<wpwrak>
wolfspraul: i noticed that the NOR is simply the first on the list with the desires size. that's how it was picked, right ? :)
<wolfspraul>
only Sebastien knows
<wolfspraul>
he started by looking at some reference schematics, or the ml-401 board maybe? that would be another place to look for the origin, if you like
<wpwrak>
ah, so maybe applied that approach then :)
<wpwrak>
s/maybe/maybe they/
<azonenberg>
Have you guys used the xilinx MIG / MCB?
<azonenberg>
I'm trying to get an XC6SLX45 talking to DDR2
<wolfspraul>
I think we are not using the xilinx mcb
<azonenberg>
So you are using raw GPIO pins and doing all of the DDR logic in CLBs?
<wolfspraul>
it's a big guess, but yes, that could be it
<wolfspraul>
the reason was to keep Milkymist more portable, among other things
<azonenberg>
Because right now i am fighting with the MIG and its not playing well
<azonenberg>
lol
<wolfspraul>
also there seem to be some mcb bugs, but bugs are everywhere so I doubt that's the key reason
<azonenberg>
The issue i'm seeing - i wont call it a bug as its more likely me not understanding what i'm doing
<wolfspraul>
xilinx is definitely having 'problems' with mcb in s-6, just my gut feeling from reading statements etc.
<azonenberg>
is that i am feeding a 200 MHz clock into the module, which is doubled to 400
<wolfspraul>
some s-6 variants have no mcb, the ones that do had yield (availability) problems for a long time, etc.
<azonenberg>
and their own MIG internal code
<azonenberg>
is failing timing
<wolfspraul>
I am sure eventually that thing can be made to work, but I cannot help
<azonenberg>
if i cut the clock to below 200 the PLL complains "input clock too slow"
<azonenberg>
lol
<wolfspraul>
I can only give you the high-level bottom line "there are issues with it"
<azonenberg>
I assume you guys' ddr controller is GPLed?
<wolfspraul>
I think so yes
<azonenberg>
:(
<azonenberg>
My project is BSD licensed
<azonenberg>
i cant use it
<wolfspraul>
maybe sebastien can relicense or dual-license that part, that's up to him
<azonenberg>
I have no objections with a dual license etc but i want to keep my project under a permissive license
<azonenberg>
i'm still researching options now but i cant even get a simple demo design using the MCB to compile
<wolfspraul>
since we all love your project, I cannot imagine Sebastien wouldn't want to share that part with you, but again, it's up to him
<wolfspraul>
you are not the first one I hear talking about problems with the mcb in s-6
<wolfspraul>
but I don't know details, only that much
<azonenberg>
This project is actually unrelated to homecmos, it's an open source softcore CPU designed for heavy number crunching
<wolfspraul>
great
<wolfspraul>
:-)
<azonenberg>
target is 200 MHz on a s6 -2, not sure if i can hit that
<azonenberg>
4-way SIMD floating point
<azonenberg>
using xilinx FPU cores initially and then gradually replacing with opencores etc
<wolfspraul>
if it's properly freely licensed, maybe in can be used on m1 still
<azonenberg>
MIPS 1 instruction set (all patents expired) but a completley new microarchitecture
<wolfspraul>
we can multi-core a little :-)
<wolfspraul>
be careful about "all mips patents expired"
<azonenberg>
All of the mips 1 patents are
<azonenberg>
mips 1 came out >17 yrs ago
<wolfspraul>
the patent system doesn't work like this
<azonenberg>
i havent looked at more recent arch versions
<azonenberg>
due to a patent that expired around three years ago
<wolfspraul>
Loongson is paying
<wolfspraul>
everybody is paying
<wolfspraul>
as long as MIPS Inc. is around they will defend their turf. if you make money with anything MIPS, they will come after you.
