Custom Search
Site Home Archive Home FAQ Home How to search the Archive How to Navigate the Archive
Compare FPGA features and resources
Threads starting:
Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
Melanie Nasic wrote:
> Hi Jerry,
>
> thanks for your response(s).
Sorry 'bout that -- Google claimed the first one hadn't posted, so I
tried again...
> Sounds quite promising. Do you know something
> about hardware implementation of the compression schemes you propose? Are
> there already VHDL examples available or at least C reference models?
I don't believe I've seen any VHDL code for it. One place that has C
code is:
ftp://ftp.cs.cornell.edu/pub/multimed/ljpg.tar.Z
I suspect Google would turn up a few more implementations as well. If
you like printed information, you might consider _Image and Video
Compression Standards: Algorithms and Architectures; Second Edition_ by
Bhaskaran and Konstantinides. Published by Kluwer Academic Publishers,
ISBN 0-7923-9952-8. It doesn't go into tremendous detail, but it's one
of the few (that I know of) that discusses lossless JPEG at all.
--
Later,
Jerry.
Article: 93526There is no free lunch but there is FREE Spartan3E board this Christmas! As it doesnt look that an announcement from Xilinx comes (today) I summarize what info is available: Avnet and NuHorizon have the the boards (I assume ready to ship from stock). Nu website says CALL, but Avnet website confirms that the board is really FREE OF CHARGE. From Avnet the offer is only valid for North America. Board schematic, user manual and one reference design can be downloaded from digilent my review and commentars is there http://xilant.com/content/view/24/55/ (free access no registration required to read) a short intro about the standalone programming utility is there http://xilant.com/content/view/28/51/ the release date may delay a bit as I may have destroyed my board partially so I am having trouble verifying the flash programming algorithm. SPECIAL OFFER for everyone who registers at www.xilant.com in 2005 this utility (and its upgrades) is also FREE OF CHARGE. I wish a merry christmas, and hope many of you will have fun with the Spartan3E :) AnttiArticle: 93527
Looks like it back to sqaure one then.. doing it myself. Too bad OpenCores doesn't have one. Maybe when I finish this one I can submit it and save other poor saps like me the trouble. :-D -AdamArticle: 93528
Adam, if I were you, I would contact Zilog. The Z8000 is their design, they probably have some legal rights (patents must be expired, since the Z8000 was introduced around 1980, but there may be copyrights etc that live much longer). The Z8000 had many fans, especially in the military markets. Maybe Zilog will help you, in order to help their frustrated Z8000 users. You never know. They may become your friend, and you definitely do not want them as your enemy... Peter Alfke (at Zilog only 1978-1980)Article: 93529
You don't need a special license to use the embedded Virtex4 TriMode Ethernet MAC. Check out Gigabit System Reference Design (GSRD) such an EDK project: http://www.xilinx.com/gsrd/ Paul "Marco T." wrote: > > Hallo, > I'm planning to buy a development board based on Virtex-4FX. > > I have read about V-4FX that ethernet mac is inside the FPGA. > > I should buy also the license to use it when I make a project into EDK for > plb interface? > > Many Thanks > MarcoArticle: 93530
The fully opensource Linux path on the Xilinx PowerPC 405 works just fine. For the kernel, the UIUC page listed below is excellent. It discusses how to to use Dan Kegel's crosstool and the linux kernel from penguinppc.org. For the root filesystem, Yellow Dog Linux root filesystem works well. More adventurous folks than I have reported success with a Red Hat powerpc root filesystem but I still need to try that out myself. Starting from EDK Base System Builder all the way through to running sytem takes about four hours mostly in downloading all the source required. Paul Alex Gibson wrote: > > "Antti Lukats" <antti@openchip.org> wrote in message > news:dogh9h$s4e$00$1@news.t-online.com... > > "Alex Gibson" <news@alxx.