<kristianpaul>
xiangfu: for the cards you sent me, if dont remenber well if you have issues trying to create files/folders on it?..
<aw>
kristianpaul, hi evening!
<kristianpaul>
so far i jus tried by ftp and was no sucefullyy even whe the ftp logs dint mentioned anythin wrong
<aw>
xiangfu, have u received those cables?
<lekernel>
kristianpaul: hmm, C++ :(
<lekernel>
then we get the GCC problems or need to use 4.4
<wolfspraul>
lekernel: C++ for lm32 worked in 4.4 but stopped working in 4.5? and things got even worse in 4.6?
<wolfspraul>
should xiangfu help you with any of this? are there any particular bugs, or patches you need to upstream, or some gcc/lm32 maintainer role xiangfu could play?
<lekernel>
wolfspraul: yes
<lekernel>
wolfspraul: I already have commit access to gcc, the problem is time and motivation to fix that ... and the gcc code isn't exactly nice to play with
<lekernel>
I already fixed a few things in the LM32 port, but now the 4.6 compiler doesn't work at all, and C++ is broken in 4.5
<lekernel>
C++ isn't very important though
<wolfspraul>
lekernel: sounds like xiangfu can help
<wolfspraul>
especially if there are regressions, I think we should catch them asap/immediately
<wolfspraul>
that's by far easier than letting things slip that already worked in the past, imo
<lekernel>
well... right now we have a solution: stick to 4.5 or, in worst cases, use 4.4
<lekernel>
so let's not spend our limited resources on this
<wolfspraul>
lekernel: if you have patches in your gcc queue, or some gcc bugs (url to tracker?), please post so xiangfu can start to warm up on those
<wolfspraul>
yes sure understood. but like I said, I think regressions should be fixed fast, that's the easiest.
<lekernel>
the 4.6 breakage has already been there for a while
<lekernel>
september or so
<kristianpaul>
C++ ahh, dint new it :(
<aw_>
lekernel, Do you prefer that enable SPDIF by pulling high pin44? or s/w by bit SPDF in register 5Ch should be set?
<lekernel>
don't connect anything spdif related
<lekernel>
put the pin to the expansion header, but don't connect it
<aw_>
the SPDIF meeds digital GND not AUDIO_AGND, so I'll change two pins on J3 be as: SPDIF OUT and GND.
<aw_>
yes, I just only connect wires for them only, no further extra-circuits
<aw_>
agreed? or NO GND on J3?
<lekernel>
you just connect the spdif stuff to J3
<aw_>
J21 already have two GND pins.
<lekernel>
and we still need a GND on J3
<aw_>
yes, connected.
<lekernel>
I think there are enough pins, no?
<aw_>
hum...okay..just added.
<lekernel>
yeah there are 5 grounds on J3
<aw_>
#pin1 of J3 = SPDIF OUT, #pin3 of J3 = digital GND.
<lekernel>
so remove 2, and you connect the SPDIF stuff to there
<lekernel>
or 3 if you want to add digital GND as well
<aw_>
yeah. okay..done on Audio file. :-)
<aw_>
thanks.
<aw_>
btw, another things.
<aw_>
to have a easy way that when soldering some digital grounds for user experiments/hackable purposes, I'd like to add GND test point which just open a solder layer and user can easy soldering on that bigger GND test point/soldering point. Are you okay with this?
<lekernel>
ok
<lekernel>
maybe even of just a solder layer
<lekernel>
you can use a hole with the possibility to solder a pin
<aw_>
right, just open a solder layer though.
<lekernel>
so you can attach the ground of a scope probe to it with no risk of breaking the solder or ripping the copper
<aw_>
hup? you want a hole? a thorough hole? I don't want to use a through hole. just want user don't touch parts's GND. :-)
<aw_>
sorry that I can't follow your 'hole" meanings.
<lekernel>
if you ask me, yes, i'd prefer a through hole
<lekernel>
this way you can 1. solder a pin through it 2. attach a scope's crocodile clip to the pin, without major risk of breaking stuff
<lekernel>
but it's very unimportant, so if there is the slightest problem with the through hole, don't do it
<aw_>
hmm....i see know. so prefer using a GND through header pin instead of using test pointes, right?
<lekernel>
yes
<aw_>
no no. i frequently solder and did some experiments, so we just missed this minor things but good.
<aw_>
okay, got it.
<lekernel>
but again: this is NOT important. so if there's any problem or delay arising from it, use just a test point, or do nothing
<aw_>
yep.