<azonenberg>
All i can say is, i did some pretty exhaustive reading and it looks like mips1 is as unencumbered as 8051
<azonenberg>
newer versions, definitely not so
<wolfspraul>
if you make money, mips inc. will come after you
<wolfspraul>
and you will pay :-)
<azonenberg>
I have no plans to make money :p
<wolfspraul>
then you are safe of most patent problems anyway
<azonenberg>
its for me to get practice in FPGA stuff, and will be used in one noncommercial research project (single unit run size)
<azonenberg>
But again, i dont see how patents could still be covering any part of the *instruction set*
<azonenberg>
of mips 1
<wolfspraul>
:-)
<wpwrak>
how exactly would they entice you to pay ? by threatening to attack you with claims they know they can't make stick until you run out of money for legal defenses ?
<wolfspraul>
you don't want to give up :-)
<azonenberg>
considering that i am  completely reimplementing the microarchitecture
<wolfspraul>
nah come on, the system doesn't work like this
<azonenberg>
as in, i'm not even using their pipeline design
<wpwrak>
through unrelated patents they hold that you may happen to "violate" ?
<wolfspraul>
they will just attack you, and sooner or later you will understand it's just better for you to pay a few cents per chip than to fight
<wpwrak>
or have they found a way to make the old patents last longer ? if yes, how ?
<wolfspraul>
you think like an engineer
<wolfspraul>
one day you arrive in the real world :-)
<wolfspraul>
if you do anything mips, you will pay
<wpwrak>
so the legal attrition approach
<wolfspraul>
done
<azonenberg>
Also, i dont know if loongson is paying
<wolfspraul>
I have been part of this first-hand
<wolfspraul>
loongson is paying
<wolfspraul>
they simply bribed the government
<wolfspraul>
problem solved
<wolfspraul>
:-)
<azonenberg>
They bought a mips license specifically so they can promote it as mips compatible
<azonenberg>
then two years later they licensed the whole architecture and started implementing mips32
<azonenberg>
i have no plans to implement anything past mips1
<wolfspraul>
:-)
<kristianpaul>
wpwrak: some comercial trades agreements for example expand rights, like avoiding beatles son be public domain ;)
<wpwrak>
kristianpaul: okay, but that's an entirely different set of legal constructs
<wolfspraul>
as long as MIPS Inc. is around they will tax anything MIPS, and they will succeed. everybody in the industry knows that and has accepted it.
<wolfspraul>
and it's a very small tax actually
<wolfspraul>
a business man focused on profits will pay and move on
<kristianpaul>
wpwrak: ah sure, i'm just giving you an analogy :), dunno if match our case
<wolfspraul>
there are much bigger taxes everywhere
<azonenberg>
wolfspraul: But an open project cannot pay patent license fees
<wolfspraul>
someone eventually will sell something
<wolfspraul>
and that's where it will be taxed
<wolfspraul>
if it doesn't have a 'license'
<wolfspraul>
trust me
<wolfspraul>
I am not telling you to not do your MIPS thing
<wolfspraul>
but when I hear "mips patents expired" I have to laugh a little
<wolfspraul>
given that I know the key people who are running the show there
<kristianpaul>
azonenberg: i guess just skip first talking about MIPS if you already re-write the whole thing?
<azonenberg>
Lexra implemented mips 1 without unaligned loads and stores
<azonenberg>
Got sued for trademark infringement
<wolfspraul>
you mean sued by MIPS?
<azonenberg>
Yes
<wolfspraul>
yes MIPS actively defends their trademark too
<azonenberg>
and settled by agreeing not to use mips trademarks without attribution and a few other little things
<azonenberg>
Which basically means, if i happen to use their ISA
<azonenberg>
Without using any patented instructions
<azonenberg>
And dont use their trademarks anywhere
<azonenberg>
then it's clean
<azonenberg>
"After its experience with Lexra MIPS Technologies changed all of its 32-bit cores to use its new MIPS32 instruction          set which extends the MIPS-I instruction set to include other features patented by MIPS Technologies. This is similar          to Intel's addition of the instruction set extensions to Pentium III in order to prevent AMD from building          compatible processors.          "
<wolfspraul>
gee
<wolfspraul>
ok
<wolfspraul>
please try this
<wolfspraul>
a mental exercise
<azonenberg>
So basically, dont use any >mips1 instructions
<wolfspraul>
you know the patent system, roughly, from reading the news. right? we all do
<wolfspraul>
imagine you are sitting in a MIPS Inc. office
<wolfspraul>
imagine you are a bad guy
<wolfspraul>
really mean
<wolfspraul>
just trying to make money
<wolfspraul>
nothing else
<wolfspraul>
MIPS has ltos of patents, old and new
<azonenberg>
Then i'd go after someone who actually had money to take
<wolfspraul>
true?
