USB programmable Open Source Hardware
in [FPGA]
|
From: Antti.Lukats on 27 Sep 2009 12:55 On Sep 27, 6:55 pm, n...(a)puntnl.niks (Nico Coesel) wrote: > "Antti.Luk...(a)googlemail.com" <antti.luk...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > >On Sep 23, 10:47=A0pm, "Antti.Luk...(a)googlemail.com" > ><antti.luk...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > >> On Sep 23, 10:41=A0pm, nobody <cydrollin...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > Antti, > > >> > You have it all figured dont ya, Nobody, nothing, no company, no > >> > interest. Well, seems as if two others have joined in to express some > >> > interest. > > >> > =A0I agree the mating components, 4 connectors, used on the board for > >> > stacking the boards are expensive and therefore need to rethink > >> Antti > >> PS I am not as negative just trying to help you, > >> and yes i have pretty much figured out > > >i must correct myself > > >s3e: no failsafe multiboot in SPI flash without external circuitry > > Whats the problem with that? The only limitation of this board is that > you need an external JTAG interface to program it. It would be nicer > to have JTAG thru the FTDI chip. That way you'll always have a > fallback. > > -- > Failure does not prove something is impossible, failure simply > indicates you are not using the right tools... > "If it doesn't fit, use a bigger hammer!" > -------------------------------------------------------------- missing multiboot was one major issue with S3E in my opinion other FPGA had multiboot already, Xilinx was just leaping behind they fixed it in S3A and V5 only multiboot is a VERY important feature, no wonder pretty much all FPGA vendors support it in their latest families. Ah, when we talk about open-source user programmable USB FPGA things, I already have one on my desk, well it isnt opened yet to public, but it soon will be, it does use FT245 and FPGA with multiboot feature, first image is programmed with FTDI communication and some default FPGA applicatation that is responsible for SPI flash update, and user application auto start, leaving 3 FPGA configurations for the user Antti
From: -jg on 27 Sep 2009 17:45 On Sep 28, 4:42 am, "Antti.Luk...(a)googlemail.com" <antti.luk...(a)googlemail.com> > > Anttis design would use > 1 FT232R (also used for CLOCK!) Why not FT2232H here, to "make it as good as you can," ? > 2 S3E or S3A > 3 spi flash I assume this includes SPI Flash with 2b/4b modes, again "make it as good as you can," ? ( or maybe even 2 SPI flash devices...) -jg
From: Uwe Bonnes on 27 Sep 2009 17:48 -jg <jim.granville(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 28, 4:42�am, "Antti.Luk...(a)googlemail.com" > <antti.luk...(a)googlemail.com> > > > Anttis design would use > > 1 FT232R (also used for CLOCK!) > Why not FT2232H here, to "make it as good as you can," ? The FT2232H costs more buck and needs more infrastructure. But I perfer it too... -- Uwe Bonnes bon(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------
From: -jg on 27 Sep 2009 18:52 On Sep 28, 9:48 am, Uwe Bonnes <b...(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu- darmstadt.de> wrote: > -jg <jim.granvi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Why not FT2232H here, to "make it as good as you can," ? > > The FT2232H costs more buck and needs more infrastructure. But I perfer it > too... I like the potential for a reasonable rate continual sample, for things like PC Frequency counter, Logic analyzer ets, as it's always good to have a 'free instrument' or two, in any development kit, and especially so for teaching. { We've been getting quite good results from SoundCards, on the 'free instrument' front, (but with obvious bandwidth ceilings) } -jg
From: Antti.Lukats on 28 Sep 2009 00:18
On Sep 28, 12:48 am, Uwe Bonnes <b...(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu- darmstadt.de> wrote: > -jg <jim.granvi...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sep 28, 4:42 am, "Antti.Luk...(a)googlemail.com" > > <antti.luk...(a)googlemail.com> > > > > Anttis design would use > > > 1 FT232R (also used for CLOCK!) > > Why not FT2232H here, to "make it as good as you can," ? > > The FT2232H costs more buck and needs more infrastructure. But I perfer it > too... > -- > Uwe Bonnes b...(a)elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de > > Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt > --------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ---------- Right Uwe, it does cost a lot of more infrastructure, and is more expensive as chip as well, so thats the reason, for lowest cost it would be FT232R, for perfromance it would be FT2232H or CY7C68013 Antti |