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > > news:411umcF1cgt5hU1@individual.net... > >> > >> "bjzhangwn" <bjzhangwn@163.com> wrote in message > >> news:1135317395.120472.211170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > >>>I want to learn more about this! > >>> > >> > >> look at uclinux > >> > >> uclinux on microblaze > >> http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~jwilliams/mblaze-uclinux > >> > >> uclinux for nios2 > >> http://www.enseirb.fr/~kadionik/embedded/uclinux/nios-uclinux.html > >> http://www.enseirb.fr/~kadionik/embedded/uclinux/HOWTO_compile_uClinux_for_NIOS.html > >> > >> http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS9386138954.html > >> > >> Note I don't know if that is the correct link for Nios as have only used > >> uclinux on microblaze. > >> > >> Can also run full linux on v2pro and v4FX with ppc hard cores. > >> > >> Alex > >> > > Alex, you as many others are saying that 'can run full linux' on V2P/V4, > > but well I belive that > > and I do know it works, but there seems to be only one way to the goal, > > namly montavista > > > > trying the full linux on virtex by using EDK and opensource linux kernel > > seems to be a real > > pain, and yes I have studied all the info about this on the web, all > > references go back to > > montavista, or V2PDK. > > > > So maybe you know where to get HOWTO > > > > EDK+opensource ppc-linux, all done in one day? > > > > I know that Denx did a lot of work for V2Pro ppc linux, but as Xilinx did > > not talk the them then they got really pissed off and stopped their > > efforts for the Virtex PPC linux support. And montavista is something very > > strange type of entity, can not understand what they are selling or > > offering or what it costs :( > > > > Antti > > I haven't tried denix myself but believe it can be made to run. > Download their eldk. Could try asking on the uclinux microblaze list. > A lot of the guys there know a lot lot more than me on this. > > Have not been doing much with fpgas / edk lately > working on TI DM642 based video systems. > And preparing to work on cradle mdsp based systems. > > Alex > > From the microblaze uclinux list > microblaze-uclinux mailing list > microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au > Project Home Page : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~jwilliams/mblaze-uclinux > Mailing List Archive : > http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~listarch/microblaze-uclinux/ > (email addresses deleted) > > In thread titled "New Digilentinc board" back in April this year. > OP was myself. > > Paul Hartke wrote: > Or http://www.crhc.uiuc.edu/IMPACT/gsrc/hardwarelab/docs/kernel-HOWTO.html > > I've already used these helpful references to get a Linux kernel running on > the PowerPC405 on the Digilent XUP-V2Pro board. I'm new to ucLinux but it > doesn't appear to be much more complicated than the ucLinux steps. > > Paul > > Quoting Schunke Jan-Hendrik : > Hi Aurash, hi John, > > We are working with the PPC on virtex2p. You do not need Monta Vista > Linux. > All you need is denx eldk: http://www.denx.de/twiki/bin/view/DULG/ELDK > And the penguin ppc linux distribution: > http://www.penguinppc.org/kernel/#developers > (we are using the 2.4 Kernel) > To get started: http://www.klingauf.de/v2p/index.phtml might be helpful. > > On the other hand we are also using uClinux on spartan3. > It is really a question of what hardware you have and what you want to do > ;-) > > Have Fun > Jan > >Article: 93531
How would I be violating anything if I made a Z8000 equivalent design in Verilog/VHDL? I mean, if they had source for it, and I tweaked it slightly and called it my own, I can see where that crosses the line. But reverse engineering a design from its databook and creating a clone isn't copyright infringement from what I understand. What do you think? -AdamArticle: 93532
No, Ethernet MAC is hard core and it's free.Article: 93533
In the early 70's there was a company that built an early
microprocessor, and gave it the Data General Nova instruction set
("it's popular, so why burden designers with another architecture?")
Data General sued, I got dragged in as witness, and if I remember
right, DG won.
Too many lawyers, too few good engineers. My opinion. Peter Alfke
Shakespeare wrote in the Second Part of King Henry the Sixth, Act IV
Scene 2:
CADE. 'I thank you, good people- there shall be no money; all shall eat
and drink on my score, and I will apparel them all in one livery, that
they may agree like brothers and worship me their lord.'
DICK. 'The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers.'
