<?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>i.MX Processorsのトピックmx50 EIM_BCLK problems and WEIM_BASE_ADDR</title>
    <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/mx50-EIM-BCLK-problems-and-WEIM-BASE-ADDR/m-p/209434#M12364</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi freescale friends,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm working with a i.mx508 board, very similar to the RD3 board. I've been trying to get an fpga interfaced on CS1 and hitting a set of problems. Here are the details:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;a) WEIM_BASE_ADDR&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In the 2.6.35.3 release, the code says:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/mx5x.h:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;#define WEIM_BASE_ADDR&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; (AIPS2_BASE_ADDR + 0x000DA000)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That seems incorrect to me because IMX50RM.pdf shows that WEIM is at:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Addresses: EIM_CS0GCR1 is 63FD_8000h base + 0h offset = 63FD_8000h&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; (page 1135)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;but if I change the value of WEIM_BASE_ADDR in mx5x.h to be + 0xD8000, I then get an unhandled fault upon read access of that address/register.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;XXXjaya reached setup_cs1:2399 weimbase physical=0x63fd8000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; XXXjaya reached setup_cs1:2400 weimbase ioremap=0xa086e000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; XXXjaya reached setup_cs1:2420&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;SPAN class="il"&gt;Unhandled&lt;/SPAN&gt; fault: external abort on non-linefetch (0x008) at 0xa086e000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;where the code was:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; weim_base = ioremap(MX53_BASE_ADDR(WEIM_BASE_ADDR), SZ_4K);&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; printk(KERN_INFO "XXXjaya reached %s:%d weimbase physical=0x%x\n", __func__, __LINE__, MX53_BASE_ADDR(WEIM_BASE_ADDR));&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; printk(KERN_INFO "XXXjaya reached %s:%d weimbase ioremap=0x%p\n", __func__, __LINE__, weim_base);&lt;/P&gt;&lt;TABLE&gt;&lt;TBODY&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;reg = readl(weim_base + 0x0);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;printk(KERN_INFO "XXXjaya %s:%d EIM base=0x%x\n", __func__, __LINE__, reg)&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;/TBODY&gt;&lt;/TABLE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;btw, I'm using &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;the MX53_BASE_ADDR macro there because the mx5x.h header has its AIPS2_BASE_ADDR as + 0x2000_0000 of the actual value.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;Anyone have any ideas why I'm getting a unhandled fault? Looking at mm.c, it looks like this range has a valid 1MB mapping setup.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;b) If I leave WEIM_BASE alone, ie: to get 0x63FD_A000, then when I set the registers using:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ioremap(MX53_BASE_ADDR(WEIM_BASE_ADDR), SZ_4K);&lt;/P&gt;&lt;TABLE&gt;&lt;TBODY&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x0021008F, weim_base + 0x18);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x00001000, weim_base + 0x1C);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x0C300010, weim_base + 0x20);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x00000008, weim_base + 0x24);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x08600008, weim_base + 0x28);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x00000000, weim_base + 0x2C);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;/TBODY&gt;&lt;/TABLE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The register writes succeed and I can read them back. When I test with this, I see EIM_CS1 assert, EIM_LBA and EIM_RW too when I do a userspace 32-bit read from 0xF400_0000 (via mmap of /dev/mem). But EIM_BCLK does not get driven. I've tried various settings for the EIM config registers, eg: BCM/SRW/SRD and not getting BCLK at all. My guess is that since WEIM_BASE is wrong in mx5x.h, I'm just getting the default behavior for WEIM which might be one where BCLK doesn't get asserted.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;btw, I've enabled weim_clk and it shows up in /proc/cpu/clocks.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;root@freescale ~$ cat /proc/cpu/clocks | grep -i eim&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;weim_clk1-0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ______&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 2&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 66666666 (66MHz)&lt;BR /&gt;weim_clk-0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; PA____&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 1&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 133333333 (133MHz)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;I'd appreciate any advice on what to look at or debug. If anyone could confirm that EIM_BCLK should assert for a 32-bit read/write, that would also be useful.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;Thanks,&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;jaya&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2012 07:58:26 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>jayakumar2</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-12-15T07:58:26Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>mx50 EIM_BCLK problems and WEIM_BASE_ADDR</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/mx50-EIM-BCLK-problems-and-WEIM-BASE-ADDR/m-p/209434#M12364</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi freescale friends,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm working with a i.mx508 board, very similar to the RD3 board. I've been trying to get an fpga interfaced on CS1 and hitting a set of problems. Here are the details:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;a) WEIM_BASE_ADDR&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In the 2.6.35.3 release, the code says:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/mx5x.h:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;#define WEIM_BASE_ADDR&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; (AIPS2_BASE_ADDR + 0x000DA000)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;That seems incorrect to me because IMX50RM.pdf shows that WEIM is at:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Addresses: EIM_CS0GCR1 is 63FD_8000h base + 0h offset = 63FD_8000h&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; (page 1135)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;but if I change the value of WEIM_BASE_ADDR in mx5x.h to be + 0xD8000, I then get an unhandled fault upon read access of that address/register.