<wolfspraul>
and they keep filing for more
<wolfspraul>
all the time
<wolfspraul>
now there are some hippies who follow this 'patents have expired' thing
<wolfspraul>
ok, fine, you think
<wolfspraul>
now they have no money, next
<wolfspraul>
oh... some of them are makign money now? wow
<wolfspraul>
let's see
<wolfspraul>
do you think you have a chance going after them?
<azonenberg>
Probably not
<wolfspraul>
and explaining to them that it's cheaper for them to pay 2-10 cents per chip to you, than to fight a multi-year patent war over what exactly is expired or not?
<azonenberg>
The way i see it is, courts have already ruled on this matter
<azonenberg>
mips1 patents were those four instructions, that one patent
<wpwrak>
azonenberg: they may also consider that a project that gets away may erode their ability to milk others
<azonenberg>
Which expired four or five years ago
<azonenberg>
Use their trademarks, you're in trouble
<azonenberg>
Otherwise it looks like they have no basis
<wolfspraul>
which court has ruled against MIPS? which chip maker is making *anything* MIPS and not paying?
<azonenberg>
Loongson was for quite a while
<wolfspraul>
:-)
<azonenberg>
the only reason loongson got a license was to use mips32
<azonenberg>
and to get the trademarks
<azonenberg>
Which was a sound business strategy, most mips binaries these days are mips32
<azonenberg>
And using the trademarks makes your product more marketable
<wolfspraul>
alright then
<kristianpaul>
off bed
<azonenberg>
for example plasma is a mips1 processor (using the actual mips microarch, 5 stage pipeline etc)
<azonenberg>
on opencores
<azonenberg>
not licensing it at all
<wolfspraul>
sure
<azonenberg>
and they've been used in a decent number of projects
<wolfspraul>
they also got some nastigrams years ago
<azonenberg>
Plasma did?
<wolfspraul>
trademark
<azonenberg>
Yeah
<wolfspraul>
patents only come when someone makes money
<azonenberg>
So the easy solution is, stay squeaky clean and never use the trademark
<wolfspraul>
its' easy to explain what is cheaper
<wolfspraul>
that's a good start
<wolfspraul>
that solves the trademark problem
<azonenberg>
And the one patent that has caused problems with mips1 is expired
<wolfspraul>
after that, stay away from anything where a patent shark is protecting his turf
<azonenberg>
>=2 is dangerous territory
<wolfspraul>
sorry but if you really believe in the power of 'expired' patents, you are not in touch with patent reality
<azonenberg>
i think some of those instructions are still covered
<wpwrak>
azonenberg: since MIPS and you are both in the US, maybe make friends in the local gun nuts community, and brag publicly about your new acquaintances and just how much they hate lawyers. after all MAD worked to keep the cold war cold, ... :)
<azonenberg>
Explain how so many people started implementing 8051
<wolfspraul>
they will corner you
<wolfspraul>
until you pay
<azonenberg>
as soon as the intel patents expired
<wolfspraul>
who is defending 8051 patents?
<azonenberg>
and afaik many (most?) are not licensing
<azonenberg>
intel was, until they expired
<wolfspraul>
is Intel known to fight against 8051 users?