<aw_>
how about I just add bigger test points nearby four J12~J15? then I don't need to source just other hearder pins. :-)
<aw_>
i.e. at four corners. of board :-)
<lekernel>
don't source header pins
<lekernel>
people who can use a scope can solder them themselves
<lekernel>
just add a hole for a header pin and DNP it
<aw_>
okay...just one through hole only?
<lekernel>
yeah...
<aw_>
:-) okay.
<lekernel>
you can also DNP J3, btw
<aw_>
no no...J3 header is good even few people use it. :-)
<aw_>
who knows that one day someone will do great works on mixing other audio sources for video effect though. :-)
<terpstra_>
the milkymist only costs 70 EUR???
<terpstra_>
that's shockingly cheap. how many have you managed to sell?
<lekernel>
we might reach 70E at some point but we'd need _huge_ volume orders :p
<terpstra_>
the price just changed!\
<terpstra_>
it was 70
<terpstra_>
now it says 380
<terpstra_>
bait and switch!
<terpstra_>
oohhhh - it's the kit part that is 70
<terpstra_>
nmind
<lekernel>
maybe 70 was just the case kit
<lekernel>
yes
<terpstra_>
how many have you sold for 380EUR? seems a bit more than most people (including me) would be willing to pay for a (private/personal) hacking/devel platform.
<terpstra>
at 70 i would've ordered one this instant ;)
<lekernel>
not many, about 35
<lekernel>
well that's a serious problem
<lekernel>
either you make a hacking/devel platform, and you have low volumes, so either it's expensive or you make something ridiculously simple like arduino
<terpstra>
sure
<terpstra>
i am not a hardware hacker, though i've been forced to work with vhdl/verilog lately. so for me, things like the linksys routers and kindle are the stuff i buy to tweak.
<terpstra>
and those are all < 100EUR for much thicker hardware
<lekernel>
*or* you go to other markets, which is what I plan doing with milkymist, which would potentially allow larger volumes and definitely higher prices than what most hackers are often ready to pay
<terpstra>
(but no fpga)
<lekernel>
yeah but those are built in much larger volumes than the milkymist today
<terpstra>
yes, i know
<lekernel>
it's a chicken and egg problem
<terpstra>
yeah
<terpstra>
the FPGA part of the milkymist is what makes it both more interesting and more expensive, though, i guess
<lekernel>
not only, that part is only about $40 (not including taxes)
<terpstra>
*blink*
<lekernel>
we have costs everywhere
<terpstra>
no disk controller except for via usb?
<terpstra>
anyway, nifty device
<lekernel>
there's the internal memory card
<lekernel>
you can easily have 8GB (or so) cards those days
<terpstra>
true
<lekernel>
btw, even as a devel platform the M1 isn't that expensive. you can compare it to http://www.digilentinc.com/atlys/ for example
<lekernel>
and less peripherals. and we're not Altera.
<terpstra>
(no A/V stuff, though, but i don't care about that part of the milkymist myself)
<terpstra>
that link you posted is dead btw
<lekernel>
no, the server is just slow
<lekernel>
try archive.org maybe
<terpstra>
what i bet you could sell quite well:
<terpstra>
a slightly more powerful milkymist that could run debian
<terpstra>
think of all the FSF nuts who could finally have their free OS running free HW
<terpstra>
i bet you could charge 380EUR no problem then
<lekernel>
the current one could run debian... it's mostly a software problem. but slowly.
<terpstra>
yes
<terpstra>
no
<terpstra>
you need an MMU
<terpstra>
no debian without a proper MMU
<lekernel>
counts as 'software'
<terpstra>
ahh
<terpstra>
also no disk controller
<terpstra>
and too little RAM
<terpstra>
if you had 512MB (or better 1GB) and a SATA plug then it would be able to really run a debian desktop
<lekernel>
and the MMU isn't the biggest problem, gcc, libc, linux and all those non portable GNU wares are the major pain
<lekernel>
with a 80MHz CPU? not really I think
<terpstra>
right, forget the fpga is so weak on that board
<terpstra>
my LM32 runs at 175MHz
<lekernel>
even 175M is slow
<terpstra>
true
<terpstra>
but not so bad
<terpstra>
arm processors at 500MHz run debian ok
<lekernel>
and if we take those FPGAs that can run at 175, it's going to cost a lot
<terpstra>
i'm not trying to push you to make the milkymist run debian. i was just envisioning a market of people who would be willing to pay a premium for an openhardware product.
<lekernel>
also, the FSF in fact doesn't really care about open hardware
<terpstra>
you need zealots like the people who buy apple.
<terpstra>
debian/linux people are the same only even more extreme.