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;XXXjaya reached setup_cs1:2399 weimbase physical=0x63fd8000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; XXXjaya reached setup_cs1:2400 weimbase ioremap=0xa086e000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; XXXjaya reached setup_cs1:2420&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; &lt;SPAN class="il"&gt;Unhandled&lt;/SPAN&gt; fault: external abort on non-linefetch (0x008) at 0xa086e000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;where the code was:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt; weim_base = ioremap(MX53_BASE_ADDR(WEIM_BASE_ADDR), SZ_4K);&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; printk(KERN_INFO "XXXjaya reached %s:%d weimbase physical=0x%x\n", __func__, __LINE__, MX53_BASE_ADDR(WEIM_BASE_ADDR));&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; printk(KERN_INFO "XXXjaya reached %s:%d weimbase ioremap=0x%p\n", __func__, __LINE__, weim_base);&lt;/P&gt;&lt;TABLE&gt;&lt;TBODY&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;reg = readl(weim_base + 0x0);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;printk(KERN_INFO "XXXjaya %s:%d EIM base=0x%x\n", __func__, __LINE__, reg)&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;/TBODY&gt;&lt;/TABLE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;btw, I'm using &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;the MX53_BASE_ADDR macro there because the mx5x.h header has its AIPS2_BASE_ADDR as + 0x2000_0000 of the actual value.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;Anyone have any ideas why I'm getting a unhandled fault? Looking at mm.c, it looks like this range has a valid 1MB mapping setup.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;b) If I leave WEIM_BASE alone, ie: to get 0x63FD_A000, then when I set the registers using:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;ioremap(MX53_BASE_ADDR(WEIM_BASE_ADDR), SZ_4K);&lt;/P&gt;&lt;TABLE&gt;&lt;TBODY&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x0021008F, weim_base + 0x18);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x00001000, weim_base + 0x1C);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x0C300010, weim_base + 0x20);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x00000008, weim_base + 0x24);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x08600008, weim_base + 0x28);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;__raw_writel(0x00000000, weim_base + 0x2C);&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;/TBODY&gt;&lt;/TABLE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The register writes succeed and I can read them back. When I test with this, I see EIM_CS1 assert, EIM_LBA and EIM_RW too when I do a userspace 32-bit read from 0xF400_0000 (via mmap of /dev/mem). But EIM_BCLK does not get driven. I've tried various settings for the EIM config registers, eg: BCM/SRW/SRD and not getting BCLK at all. My guess is that since WEIM_BASE is wrong in mx5x.h, I'm just getting the default behavior for WEIM which might be one where BCLK doesn't get asserted.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;btw, I've enabled weim_clk and it shows up in /proc/cpu/clocks.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;root@freescale ~$ cat /proc/cpu/clocks | grep -i eim&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;weim_clk1-0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; ______&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 2&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 66666666 (66MHz)&lt;BR /&gt;weim_clk-0&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; PA____&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 1&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; 133333333 (133MHz)&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;I'd appreciate any advice on what to look at or debug. If anyone could confirm that EIM_BCLK should assert for a 32-bit read/write, that would also be useful.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;Thanks,&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;jaya&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2012 07:58:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/mx50-EIM-BCLK-problems-and-WEIM-BASE-ADDR/m-p/209434#M12364</guid>
      <dc:creator>jayakumar2</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-12-15T07:58:26Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: mx50 EIM_BCLK problems and WEIM_BASE_ADDR</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/mx50-EIM-BCLK-problems-and-WEIM-BASE-ADDR/m-p/209435#M12365</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Just an update to this. We don't understand why or how, but performing a md.l f0000000 20 (ie: a CS0 range access) while in u-boot and then subsequently doing the same setup (no changes) causes the accesses to work (ie: system no longer hangs):&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;root@freescale ~$ /unit_tests/memtool -32 f0000000 20&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Reading 0x20 count starting at address 0xF0000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000000:&amp;nbsp; 0001FFFF 00030002 00050004 EEABEEAA&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000010:&amp;nbsp; 00090008 EEAFEEAE 000D000C EEABEEAA&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000020:&amp;nbsp; 00110010 00130012 00150014 EEABEEAA&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000030:&amp;nbsp; 00190018 001B001A 001D001C EEABEEAA&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Does anyone have a possible explanation for this? My guess is that doing the md.l access in u-boot has some side effect on the cache/TLB that makes this work? Relevant register settings below.