<wolfspraul>
I don't know the 8051 story
<wolfspraul>
look at the aggressors
<wolfspraul>
don't read patents word by word and think like an engineer
<wolfspraul>
that's not how the system works
<wolfspraul>
if Intel doesn't actively fight for the 8051 patents then 8051 is safe
<wolfspraul>
MIPS on the other hand is known to actively and aggressively go after trademarks, patents, everything
<wolfspraul>
as the 2 projects you pointed to already show wrt trademarks (nexra, plasma)
<azonenberg>
So like i said, the solution is to locate all of them and verify you are clean by any reading of the wording
<wolfspraul>
and I tell you with patents it's such that until today, nobody succeeded on the 'mips patents have expired' path
<azonenberg>
for example, never use the text "mips" anywhere in documenataion or source code
<wolfspraul>
definitely
<wolfspraul>
I 100% agree with you on that
<wolfspraul>
next step: give up on that idea that some patents have 'expired'
<azonenberg>
And if i dont implement any instructions that were added to the architecture since today's date 17 years ago
<wolfspraul>
just get over it
<azonenberg>
what claim do they have?
<wolfspraul>
it's not true in reality
<azonenberg>
Show me a case where someone has succeeded in court by suing on the basis of an expired patent?
<azonenberg>
The R2000 was released in 1985
<wolfspraul>
show me one manufacturer of MIPS-anything chips that is not paying to MIPS Inc.
<azonenberg>
that's 26 years ago
<wolfspraul>
they will defend this
<azonenberg>
All of the manufacturers use mips32
<azonenberg>
most of the open ones are mips1
<wpwrak>
azonenberg: how do you tell people how to build a cross-compiler ?
<azonenberg>
tell me there isnt a reason
<wolfspraul>
but you are free to follow the long sequence of businesses before you that have tried to change this :-)
<wolfspraul>
until today they all failed
<wolfspraul>
including the ones in China with strong political govt backing
<wolfspraul>
maybe you will do it
<azonenberg>
Why do you say loongson failed?
<azonenberg>
They didnt
<wolfspraul>
but sooner or later I think you will understand the logic of the arguments they will be making to you in a few years
<wolfspraul>
they failed to stay outside of the MIPS licensing regime
<azonenberg>
They decided they would be more marketable if they implemented the full architecture
<wolfspraul>
who are you arguing for now?
<azonenberg>
for quite some years they were implementing mips1 and paying nothing
<wolfspraul>
and?
<wolfspraul>
maybe we are on the same page actually
<wolfspraul>
go in that direction, and sooner or later you will pay
<azonenberg>
So the poitn is, mips didnt go after them except for the trademark
<wolfspraul>
hah
<wolfspraul>
I am out of arguments
<wolfspraul>
stay away from MIPS trademark, that's a good start
<azonenberg>
i only see one legal opinion from a quick search involving a mips case that went to court
<azonenberg>
and it was related to a suit against the company
<azonenberg>
not by them
<wolfspraul>
this stuff typically doesn't go to court
<wolfspraul>
it's all about business, making money
<wolfspraul>
MIPS is very reasonable, at least that
<wolfspraul>
2-10 cents per chip, it's really not a big deal
<wpwrak>
so maybe all it takes is someone with the backbone to reject the extortion :)
<wolfspraul>
and then you are covered under the big umbrella
<wolfspraul>
sooner or later you will understand that that is better than be out in the rain
<wolfspraul>
I understand it may be depressing to look at the patent system like that, but that's from my real industry experience
<wpwrak>
"you better pay for protection. you never know what could happen ..." where have i heard that before ? ;-)
<wolfspraul>
the only way to be safe from MIPS Inc. is to completely stay away from any of their stuff, not just trademark
<wolfspraul>
then you still have random trolls of course, if you make a lot of money
<wolfspraul>
but MIPS Inc. focuses on their turf. 'patents have expired' has never worked so far.
<wpwrak>
well, if azonenberg can make a credible statement that he will and can actually fight back long enough that there may be a ruling against MIPS, even if they can later get it reversed, then MIPS may decide not to push weak claims and risk having their weakness exposed in all the press
<wolfspraul>
it's nice how you copy/paste the loongson reasoning here btw
<azonenberg>
wolfspraul: And it worked
<wolfspraul>
oh my :-)
<azonenberg>
They paid nothing until they decided they weren't selling enough
<wolfspraul>
yes it did
<azonenberg>
at which point they licensed mips32
<azonenberg>
and started paying
<azonenberg>
But until then, they were selling chips and paying nothing
<azonenberg>
and not sued for over two years
<wolfspraul>
you really believe that, right?