<lekernel>
the problem is they have absolutely no idea what logic synthesis is about
<terpstra>
why is that a problem?
<lekernel>
for them the CPU is hardware and not their problem
<terpstra>
sure.
<terpstra>
oh -- you mean they wouldn't buy into the free hardware angle?
<lekernel>
yes
<terpstra>
i don't agree. debian even ditch custom firmware from the kernel.
<lekernel>
as long as it's free from 'blobs' they're happy
<lekernel>
firmware is 'blob'
<terpstra>
i think happy is relative
<lekernel>
now they could even moan, rightfully I admit, about the bitstream being a 'blob'
<terpstra>
they have the most free that they can get.
<terpstra>
if a milkymist-like product could run debian reasonably well, they'd have a new freedom option that they didn't previously
<lekernel>
well, we can figure that out before
<lekernel>
we can definitely ping the FSF about this
<terpstra>
and you're quite correct that they will moan about the synthesis tool not being free
<lekernel>
even given the current state of things
<terpstra>
but isn't that what you moan about too?
<terpstra>
maybe they would help you out! ;)
<lekernel>
sure. they would be right doing that. but that's not going to improve sales.
<terpstra>
any publicity will improve your sales.
<terpstra>
no one i have spoken to has heard of the milkymist
<terpstra>
i only found it myself when looking into opencores and researching the lm32
<terpstra>
(opencores here is open cpus, not the website)
<lekernel>
mh... don't know. maybe you're right and the FSF is worth trying...
<lekernel>
but otoh I've contacted so many people and been turned down so many times that I have doubts about that
<terpstra>
i don't understand why you would ask the FSF?
<terpstra>
they don't run debian
<terpstra>
people would only really care once/if you had debian able to boot.
<terpstra>
not many people are interested in a half-finished product
<lekernel>
that sounds like going through a lot of pain for something very uncertan
<terpstra>
isn't that what you're already doing with the milkymist? ;)
<terpstra>
anyway, i'm not trying to pressure you to do this!
<terpstra>
i was just thinking out loud about what market would be willing to pay a premium for open hardware
<terpstra>
(b/c let's face it, there will definitely be quite a premium)
<terpstra>
the audio/video nuts certainly like to pay too much also (gold plated usb plugs?!) so that is also a good market
<lekernel>
my plan is not to put forward openness in most of the marketing stuff
<lekernel>
I think only a small minority of people are interested in that anyway
<terpstra>
you are planning to make a business around the milkymist, though?
<lekernel>
sure. I rather envision a regular hardware product developed using open source practices
<terpstra>
cool.
<lekernel>
that being said, we could DEFINITELY benefit from more publicity in hacker/embedded circles
<terpstra>
btw, ohwr.org is exactly aligned with your stated goals.
<lekernel>
isn't ohwr.org centered on particle physics?
<terpstra>
'regular hardware product developed with open source practices'
<terpstra>
nah, that quote might as well have come from javier - they guy who founded it
<lekernel>
why do you think there should be a premium for open source hardware, btw?
<terpstra>
if you use and fpga and sell low volumes ...
<terpstra>
anyway, i'm off
<terpstra>
(i don't think it's open hardware per se, but a small enthusist project like you have now that costs)
<lekernel>
yeah sure
<lekernel>
but hopefully this is a temporary state
<lekernel>
it's going to be hard to get past it, but I hope it will happen
<lekernel>
as a matter of fact, the milkymist product is soon reaching a state of usability and quality where we can begin trying hard to contact retail chains, businessmen, etc.
<lestat>
hi there
<kristianpaul>
hi lestat
<lestat>
hello kristianpaul
<kristianpaul>
he, rms is requesting for a Free Software GSM phone at osmocom baseband mailist
<lekernel>
oh, miracle
<lekernel>
Google answered
<kristianpaul>
:o
<lekernel>
Thanks for contacting us through the WebM project and sorry for the long wait.
<lekernel>
I took a look at the Milkymist SoC at your website and it really looks like a great project! However, our WebM RTL is not open source although it is free, so I don't know if there is a way we could make it part of that platform. Please let me know if you have a suggestion.
<kristianpaul>
ha.. i was waiting for such us answer
<lekernel>
yeah, but I wonder why they do that
<kristianpaul>
just a dirty marketing strategy i guess
<kristianpaul>
or just realize that IP have so much value that cant be open/libre
<lekernel>
they claim it is free of charge
<kristianpaul>
or they jus waiting emails from companies that will surelly pay for  the licesing of this IP and not mails from open source projects
<lekernel>
and that you get the source (but with NDA I'd guess)
<kristianpaul>
hmm well yes
<lekernel>
so why restrict it?