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;root@freescale ~$ /unit_tests/memtool -32 53fd4000 20&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Reading 0x20 count starting at address 0x53FD4000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FD4000: 000012FF 00000000 00000034 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FD4010: 00000000 0A080980 00010006 F321F133&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FD4020: 00000000 00410000 00400040 00400040&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FD4030: 00000000 00000000 02080000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FD4040: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FD4050: 00000000 03000021 00000000 FFFFFFFF&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FD4060: 000A00F0 00000000 150300C1 000003C0&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FD4070: 0C303400 00000000 00000C00 000D3000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;root@freescale ~$ /unit_tests/memtool -32 63fda000 26&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Reading 0x26 count starting at address 0x63FDA000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA000: 00610089 00001002 1C022000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA010: 1C092480 00000000 00010080 00001000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA020: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA030: 00010080 00001000 00000000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA040: 00000000 00000000 00010080 00001000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA050: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA060: 00010080 00001000 00000000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA070: 00000000 00000000 00010080 00001000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA080: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x63FDA090: 00000020 00000010&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;root@freescale ~$ /unit_tests/memtool -32 53fa8000 20&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Reading 0x20 count starting at address 0x53FA8000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FA8000: 00000000 00190005 00000000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FA8010: 00000000 00000016 00000000 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FA8020: 00000001 00000001 00000001 00000001&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FA8030: 00000001 00000001 00000001 00000001&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FA8040: 00000010 00000010 00000010 00000010&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FA8050: 00000001 00000001 00000001 00000001&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FA8060: 00000001 00000001 00000001 00000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0x53FA8070: 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000001&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;root@freescale ~$ /unit_tests/memtool -32 f0000000 20&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Reading 0x20 count starting at address 0xF0000000&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000000: EEBBEEBA 00030002 00050004 00070006&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000010: EEBBEEBA 000B000A 000D000C 000F000E&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000020: EEBBEEBA 00130012 00150014 00170016&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000030: EEBBEEBA 001B001A 001D001C 001F001E&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000040: EEBBEEBA 00230022 00250024 00270026&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000050: EEBBEEBA 002B002A 002D002C 002F002E&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000060: EEBBEEBA 00330032 00250024 00370036&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;0xF0000070: EEBBEEBA 003B003A 003D003C 003F003E&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN class="mce_paste_marker"&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2013 09:20:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/mx50-EIM-BCLK-problems-and-WEIM-BASE-ADDR/m-p/209435#M12365</guid>
      <dc:creator>jayakumar2</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-03-01T09:20:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: mx50 EIM_BCLK problems and WEIM_BASE_ADDR</title>
      <link>https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/mx50-EIM-BCLK-problems-and-WEIM-BASE-ADDR/m-p/209436#M12366</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"&gt;Have you configured EIM PIN Mux correctly? In mx50_rdp.c, you can see the EIM pins are configured as KEY and GPIO&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;TABLE&gt;&lt;TBODY&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA0__KEY_COL4,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA1__KEY_ROW4,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA2__KEY_COL5,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA3__KEY_ROW5,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA4__KEY_COL6,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA5__KEY_ROW6,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA6__KEY_COL7,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA7__KEY_ROW7,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;/*EIM pads */&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA8__GPIO_1_8,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA9__GPIO_1_9,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA10__GPIO_1_10,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA11__GPIO_1_11,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA12__GPIO_1_12,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA13__GPIO_1_13,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA14__GPIO_1_14,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_DA15__GPIO_1_15,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_CS2__GPIO_1_16,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_CS1__GPIO_1_17,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_CS0__GPIO_1_18,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_EB0__GPIO_1_19,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_EB1__GPIO_1_20,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_WAIT__GPIO_1_21,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_BCLK__GPIO_1_22,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_RDY__GPIO_1_23,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_OE__GPIO_1_24,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_RW__GPIO_1_25,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;TR&gt;&lt;TD&gt;&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;TD&gt;MX50_PAD_EIM_LBA__GPIO_1_26,&lt;/TD&gt;&lt;/TR&gt;&lt;/TBODY&gt;&lt;/TABLE&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;SPAN style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: Arial, sans-serif;"&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 03:10:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.nxp.com/t5/i-MX-Processors/mx50-EIM-BCLK-problems-and-WEIM-BASE-ADDR/m-p/209436#M12366</guid>
      <dc:creator>GraceH</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2013-05-02T03:10:31Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

