mcf5329 cache or SDRAM problem ?

cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

mcf5329 cache or SDRAM problem ?

1,104 Views
schranzo
Contributor I

Hello,

 

we have a weird problem on a MCF5329-based board (16 MB SDRAM, 16 MB NOR-Flash).

On bootup (assembler), we first invalidate the cache completely:

  move.l  #CACR_CINVA|CACR_ESB|CACR_DNFB,d0
  movec   d0,cacr

  nop

After initializing some stuff, among them the SDRAMC, the cache is enabled with:

  move.l  #CACR_EC|CACR_ESB|CACR_DNFB|CACR_DCM_CIP,d0
  movec   d0,cacr

  nop

 

Looking at the memory with the debugger (winIDEA using BDM) when

single-stepping the enabling 'movec   d0,cacr', the memory content of the SDRAM starting

at 0x40000000 (cache off):

00 11 22 33 44 55 66 77 88 99 aa bb cc dd ee ff 

01 12 23 34 45 56 67 78 89 9a ab bc cd de ef f0

.

.

 

changes in this way (cache on):

00 11 22 33 44 55 66 77 00 11 22 33 44 55 66 77

01 12 23 34 45 56 67 78 01 12 23 34 45 56 67 78

.

.

 

That is, every 8 bytes are mirrored onto the following 8 bytes. 

Disabling the cache restores the old, correct memory content.

This problem does _not_ occur when the cache is enabled on

the NOR-flash, so it seems to be related to the SDRAM.

 

I am suspecting that it could somehow be related to the SDRAM-bursts,

because the cache can, as far as i know, initiate burst transfers. 

 

We have an older board which does not have this problem. We triple-checked

the schematics, but it seems ok. But layout changed a bit between the boards,

so the problem could also be timing-related.

 

Does anyone have any idea ?

 

Any help is very appreciated ! 

Labels (1)
0 Kudos
Reply
1 Reply

465 Views
schranzo
Contributor I

Update:

 

we might have found the problem:

at initialization of the SDRAM, we did: 

    move.l    (a1)+,#0x008B0000    // Issue LMR
    move.l    (a1)+,#0x40130000    // Lock SDMR

 

The second command is the problem, it seems to apply to an 'extended mode register',

but our SDRAM does not have such a register. Removing this command solves the problem.

Does anybody know something about this ?

 

Thanks,

 

Wolfram 

0 Kudos
Reply