<wpwrak>
2 years isn't particularly long ..
<azonenberg>
and afaik nobody has *ever* sued them over that version of the chip
<azonenberg>
i dont think loongson even got sued at all
<wolfspraul>
gee
<azonenberg>
from my reading of the articles they approached mips and say "we wants mips32, let us have it"
<wolfspraul>
ha ha
<wolfspraul>
oh my
<wolfspraul>
this does make my day
<wolfspraul>
no it's not like that, really
<wpwrak>
it's all about saving face :)
<wolfspraul>
but yes, everybody is happy now
<wolfspraul>
so why discuss
<wolfspraul>
loongson has understood that they are better off paying
<wolfspraul>
like you say yourself
<wolfspraul>
so... problems solved
<wolfspraul>
what's bad about paying a few cents to MIPS actually?
<wolfspraul>
we pay so many fees here and there, often hidden behind laws and regulations
<azonenberg>
Because it means the project is admitting they are no longer unencumbered
<wpwrak>
what's bad about paying a kidnapper ?
<wolfspraul>
MIPS Inc. is known to aggressively defend their IP
<wolfspraul>
so what
<wolfspraul>
that is known, no need to discuss
<wolfspraul>
ARM too btw
<azonenberg>
Yes, but in every case i see a clear violation of a trademark
<azonenberg>
or something similar
<wolfspraul>
yes
<wolfspraul>
I 100% agree with you on that
<wolfspraul>
that's why we do things like 8:10
<wolfspraul>
and maybe I would do the same with USB and others later, who knos
<wolfspraul>
knows
<wpwrak>
again, the MAD logic helps here: you just have to make it credible that you're too crazy to be afraid
<wolfspraul>
the reason we started this whole discussion was because of your 'patents have expired' line
<azonenberg>
I can find no recorded cases of them complaining about anyone implementing the original archiecture without using their tradmeark
<wolfspraul>
and I wanted to highlight that in real life, this argument really doesn't matter
<azonenberg>
Why?
<wolfspraul>
yes true, as I said already. Please make sure to not use MIPS anywhere, that is indeed a very good start.
<azonenberg>
They wont file a case that has no basis
<wolfspraul>
ok
<azonenberg>
so its as simple as, dont give them one
<wolfspraul>
you be the next to try
<wolfspraul>
they are ready for you
<wpwrak>
actually, getting sued may be useful
<wolfspraul>
but only after there are at least a few million to take from you
<wolfspraul>
fine, try
<wpwrak>
because then you could publicly state that you're being / you've been sued by MIPS. and this use the trademark ;-)
<wpwrak>
s/this/thus/
<wolfspraul>
a business has no interest to cleanup the legal system, patent system, etc.