<kristianpaul>
because the fear to leaks?
<lekernel>
what's 'leak' ?
<kristianpaul>
information leak?
<lekernel>
what I mean is: why not allow people to redistribute that source, if they're not making any money from it
<kristianpaul>
(money) no yet ;)
<kristianpaul>
not*
<kristianpaul>
the lied, thats all
<kristianpaul>
they*
<lekernel>
don't know
<lekernel>
i'll ask them this question
<lekernel>
then maybe in another 6 months I'll get the answer :-)
<larsc>
hm... provide an interface to the webm rtl and tell everybody to request the source themself
<kristianpaul>
they will be happy if you answer with a technical solution to use the free/gratis bitstream ;)
<lekernel>
nah, i'll clearly mention this isn't an option
<lekernel>
if they don't answer or tell me to go to hell, starting the development of an independent WebM encoder because Google isn't open sourcing it definitely is PR-worthy and troll-prone material, so either case we'll gain something :p
<lekernel>
"it would be the first mobile phone that he himself would be able to use, given that there is no proprietary software on the baseband anymore"
<lekernel>
yeah well
<lekernel>
we do more than software
<lekernel>
and anyway open source hardware exposes flaws in the FSF talking, so ....
<kristianpaul>
yeah, i agree with Sylvain Munaut about DSP part, of course FSF will no care about that..
<lekernel>
plus those projects are a gift that the mobile phone manufacturers do not deserve
<kristianpaul>
and for a first phone why no? mm1 is not a DSP focus yet..
<kristianpaul>
but a phone is an interesting turn-key problem to be solve using free software ;)
<kristianpaul>
also VJs of course ;)
<kristianpaul>
VJings*
<lekernel>
mobile phones are a very competitive business...
<lekernel>
so after you get that phone to work technically (openmoko didn't even get there), how do you sell it?
<kristianpaul>
openmoko was to ambitious project
<kristianpaul>
of course the needed to make atractive for potencial buyers i gues..
<kristianpaul>
is like if you're trying to make milkymist a full featured computer, something of course is not and not ready for
<lekernel>
if we make a full featured computer, what is the selling point? freedom?
<kristianpaul>
thats a very small target surelly :-)
<lekernel>
how many people care that the masks of their CPU are open? guess not more than one in five million?
<lekernel>
now that minority is interesting, and that's why we should have OSH CPUs
<lekernel>
but OSH is NOT a selling point
<kristianpaul>
sure not, but for at least those buyers will not complaing too much about missing features ;)
<kristianpaul>
a year ago i wrote rms about mm1 but *i* think he dont like the idea of uclinux.. also if it cant run emacs well :p
<lekernel>
no, they will just buy intel or ARM :-)
<lekernel>
and? no answer from rms?
<kristianpaul>
not after i told him about it just can run uclinux
<lekernel>
but did he answer in the first place?
<kristianpaul>
yes
<lekernel>
interesting. what did he say?
<kristianpaul>
let me find the mail, was time ago..
<kristianpaul>
"What job does this hardware do?"
<kristianpaul>
"ISTR that uclinux is meant for small machines and does not give all                                                          "
<kristianpaul>
Is that true?""
<kristianpaul>
"Are you saying this computer lacks a mmu?"
<kristianpaul>
and i said yes,i was the last mail..
<lekernel>
huh?
<kristianpaul>
now i realize the mmu is very important for software developer :-)
<kristianpaul>
(huh?) ?
<lekernel>
didn't understand the second line
<lekernel>
"ISTR that uclinux is meant for small machines and does not give all"
<kristianpaul>
ah, sorry i forgot to append and the end a comma followed by Is "that true?"
<lekernel>
well, we can add a mmu, then people will start complaining about clock frequency, which we can't really solve without making an asic
<kristianpaul>
:-)
<lekernel>
which in turn brings it lots of problems related to price and volume, and as I said before, freedom is no selling point
<kristianpaul>
sure
<lekernel>
so you should answer that to people like rms next time :-)
<kristianpaul>
lol
<kristianpaul>
k
<lekernel>
btw, there's opensparc, which is free and made into an ASIC
<lekernel>
does it sell a lot? is it popular? no.
<lekernel>
the opensparc community is even smaller than ours
<lekernel>
so that's also a good example you can point to him
<kristianpaul>
(smaller) oh really?
<lekernel>
yeah probably
<lekernel>
last time I checked it was mostly students who were there to get their degree and then leave
<lekernel>
but opensparc has that famous MMU and is even 64 bits :p