[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
Michael,
I have the design ready, but I have one final question (before I check in
something that you might don't need). Let me explain how it is done right
now: there is or1200_qmem_top instance in or1200_top, this particular module
is mainly insn memory, but since it can be used as either ROM or RAM, and in
the case of latter, you need to load it first before you, it also has data
interface. So it can also be used as data memory (data memory means access
by load/store, insn memory means access by insn fetch) and hence it is
called qmem (as in quick memory). Now here comes the trick: because in
majority of cases it will be used mainly as insn memory for fetching
critical parts of code, it is only 32-bit writable. In other words, as it is
right now you can't use it for storing bytes/half words, but only full
32-bit words. Is this OK??
If it is OK, I'll check it in as branch qmem, otherwise I'll make
modifications and check it later with the modifications.
regards,
Damjan
----- Original Message -----
From: <mphan01@earthlink.net>
To: <mphan@nimbuswireless.com>; <openrisc@opencores.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 11:17 AM
Subject: RE: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
> Hi Damjan,
>
> Please let me know if you already checked in the new data base for "I
> RAM replacement for I cache".
> I hope you did have a chance to do the final testing.
>
> Thanks
>
> Michael Phan
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Phan" <mphan@n... >
> To: <openrisc@o... >
> Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 14:41:17 -0700
> Subject: RE: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
>
> >
> >
> > Sound good to me.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Michael Phan
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-openrisc@o...
> > [mailto:owner-openrisc@o... ]On Behalf Of Damjan Lampret
> > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 11:37 PM
> > To: Openrisc@O...
> > Subject: Re: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
> >
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > yes I'm back. Thanks.
> >
> > I'm doing some final testing so I'm sure I don't check-in some
> > garbage. I'll
> > check-in tomorrow evening or saturday (depending when I'm done
> with
> > testing).
> >
> > regards,
> > Damjan
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <mphan@n... >
> > To: <lampret@o... >; <openrisc@o... >
> > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 11:51 AM
> > Subject: Re: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
> >
> >
> > > Hi Damjan,
> > >
> > > I hope you are back from travelling and had a nice one.
> > > Did you check in the changes for "I RAM replacement for I
> > cache" yet?
> > > I am waiting to test it out.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Michael Phan
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Damjan Lampret" <lampret@o... >
> > > To: <mphan@n... >,
> > > <openrisc@o... >
> > > Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 00:47:12 -0700
> > > Subject: Re: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Michael,
> > > >
> > > > I assume you mean the I RAM replacement for I cache? Not
> > yet, for
> > > > the moment
> > > > you can use RAM connected to iwb and I'll commit the
> > changes to the
> > > > cvs next
> > > > weekend (I'm travelling this weekend until next weekend).
> > > >
> > > > regards,
> > > > Damjan
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: <mphan@n... >
> > > > To: <mphan@n... >;
> > > > <openrisc@o... >
> > > > Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 11:11 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > HI Damjan,
> > > > >
> > > > > Just want to touch base with you on this project,
> > "instruction
> > > > execution
> > > > > with 0 wait state", did yo have a chane to put the
> > changes
> > > > into the
> > > > > CVS so we can download and try them out.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks in advance
> > > > > Michael Phan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: mphan@n...
> > > > > To: lampret@o... , openrisc@o...
> > > > > Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 17:57:54 -0100
> > > > > Subject: Re: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Damjan,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your feedbacks are so precious and helpful to
> > our
> > > > project. Exactly,
> > > > > > we
> > > > > > don't need to use MMU and want to replace the
> > cache with
> > > > fixed
> > > > > > memory for instruction execution with 0 wait
> > state. So
> > > > please put
> > > > > > your
> > > > > > changes in the CVS at your convenience so we
> > can try it
> > > > out and
> > > > > > measure the performance improvement. Our
> > project needs
> > > > about 512
> > > > > KB
> > > > > > for the cache.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thousand thanks
> > > > > > Michael Phan
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Damjan Lampret" <lampret@o... >
> > > > > > To: <openrisc@o... >
> > > > > > Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 21:21:38 -0700
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: <mphan@n... >
> > > > > > > To: <openrisc@o... >
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2003 3:36 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: [openrisc] Cache Line Fill
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Damjan.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In the current design of orp_soc,
> > with
> > > > > > or1200_registered_ouput
> > > > > > > > supported, a cache line fill takes 8
> > clocks
> > > > (2-2-2-2) to
> > > > > > fetch
> > > > > > > 4 DWORDs
> > > > > > > > from the SRAM/FLASH. And a single
> > DWORD fetch
> > > > takes 3
> > > > > > clocks
> > > > > > > > (including one idle cycle of wb_cyc_o
> > > > deasserted).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > If we have a very fast internal SRAM,
> > is it
> > > > possible to
> > > > > > do a
> > > > > > > cache line
> > > > > > > fill
> > > > > > > > with 4/5 clocks (1/2-1-1-1) by
> > changing the
> > > > wb_stb logic
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > or1200_wb_biu.v and do a single DWORD
> > fetch
> > > > with 2
> > > > > > clocks.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > OR1200 is it is has been used in SoC
> > projects much
> > > > more
> > > > > > complxed
> > > > > > > than
> > > > > > > orp_soc. In all these projects the memory
> > subsystem
> > > > takes more
> > > > > > than
> > > > > > > 1/2-1-1-1. So the current 2-2-2-2 was fast
> > enough
> > > > for all
> > > > > > SoCs. If
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > however have faster memory subsystem than
> > > > modification of
> > > > > > > or1200_wb_biu and
> > > > > > > possibly IC/DC state machines will be
> > needed.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My next question is can we increase
> > to cache
> > > > size to 512
> > > > > > kB to
> > > > > > > reside
> > > > > > > > the whole firmware and execute
> > instructions
> > > > from it with
> > > > > > 0
> > > > > > > wait state.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you want to use MMUs, then no. This is
> > because
> > > > MMU's page
> > > > > > > translation is
> > > > > > > done at the same time as cache access -
> > virtual page
> > > > number is
> > > > > > > translated at
> > > > > > > the same time as cache hit is determined.
> > Since page
> > > > size is
> > > > > > 8KB,
> > > > > > > largest
> > > > > > > direct mapped cache can only be 8KB,
> > unless you use
> > > > several
> > > > > > ways,
> > > > > > > or unless
> > > > > > > cache access takes an additional clock
> > cycle (maybe
> > > > acceptable
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > data
> > > > > > > accesses ?).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Anyway if you don't need MMU, then your
> > caches sizes
> > > > are not
> > > > > > > limited. To
> > > > > > > increase cache size just add new IC/DC
> > configuration
> > > > (search
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > "configuration" in or1200_defines.v and
> > when you
> > > > find IC and
> > > > > > DC
> > > > > > > configurations, just add a new size and
> > then enable
> > > > new
> > > > > > > configuration).
> > > > > > > Right now there are configurations for 4KB
> > and 8KB
> > > > caches.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm working on one project where similar
> > to your
> > > > case all code
> > > > > > > needs to be
> > > > > > > accessible in 0 wait states. What I plan
> > to do is to
> > > > replaces
> > > > > > > caches with
> > > > > > > fixed memories - basically removing TAG
> > RAMs and
> > > > making sure
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > the "hit"
> > > > > > > always happens when accessing certain
> > address range
> > > > and never
> > > > > > > happens when
> > > > > > > accesssing outside of that range. This
> > will
> > > > effectively
> > > > > > "change
> > > > > > > caches into
> > > > > > > fixed RAMs much like DSP RAMs or similar).
> > > > > > > If you want these changes, I can put them
> > into the
> > > > cvs with
> > > > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > defines. But it will take a few days.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > regards,
> > > > > > > Damjan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Michael Phan
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --
> To unsubscribe from openrisc mailing list please visit
http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml
>
--
To unsubscribe from openrisc mailing list please visit http://www.opencores.org/mailinglists.shtml