<wolfspraul>
a business will focus on making more moeny
<wolfspraul>
well, nobody will do this in real life
<azonenberg>
wolfspraul: nobody will do what
<wolfspraul>
if azonenberg is the CEO of a small chip maker in 10 years, he will make the right decision then, as everybody else
<wolfspraul>
and if this chips are based on mips somewhere, he will get an architecture license because it is good for his business
<azonenberg>
But the question i ask is, what if i dont
<azonenberg>
what if i keep making mips1
<azonenberg>
not using their trademark
<azonenberg>
and not using any recently added instructions
<wolfspraul>
eventually you will realize you will be better off with an architecture license
<azonenberg>
I'm not asking that
<azonenberg>
I'm asking, will they have any basis to complain
<azonenberg>
In a business sense, i'd probably license it because it would be cheaper than reimplementing
<wolfspraul>
it seems you are setting up your company to make a point about the expiration status of a few patents
<azonenberg>
But if i am running an open project
<azonenberg>
as you guys should understand
<azonenberg>
Say, for example
<wolfspraul>
oh sure
<wolfspraul>
you are safe
<wolfspraul>
but your argument was 'mips patents have expired'
<azonenberg>
milkymist deployed my core instead of latticemico
<azonenberg>
Let's say milkymist sells 50,000 units next year
<wolfspraul>
and that's a dangerous argument to make, others may follow and not understand the consequences
<azonenberg>
mips wants money
<azonenberg>
My argument was, *that specific* patent has expired
<azonenberg>
Which was the last one they have ever sued anyone over mips1 about
<azonenberg>
and the last one anyone has been able to come up with that covers mips1
<wpwrak>
wolfspraul: setting up a company that is actually expected to be hit by such a lawsuit may not be such a bad idea if your true objective is to fight this kind of excesses of the intellectual property system
<wolfspraul>
maybe, but nobody is doing that afaik
<azonenberg>
Although Lexra had announced its wares as MIPS compatible it had removed four Cobol compiler-dependent instructions not deemed necessary, and seen performance shoot up 30%. MIPS accused it of making false compatibility claims and of using the MIPS trademark in a misleading manner. The newly signed memorandum sees Lexra agreeing not to represent its products as MIPS compatible, and agreeing to accurately indicate that its LX-4080
<wolfspraul>
there are so many good causes you can go after in this world, are you sure this one should be on top?
<azonenberg>
No, and that isnt what i'm intending to do
<azonenberg>
I'm asking, if a project like milkymist starts getting on radars
<azonenberg>
using a core like this
<wolfspraul>
difficult question
<azonenberg>
Does mips have any legal basis to go after them
<wolfspraul>
my patent strategy is to stay off of radars as much as possible
<azonenberg>
And if so, what can be done to the core to make this less likely
<wolfspraul>
that's the strategy
<wolfspraul>
but now, what if we do show up on some patent radar
<wolfspraul>
from a troll
<wolfspraul>
from MIPS
<wolfspraul>
from anybody
<wolfspraul>
what then?
<wolfspraul>
pay?
<wolfspraul>
throw out the tech that is being debated?
<wolfspraul>
fight to death, take on the entire system?
<wpwrak>
it may be another nail in the coffin of the current patent system. mips are certainly not the only ones who count on being able to use their patents beyond formal expiration. if you succeed in breaking this model, the whole value of such portfolios drops.
<wolfspraul>
ok
<wolfspraul>
but you are up against a huge system
<wolfspraul>
realistically you will fail, nobody else
<wolfspraul>
I would probably pay to try to make them go away
<wolfspraul>
I would also play incorporation tricks like letting one company go bankrupt, setting up a new one
<wolfspraul>
move country
<wolfspraul>
in parallel I would try to remove any tech that is used as a hook, to follow the bigger 'stay off of radars' strategy
<wolfspraul>
I would try to publish any and all communication with them
<wolfspraul>
that alone would be a lot of fun
<azonenberg>
The fundamental question is
<azonenberg>
at a more basic level
<azonenberg>
If one wants to make a softcore from scratch
<azonenberg>
Using an existing RISC ISA and a completely new microarchitecture
<azonenberg>
That there are already C compilers etc for
<azonenberg>
are there *any* that are not patent encumbered?
<wolfspraul>
hard to say
<azonenberg>
i chose mips1 as one that i was familiar with and that had no current patents i could find
<wolfspraul>
ask "which have the least likelihood of a patent attack?"
<wpwrak>
step one: get rms to make an alias of the arch name for you. i think he'll be more than happy to do that :)
<wolfspraul>
I think mico32 is a good start, although lm32 support in compilers is weak
<wolfspraul>
mips is known to be a patent landmine
<wolfspraul>
so is ARM
<azonenberg>
wolfspraul: But they are widely supported
<wolfspraul>
a real troll can go after anything of course
<azonenberg>
Exactly
<wolfspraul>
yeah fine but I try to answer your question
<wolfspraul>
or rather I first rephrased it :-)
<wpwrak>
plan B: since 8051 seems to be safe, extend it to 32 or 64 nits ;-)
<azonenberg>
A troll can claim your sandwich or laser pointer cat exerciser violates his patent
<wolfspraul>
"which has the least likelihood of a patent attack?"
