<GenTooMan>
key2 PCI to USBC and PCIe to USBC + PCIe?
chipmuenk1 has joined #nmigen
chipmuenk has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
chipmuenk1 is now known as chipmuenk
DX-MON has joined #nmigen
FFY00 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
FFY00 has joined #nmigen
jeanthom has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
chipmuenk has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<key2>
just adapter boards
jeanthom has joined #nmigen
emeb_mac has joined #nmigen
Degi_ has joined #nmigen
emeb has quit [*.net *.split]
PyroPeter has quit [*.net *.split]
Degi has quit [*.net *.split]
rohitksingh has quit [*.net *.split]
Degi_ is now known as Degi
rohitksingh has joined #nmigen
emeb has joined #nmigen
PyroPeter has joined #nmigen
jeanthom has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
<ktemkin>
key2: Degi is the one to ping re: ECP5-PCIe status
<key2>
ahh ok
<ktemkin>
she seems to be doing good well on it
<key2>
anyway she can do it with the official ecp5 board
<key2>
the interesting part is if we use it for sniffing
<key2>
by putting the GTP into loopback mode
<key2>
btw, where are you at with Luna and GTP ? did you manage to get it working or are you using only TI PHYs ?
<ktemkin>
I need to retry everything now that the USB3 stack's core is done
<ktemkin>
I've been working on the gateware stack using PHYs
<ktemkin>
I'm on vacation for the next week and a half, but when I get back I'm going to implement a bit more stack (bulk) and then work on figuring out if fixing clocking is good enough to solve the eye closure / bit error rate issues I was having with the ECP5s
<ktemkin>
going to pull the SerDes drivers from LUNA into a soft-PIPE library, so I should have PIPE interfaces for the ECP5, the GTPs, and the GTX that can be be used in place of a hardware PIPE PHY
<ktemkin>
and ideally that'll include more than just the USB3 flavor of PIPE, eventually
peeps[zen] has joined #nmigen
peepsalot has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
<key2>
mmh
<key2>
GTX at 10Gb ? :)
<lkcl>
ktemkin: nice
<lkcl>
does anyone know if there's a USB3-PIPE PHY other than the (broken) TI 1310?
<ktemkin>
I haven’t found a hard PHY other than that that’s acquirable
<ktemkin>
the TUSB1310A works okay-ish
<ktemkin>
it’s NRND, though
<ktemkin>
key2: theoretically, eventually
<ktemkin>
I need a long break before I touch any more complex protocols / physical layers =P
DaKnig has joined #nmigen
<lkcl>
:)
<lkcl>
achh yer need a guid run-up at these things, y'ken.
Asuu has joined #nmigen
Asu has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<anuejn>
ktemkin: does / will luna support multi lane usb?
<anuejn>
(just curious)
cr1901_modern1 has joined #nmigen
cr1901_modern has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
Asuu has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
peepsalot has joined #nmigen
peeps[zen] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
<awygle>
anuejn: thanks for taking care of that
<ktemkin>
anuejn: doesn't currently, could in the future
<ktemkin>
not sure there's currently a use-case that makes 10Gbps worth it, yet, either as 5Gx2 or 10Gx1
<cr1901_modern1>
whitequark: Can I suppress UnusedElaborate in a specific case where I know it's what I want (I want to test that the Elaboratable is constructed probably via extra outputs after Elaboratable.__init__ is fed a config file as input)?
<ktemkin>
cr1901_modern1: depending on how hacky you want to be and what scope you want, you have at least a few options
<ktemkin>
you can suppress it for a whole file by sticking "# nmigen: UnusedElaboratable=no" at the top of your file
<cr1901_modern1>
Ideally I'd like it for this specific module only. Don't mind how hacky it is
<ktemkin>
if you don't care about dirtying yourself by reaching into the nMigen innards, you can also just `my_elaborable._MustUse__used = True
<cr1901_modern1>
I'll do that for now, and when I'm ready to deploy for the world to see, I can bring it up at a meeting
<cr1901_modern1>
Maybe someone can suggest better then
<ktemkin>
I mean, I'd imagine you can also just not mark your class Elaboratable, but define Elaborate() anyway
<ktemkin>
oh, actually, strike that -- that generates a different stray warning
<cr1901_modern1>
indeed :P
<ktemkin>
bit of a catch-22 there
<ktemkin>
AFAIK, the purpose of tagging a class with Elaboratable is pretty much entirely to make sure that class is used, so it'd have made sense to be able to not subclass Elaboratable to not get that tracking, but it's a bit damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't