Article: 93534But isn't that how Intel was founded? Didn't they reverse engineer IBM's 8086 and create their own (or was it the 8080). In fact, IBM was making x86 equivalent CPUs for a while before they went full force with PPC. And then there's AMD who's still doing it.. etc..etc. And also, if that were the case, I would also think that guys who write software emulators that emulate specific processors would also get hammered. I'm only mimiking what's already been done: http://www.systemyde.com/proc_tab.html http://smaplab.ri.uah.edu/dmsms/damarlas.pdf http://csdl2.computer.org/persagen/DLAbsToc.jsp?resourcePath=/dl/proceedings/viuf/&toc=comp/proceedings/viuf/1999/0465/00/0465toc.xml&DOI=10.1109/VIUF.1999.801975Article: 93535
Let me clarify: Intel developed and designed the 4004, then 8008, which evolved into the 8080. Then there ws the race to 16 bits: Intel 8086, Motorola 68000, and Zilog Z8000. Intel also made an economy-version of the 8086, called 8088 (8-bit bus insted of 16-bit), and IBM picked this intel 8088 for their PC. IBM was not in the commodity microprocessor business in those days, and IBM never manufactured 8086-like chips. And then there is the story how Bill Gates sold them an operating system that he was about to acquire...Facts can be stranger than fiction. Peter AlfkeArticle: 93536
On 2005-12-24, ajcrm125 <ajcrm125@gmail.com> wrote: > But isn't that how Intel was founded? What?! Are you on crack? > Didn't they reverse engineer IBM's 8086 and create their own No. IBM used the Intel 8088 and later the 8086. Both were 100% Intel designs. IBM also evaluated the Motorola 68K family, but the 8-bit bus version wasn't going to be available in time. > (or was it the 8080). In fact, IBM was making x86 equivalent > CPUs for a while before they went full force with PPC. I don't remember hearing about that. Got any references? > And then there's AMD who's still doing it.. etc..etc. Several vendors have made Intel-architecture compatible CPUs. All were either licensed from Intel or reverse engineered from Intel processors. -- Grant Edwards grante@visi.comArticle: 93537
Is the linux on the link is a full version?thaks!And if It is a difficult work to port the linux to the nios2!Article: 93538
http://www.intel.com/museum/online/hist_micro/hof/ "ajcrm125" <ajcrm125@gmail.com> wrote in news:1135393423.728304.164860@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: > But isn't that how Intel was founded? Didn't they reverse > engineer IBM's 8086 and create their own (or was it the 8080). In > fact, IBM was making x86 equivalent CPUs for a while before they > went full force with PPC. And then there's AMD who's still doing > it.. etc..etc. > > And also, if that were the case, I would also think that guys who > write software emulators that emulate specific processors would > also get hammered. > > I'm only mimiking what's already been done: > http://www.systemyde.com/proc_tab.html > http://smaplab.ri.uah.edu/dmsms/damarlas.pdf > http://csdl2.computer.org/persagen/DLAbsToc.jsp?resourcePath=/dl/pr > oceedings/viuf/&toc=comp/proceedings/viuf/1999/0465/00/0465toc.xml& > DOI=10.1109/VIUF.1999.801975 > > -- rk, Just an OldEngineer "The number of people having any connection with the project must be restricted in an almost vicious manner. Use a small number of good people." -- Kelly Johnson, as quoted in _Skunk Works_Article: 93539
Antti Lukats wrote: > "Andy Peters" <Bassman59a@yahoo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:1135359469.557185.162020@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > > Antti Lukats wrote: > >> Hi > >> > >> I am having extreme trouble with ChipScope and Spartan3e (using the > >> Spartan3E Sample Pack PCB from digilent). > >> > >> ISE 7.1 sample top, CS coregen, ICON+VIO wired up build, then: > >> 1 First I tried CS 7.1SP2, no cores found... > >> 2 tested with CS analyzer 7.1SP4, no cores found... > >> 3 then regenerated the ICON+VIO with 7.1SP4, cores found, I am happy. > >> 4 then ISE clean, rebuild, no cores found... > >> 5 regenereting the ICON+VIO with CS 8.1 no cores found... > >> 6 updating the project to ISE 8.1, cores found, I am happy > >> 7 ISE clean, rebuild, no cores found.. > >> 8 what should I do next? > > > > I never instantiate ChipScope in the design. I always use the > > ChipScope Core Inserter. Making changes to what you wish to probe is a > > lot easier this way. > > > > I've noticed that, at least with Spartan 2E, you can't configure the > > chip from within ChipScope. It always fails. I use Impact to program > > the configuration EEPROM, then power-cycle the board, then reconnect > > ChipScope. > > > > When ChipScope works, it's the shit. When it doesn't, lots of cursing > > ensues ... ^^^^^^^ Not a typo. That is slang for very good. > > > > -a > > > shit when works and cursing when not? That was a typo I guess :) > > well you can not use core inserter for the VIO, so thats no option. > > I dont know why you can not configure with chipscope, the way > you do it is very troublesome. be aware that chipscope does > not auto fix the startup clock so if the clock wasnt set to JTAG > in the bitgen option then chipscope want of course configure. > > AnttiArticle: 93540
