Path: news.mathworks.com!not-for-mail
From: <HIDDEN>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.matlab
Subject: Re: Porting Matlab code to tms320dm6437 evm
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:28:01 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: University of Pune
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <gq0jn1$jaf$1@fred.mathworks.com>
References: <gpbhha$6t4$1@fred.mathworks.com> <gpbs5p$86g$1@fred.mathworks.com> <86b43c11-d47b-472a-a49d-7c50dc2915f5@e36g2000prg.googlegroups.com> <gph9fc$kjc$1@fred.mathworks.com>
Reply-To: <HIDDEN>
NNTP-Posting-Host: webapp-05-blr.mathworks.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: fred.mathworks.com 1237570081 19791 172.30.248.35 (20 Mar 2009 17:28:01 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@mathworks.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:28:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: MATLAB Central Newsreader 1753069
Xref: news.mathworks.com comp.soft-sys.matlab:526474


"Arnaud Miege" <arnaud.miege@nospam.mathworks.co.uk> wrote in message <gph9fc$kjc$1@fred.mathworks.com>...
> 
> <pratham.delight@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:86b43c11-d47b-472a-a49d-7c50dc2915f5@e36g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> 
> Hi,
> Thank you for your apt reply. My doubt about the fourth option is
> whether the C code generated by the Real Time Workshop will be
> embeddable in the dm6437 or whether I'll have to port it into the
> processor via the Code Composer Studio. Also, as far as I know, I wont
> be able to use a few Matlab functions in the Embedded Matlab code.
> However, for these functions, there are redy-made blocks in Simulink.
> So should I prefer using the second option?
> 
> Thank You.
> Sincerely,
> Prathamesh Kulkarni.
> 
> ---------------
> 
> Hi,
> 
> The C code generated by Real-Time Workshop and Real-Time Workshop Embedded 
> Coder is ISO-ANSI C code, so should be embeddable on any real-time target, 
> provided the correct wrapper is wrriten for it. In your case, I would 
> recommend using Embedded IDE Link CC 
> (http://www.mathworks.com/products/ccslink/), which will allow to port the C 
> code generated to Code Composer Studio, which will make it easier to target 
> your specific processor. Whether you generate the code directly from MATLAB 
> or from Simulink is difficult to answer without looking at the actual code 
> (+it's not something I am very familiar with). If you know that there are 
> MATLAB functions in your code that are not compliant with Embedded MATLAB, 
> and that it would be difficult/time-consuming to modify the code to make it 
> compliant with Embedded MATLAB, then maybe you should consider Simulink. I 
> guess it's what environment you are feeling more at ease with.
> 
> HTH,
> 
> Arnaud 
> 
Hi,
What I'm planning to do is: 
For the inbuilt MATLAB functions like thresholding, which I need, I'll use ready made Simulink blocksets and for inserting my own code in the model, I'll use the Embedded MATLAB block in Simulink. Now, to put your code into this block, it has to be made compatible with the Emedded MATLAB subset. This is achievable to me since I've very few inbuilt functions in my code. I've the model ready in Simulink. However, the problem is it takes infinite time to simulate. I can convert this code to an embeddable code for DM6437 using the Real Time Workshop which creates a CCS project for my code. I can load this project into the board.
My question is: Is the above stated method recommended and widely used method for dumping a Matlab code on a daVinci board? Should I proceed with this? 
I have only 15 days in hand. So at this stage should I consider re-writing the code in C?