<wpwrak>
s/nits//bits/
<wolfspraul>
and mips is definitely not at the top of that list
<wolfspraul>
more at the top of the "most likely" list
<azonenberg>
wpwrak: if i was going to extent 8051
<wolfspraul>
sure if Intel is calm on 8051, I think we can trust that they won't reverse course
<wolfspraul>
I don't know much about 8051 (the real-life patent situation)
<azonenberg>
(which would mean new c compilers etc anyway)
<azonenberg>
i'd go all out
<azonenberg>
and do a full custom arch
<wolfspraul>
but I think Intel in general is a somewhat trustworthy giant, no?
<wpwrak>
ARM, atmel, should also be vying for the top
<azonenberg>
i designed an 8-bit, i can do a 32
<wpwrak>
intel are too big to play dirty :)
<wolfspraul>
if Intel owns the old (expired) 8051 patents, and Intel has been shown to not hunt down people for x years, that's a good sign that it's safe
<azonenberg>
The thing is, i'd have to do a gcc port of my architecture
<azonenberg>
wolfspraul: also, the last patent suit against a mips1 implementation was five years ago
<wolfspraul>
most are behind closed doors, they never reach a court
<wolfspraul>
MIPS is a very aggressive patent defender, just believe it now
<wolfspraul>
you can get a feeling for how well they defend their trademark...
<wolfspraul>
that's just how it is
<azonenberg>
and again, i agree that openly using the trademark is silly
<wolfspraul>
good
<azonenberg>
Because it is something they clearly have a claim to
<azonenberg>
But the instruction set?
<wolfspraul>
MIPS is actively using patents to defend their 'ecosystem'
<wolfspraul>
don't try to play cheap little engineer tricks with them
<wolfspraul>
I have seen thick books arguing the details of this and that bit in this and that register
<wolfspraul>
it all won't work
<azonenberg>
December 23, 2006
<wolfspraul>
you can pay millions for your legal team if you like
<azonenberg>
was when it expired
<wolfspraul>
and attack the MIPS ecosystem
<wolfspraul>
and MIPS will throw their entire company behind the defense
<wolfspraul>
good luck!
<azonenberg>
I have seen no suits filed since that date
<wpwrak>
azonenberg: one risk may be an implementation technique you use that's "similar" to something they've patented
<azonenberg>
mips announces evry time they sue someone
<azonenberg>
wpwrak: I will be using a ~20 stage pipeline
<wolfspraul>
alright, gotta run
<azonenberg>
mips1 used around five
<azonenberg>
so do most of the newer ones
<wolfspraul>
you are safe anyway because your project is just a hobbyist/academic project
<wpwrak>
i.e., when you provoke them, they may search for patents not on your radar you may have unintentionally violated
<wolfspraul>
and if you keep their trademark out you will not hear from them, ever
<azonenberg>
wolfspraul: Thats what i'm saying - if you dont use the trademark or market the cpu as compatible
<wolfspraul>
if you have a business and numbers to make each quarter, you will realize sooner or later it is better to team up with them
<azonenberg>
I dont think they have any option
<wolfspraul>
sure
<wolfspraul>
and no interest
<azonenberg>
no matter how many you are selling
<wolfspraul>
I mean "better" without any cynicism btw
<wolfspraul>
it is better, economically
<wolfspraul>
maybe you are not fighting for a better world anymore, but for a better bottom line of your company surely
<wpwrak>
of course, if someone starts fighting back, that may help a lot of others, making this indeed a better world
<lekernel>
"hardware is built by companies, and ethics do not matter with companies"
<lekernel>
azonenberg, if you get a M1 for your project, we can discuss switching the license of my memory controller to BSD (plus you will already get an out of the box working implementation)
<wpwrak>
lekernel: oh, he doesn't have to touch hardware. just add a new name to the long list of archs :)
<devn>
anyone have any videos or anything of people using milkymist?