ajcrm125 wrote: > > But isn't that how Intel was founded? Didn't they reverse > engineer IBM's 8086 and create their own (or was it the 8080). > In fact, IBM was making x86 equivalent CPUs for a while before > they went full force with PPC. And then there's AMD who's still > doing it.. etc..etc. Utter nonsense. Intel developed the 4004, then the 8008, and the 8080 was an outgrowth of that. Intels primary business at the time was memory, including RAM and ePROMs. Their purpose in developing uCs was to expand their memory business. The 8086/8 were further developments of the 8080, and were licensed to AMD. At that time engineers had a lot more sense than they seem to today, and wouldn't consider designing in a sole-source part. Thus the license was a business necessity. The AMD license lasted through the 286, IIRC, after which AMD designed their own CPUs. -- "If you want to post a followup via groups.google.com, don't use the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on "show options" at the top of the article, then click on the "Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/>Article: 93541
Antti Lukats wrote: > "Alex Gibson" <news@alxx.org> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:411umcF1cgt5hU1@individual.net... > > > > "bjzhangwn" <bjzhangwn@163.com> wrote in message > > news:1135317395.120472.211170@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com... > >>I want to learn more about this! > >> > > > > look at uclinux > > > > uclinux on microblaze > > http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~jwilliams/mblaze-uclinux > > > > uclinux for nios2 > > http://www.enseirb.fr/~kadionik/embedded/uclinux/nios-uclinux.html > > http://www.enseirb.fr/~kadionik/embedded/uclinux/HOWTO_compile_uClinux_for_NIOS.html > > > > http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS9386138954.html > > > > Note I don't know if that is the correct link for Nios as have only used > > uclinux on microblaze. > > > > Can also run full linux on v2pro and v4FX with ppc hard cores. > > > > Alex > > > Alex, you as many others are saying that 'can run full linux' on V2P/V4, but > well I belive that > and I do know it works, but there seems to be only one way to the goal, > namly montavista > > trying the full linux on virtex by using EDK and opensource linux kernel > seems to be a real > pain, and yes I have studied all the info about this on the web, all > references go back to > montavista, or V2PDK. > > So maybe you know where to get HOWTO > > EDK+opensource ppc-linux, all done in one day? > > I know that Denx did a lot of work for V2Pro ppc linux, but as Xilinx did > not talk the them then they got really pissed off and stopped their efforts > for the Virtex PPC linux support. And montavista is something very strange > type of entity, can not understand what they are selling or offering or what > it costs :( > > Antti We have an Avnet Virtex-II Pro board that came with the Denx Linux distribution. We have been able to use that distribution with out problems. They used their own boot manager called Avmon. We have replaced it with UBOOT loading Linux from a Mini-SD card. I emailed Montavista and asked them to have someone from technical sales call me. Someone did call me, but all I could get out of them was how much it cost. I never did get a clear picture of what they provided. Is there anyone here that has used Montavista that could give us some feedback on the support that you received? Regards, John McCaskillArticle: 93542
Grant Edwards wrote: > On 2005-12-24, ajcrm125 <ajcrm125@gmail.com> wrote: > > > But isn't that how Intel was founded? > > What?! Are you on crack? > > > Didn't they reverse engineer IBM's 8086 and create their own > > No. IBM used the Intel 8088 and later the 8086. Both were > 100% Intel designs. IBM also evaluated the Motorola 68K > family, but the 8-bit bus version wasn't going to be available > in time. > Someone reversed engineered something back in the day.. I just can't remember who. I'll do some digging. > > (or was it the 8080). In fact, IBM was making x86 equivalent > > CPUs for a while before they went full force with PPC. > > I don't remember hearing about that. Got any references? Yep... me. :-) I work for IBM and back when I joined we were making 486's called "Blue Lightning" > > And then there's AMD who's still doing it.. etc..etc. > > Several vendors have made Intel-architecture compatible CPUs. > All were either licensed from Intel or reverse engineered from > Intel processors. Reverese engineered.. there ya go. :-)Article: 93543
