us.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;1.Do you use the development board or customer board?&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;2. Are you using the IDE of S32DS? What is the version of IDE for you testing?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;3. Could you share your testing code with me?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;BR&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Joey&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 02:11:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2356207#M305</guid>
      <dc:creator>Joey_z</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-04-27T02:11:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: S32Z RTU0 core0 performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2356604#M307</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.nxp.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/236188"&gt;@Joey_z&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;thanks for the quick reply.&amp;nbsp; Please see below my answers to the questions:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;1) I am using a combination of the S32Z2XX motherboard + S32Z2XX daughterboard.&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; a) S32ZXX motherboard X-S32X-MB version A&lt;BR /&gt;&amp;nbsp; &amp;nbsp; b) S32ZXX daughterboard SCH-50588 REV B2 / 700-50588 REV A2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="S32Z2XX_Complete_Setup.jpg" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383695iF5820893A0717FB2/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="S32Z2XX_Complete_Setup.jpg" alt="S32Z2XX_Complete_Setup.jpg" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="S32Z2XX_Motherboard_Tag.jpg" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383696i67693169B9569321/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="S32Z2XX_Motherboard_Tag.jpg" alt="S32Z2XX_Motherboard_Tag.jpg" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="S32Z2XX_Daughterboard_Tag.jpg" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383697i7DF2E8EEBDDCE198/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="S32Z2XX_Daughterboard_Tag.jpg" alt="S32Z2XX_Daughterboard_Tag.jpg" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;2) Code is compiled and linked using S32DS Version 3.6.7 Build 260420.&amp;nbsp; There is no change when using previous releases of the S32DS such as Version 3.6.6 or 3.6.5.&amp;nbsp; I am using RTD2.0.1 for S32Z2XX.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Screenshot 2026-04-27 092032.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383698iF5CBE97A41904962/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Screenshot 2026-04-27 092032.png" alt="Screenshot 2026-04-27 092032.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Screenshot 2026-04-27 092336.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383700i93421940C0E24948/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Screenshot 2026-04-27 092336.png" alt="Screenshot 2026-04-27 092336.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;3) I will send a copy of the project using DM.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 13:27:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2356604#M307</guid>
      <dc:creator>DirkEtzler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-04-27T13:27:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: S32Z RTU0 core0 performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2356609#M308</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Attached is also a photo of the package markings.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Scan from 2026-04-27 09_28_21 AM.jpg" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383703i21FECFF5B6C92395/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Scan from 2026-04-27 09_28_21 AM.jpg" alt="Scan from 2026-04-27 09_28_21 AM.jpg" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 13:31:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2356609#M308</guid>
      <dc:creator>DirkEtzler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-04-27T13:31:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: S32Z RTU0 core0 performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2357714#M309</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,&lt;SPAN&gt;DirkEtzler&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Thank you for your reply and detail information.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I will help you to check it and reply to you late.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;BR&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Joey&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 11:21:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2357714#M309</guid>
      <dc:creator>Joey_z</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-04-28T11:21:34Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: S32Z RTU0 core0 performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2358201#M310</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi,DirkEtzler&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Sorry for the reply late.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;(1) I have routed out the RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK via MC_CGM_3_MUX4_CSC (e.g., SEL_CTL = 0x3D) to CLKOUT_4 (PAD_040 of BGA594) including a divider of 10 in MC_CGM_3_MUX4_DC_0 (e.g., DIV = 0x9). See also attached register readings. If I measure 50MHz at CLKOUT_4, can I presume that (a) RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK is 500MHz and (b) RTU0_CORE_CLK is 1GHz?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;gt;&amp;gt;&amp;gt;About this question, the number 7 is assigned to&amp;nbsp;RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK, you also should program GPR3.CLKOUT4SE to set this value. Could you try to confirm if you have set this register?&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="Joey_z_0-1777434680768.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.nxp.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/383922i342E3A6FCEE00F10/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="Joey_z_0-1777434680768.png" alt="Joey_z_0-1777434680768.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;BR&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Joey&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 03:57:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2358201#M310</guid>
      <dc:creator>Joey_z</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-04-29T03:57:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: S32Z RTU0 core0 performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2359660#M311</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Hello&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.nxp.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/236188"&gt;@Joey_z&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;With respect to this question:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;EM&gt;&amp;gt;&amp;gt;&amp;gt;About this question, the number 7 is assigned to&amp;nbsp;RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK, you also should program GPR3.CLKOUT4SE to set this value.&amp;nbsp; Could you try to confirm if you have set this register?&lt;/EM&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have checked register settings for&amp;nbsp;GPR3.CLKOUT4SEL[MUXSEL] which is set to 7 to select RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK in the corresponding multiplexer.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2026 13:40:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2359660#M311</guid>
      <dc:creator>DirkEtzler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-05-01T13:40:20Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: S32Z RTU0 core0 performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2360478#M313</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.nxp.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/236188"&gt;@Joey_z&lt;/a&gt;,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am not sure my previous message went through and was recognized as a reply.&amp;nbsp; I have checked GPR3.CLKOUT4SEL[MUXSEL] is set to 0x7 and thus, routing&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN&gt;RTU0_CORE_DIV2_CLK through the multiplexer.&amp;nbsp; Using the described configuration and seeing 50MHz at the output pin, I presume the RTU0 core is clocked with 1GHz.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;If the core frequency is set to 1GHz and I still do not see the expected performance (e.g., using CoreMark testbench) what else could be incorrect configured?&amp;nbsp; How can I check if the cache is configured correctly?&amp;nbsp; I have been looking through the assembler startup script and also the used linker script and cannot find anything that looks suspicious.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 12:27:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/S32Z-E/S32Z-RTU0-core0-performance-issue/m-p/2360478#M313</guid>
      <dc:creator>DirkEtzler</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-05-05T12:27:03Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