Interesting reading... this is not the case of reverse engineering I'm reffering to above, this is just another example: "While exactly copying a processor's microarchitecture would be illegal, creating a compatible product through the use of an original "clean room" design is legally protected. According to Halfhill, Intel clearly reverse-engineered AMD's products, a tactic AMD and other X86 chip designers have used to quickly catch up to Intel's historical leadership in the design of new microprocessors."Article: 93544
I wanna to write a pci express endpoint ,and I don't have a idea that if this is too difficult,But the ipcore from the fpga vendor are too expensive!can someone give me some advice!Article: 93545
>Someone reversed engineered something back in the day.. I just can't >remember who. I'll do some digging. Ahhh... I think what I remember was the whole Compaq/IBM episode with Compaq reverse engineering the IBM BIOS. Although I do remember a TV show where an engineer was interview and he basically said "We had to go though every possible opcode and see figure out what it did so we could create a microprocessor that did the same thing". Man once you hit 30 your memory just aint what it used to be..... Anywho.. seing as how I'm using 0% of the originla Z8000 microarchitecture (as non is documented) I should be all set.Article: 93546
bjzhangwn wrote: > I wanna to write a pci express endpoint ,and I don't have a idea that > if this is too difficult,But the ipcore from the fpga vendor are too > expensive!can someone give me some advice! > I worked on a project not too long ago that involved a PCI (not PCI express) core in a Xilinx. I got to look over the shoulder of the guy making it all work. We had purchased a PCI core from Xilinx, but he had developed PCI cores in the past so he was a real expert. It was _not_ a trivial project. The PCI spec covers a lot of ground. Taking care of all the corner cases takes a lot of work. Even putting everything into the FPGA to provide the proper care and feeding for the PCI core in such a way that the bus could provide the speed that we needed wasn't trivial. In my opinion hand-building a PCI core would be like hand building a car -- it's possible, but it's not worth the time. The only exception would be if you could be absolutely sure that your project is only going to use a specific subset of the spec, and that you are free to violate unused parts. I wouldn't touch this with a 10 foot pole, and there are very few folks that I would trust to "trim" such a complex spec. -- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.comArticle: 93547
Chuck F., > At that time engineers had a lot more sense than they seem to > today, and wouldn't consider designing in a sole-source part. Thus > the license was a business necessity. I wish we could bring the same business necessity around again... Engineers today have no options left - things get monopolised faster than developed. It is a social rather than a technical problem, not necessarily solvable in our lifetimes. Not that I disagree with you that engineers had more sense back then :-), to me a person using tools which do things he/she does not understand in detail is a machine operator, not an engineer... Dimiter ------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments http://www.tgi-sci.com ------------------------------------------------------Article: 93548
"Marco T." <marcotoschi@nospam.it> wrote in message news:doh7dp$ug1$1@nnrp.ngi.it... > Hallo, > I'm planning to buy a development board based on Virtex-4FX. > > I have read about V-4FX that ethernet mac is inside the FPGA. > > I should buy also the license to use it when I make a project into EDK for > plb interface? > > Many Thanks > Marco > > Many Thanks to everyone for the replies. MarcoArticle: 93549
ajcrm125 wrote: > Hey guys, does anyone know where I can get VHDL/Verilog source for the > Z8001/Z8002 processor? > Thanks for any info! > > -Adam > ajcrm125@gmail.com So why exactly would you want such a design? Do you have Z8000 binary code you must run? As noted below other IP shops have functionally reversed engineered it. I recall one aerospace company had to run old code with timing precision and paid for the Z8000 design to be redone. A functional clone could give good guarantee that machine codes would run in same time clock for clock. The Z8000 was complicated enough but was still a fully predictable design as far as external events were concerned ie no caches. As it happens I also reverse engineered some of the Z8000 blocks around 79 and still have paper docs for the datapath, but that wouldn't get you very far today. Also a good collection of comp arch books before the H &P bandwagon took over, would often describe the microarchitectures in some detail of most all mid 70s and earlier designs. If you don't need cycle accuracy, why not write a ISA translator and retarget to Arm, x86, whatever. With the speed advantage you would get a few orders of improvement. Thats probably already been done too! transputer guy
Site Home Archive Home FAQ Home How to search the Archive How to Navigate the Archive
Compare FPGA features and resources
Threads starting:
Authors:A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z