Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #13704

Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show key headers only | View raw

On 9/18/2013 11:17 AM, David Brown wrote:
> On 17/09/13 19:22, rickman wrote:
>> On 9/17/2013 5:42 AM, David Brown wrote:
>>>
>>> FPGAs are really good at doing things in parallel, and less good at
>>> doing things serially.
>>
>> I get tired of people making *unsupported* claims.  This is a good
>> example.  What about an FPGA makes it "less good" at doing serial
>> operations?  Hmm?  Or maybe I misunderstand what the comparison point is
>> for the "less good" claim.  Perhaps you mean FPGAs are less good at
>> serial computations than FPGAs are at parallel computations.  Even that
>> I can't really see.  FPGAs are agnostic about the method, they do serial
>> or parallel equally well.
>>
>
> First off, are we all happy that FPGAs are really good at doing things
> in parallel?
>
> Secondly, are we all happy that processors are really at doing things
> serially?  They step through a sequence of instructions, doing (usually)
> one step at a time.
>
> The point of contention is how good FPGAs are at doing things serially.
>
> When the algorithm is a series of similar steps (such as "do a MAC on
> this data, then a MAC on that data, etc."), FPGAs are fine - you can
> write a state machine that handles the steps, along with some logic for
> end cases.
>
> But when you have complicated branching, jumping, subroutines, etc., in
> your algorithm, then FPGA logic is hard.  It is hard to implement, as
> you have to re-organise the algorithm into a form that the FPGA
> languages can handle.

Ok, a *factual* statement that can be discussed, even if it is 
unsupported.  You make a claim that you have to reorganize the algorithm 
to suit HDLs.  What aspect of HLLs is missing from HDL?  They include 
conditionals, looping, branching, etc.  Why is it hard to implement any 
aspect of an algorithm in an HDL?


> And all the time you are faced with balances - do
> you dedicate resources such as DSP blocks to particular tasks, or do you
> multiplex them across a range of uses?  When you need to hold a number
> of 64-bit variables, do you use logic cells for these?  If your
> algorithm needs a dozen such variables, you quickly lose a a percent or
> two of your total logic elements here.  Or do you put them in a memory
> block - saving space, but requiring complex logic to address them?  When
> you need complex sequential work, do you write it all out, using all the
> combinational and sequential logic, spending your resource-limited LUTs
> on multiplexers, counters, decoders, etc.?  Do you implement some sort
> of state machine interpreter with the steps held in a ROM table?

Why is this significantly different from software?  The fact that there 
are multiple types of resources?  Software has the same issues.  Do you 
put the 64 bit variables on the stack dynamically or allocate static 
memory?  Software can be implemented in many, many ways as well and that 
is where experience comes in.  Many people have lots of experience with 
software and are comfortable with these trade offs.  So comfortable that 
they don't even see them as issues... such as in your case apparently.


> And how do you test and debug all this?  An FPGA simulator is great for
> some things, but not this - you want to be able to single-step the
> system, read out whatever variables you want, put breakpoints in the
> code, print out values to a file, etc.  When you want to change the
> code, the programmer changes the code and quickly re-compiles - the FPGA
> developer needs a much more demanding re-build (and that's assuming
> there is no need to do the route and place part).

Why can't you single step the system in a simulator?  Actually, it is 
better if you don't.  If you had more familiarity with the simulators 
used for HDL design you would realize that they work very much like 
software debuggers but with a significant advantage (at least to me) of 
in addition to all the standard information displays of memory, signals, 
etc., being very visual, showing graphs of the signals changing over 
time.  I can run a simulation and go forwards and backwards in time to 
see what caused a given result.  Single stepping is great, but it is 
hard to go back to an earlier time.


> Once you get beyond a certain basic level of complexity, sequential work
> is best done with a sequential processor.

...no comment...


>>> Processors are really good at doing things
>>> serially, and less good at doing them in parallel.
>>
>> Other than multicore processors, they don't do things in parallel at
>> *all*!  Processors always execute code sequentially.
>>
>
> "parallel" is just a matter of perception.  If a processor does one
> thing every microsecond, then it does a thousand things every
> millisecond - just as if it did those thousand things in parallel once
> per millisecond.  You will notice that your PC is quite happy running
> multiple programs "in parallel" even if it only has one CPU.

It is not a mater of perception when you are writing the software. 
Implementing virtual parallelism on a sequential processor requires a 
lot of additional work somewhere, buy someone.  Much of it may have been 
done for you, but if your app needs to use that parallelism, you need to 
address that in ways which are unique to this situation.  When things 
are *actually* run in parallel this all goes away.


>>> This is a
>>> fundamental difference between the two types of computation.  Obviously
>>> you /can/ do things in serial in an FPGA (and you can at least simulate
>>> parallelism in a cpu), an inherently serial algorithm with lots of
>>> branches, choices, loops, etc., is most naturally implemented in a
>>> serial processor.
>>
>> Can you explain "natural"?  That sounds like a bias.  I can't measure
>> "natural" in any way I know of.
>>
>
> Try /thinking/ rather than /measuring/.

The point is that "natural" has no meaning, in food or in this 
discussion, unless you give it one.  I'm asking for the meaning you 
intended.


> FPGAs are Turing complete.  So are cellular automata - but they are
> pretty hopeless for anything other than the type of simulation that is a
> "natural fit" for that type of computer.  The same applies to FPGAs.

This statement is accurate and has no bias.  But it says nothing about 
what the "natural fit" is for FPGAs.


>>> Add to that the desire for double-precision floating point.  Yes, an
>>> FPGA /can/ do these calculations - but it is much easier to do it in
>>> software.  In software, you write "double a, b, c, d; a = b * c + d;"
>>> and that's it done - in an FPGA, you design and debug double-precision
>>> floating point addition and multiplication blocks.
>>
>> It is easier to do in software only if someone has done it for you or
>> you are using a processor where DP FP is done in hardware.  Once you
>> construct your basic DP FP algorithm in an HDL you never need to think
>> about it again in an FPGA.  So no, I don't agree that it is "hard" in an
>> FPGA.  Again, an FPGA is data type agnostic.
>
> On processors that have appropriate hardware support, it is easy to do
> the double precision floating point because the hardware supports it -
> it is a single line of C code, or a few assembly instructions.  On
> processors that don't have the support, it is /also/ easy to do because
> it is part of the basic toolchain for the chip (a compliant C compiler
> /must/ provide it).

Yes, I believe that is what I wrote above, but in more detail.


> On an FPGA, you either have to write the FP stuff yourself - taking a
> great deal of time and effort - or you have to use third-party blocks
> that are often expensive to buy, and take a lot of resources.  A quick
> check of some IP blocks on Altera's site suggests that double precision
> floating point takes of the order of 2000 LE's - that is a /massive/
> amount when you are using sanely priced devices.

Unless you use the dedicated multipliers as they are intended.


> It means that you can
> pretty much forget about structures using dedicated FP blocks for each
> operation in an algorithm like KF - there simply aren't enough resources
> on a device.  So you have piles of code (and work, testing, debugging,
> logic resources, etc.) to funnel everything through a few FP blocks.
> Alternatively, with a big enough FPGA and enough development time, you
> could probably write optimised FP blocks of different kinds for
> different parts of the system, and get it all squeezed in.
>
> Tell me again how Kalman on an FPGA is /not/ massively harder to
> implement than doing it in software?

I don't see what is difficult and you have not explained it.  You are 
trying to make a point that FPGAs are poor at decision making, which is 
not true.  You have tried to make a point that FPGAs are poor at 
floating point, which is not true.


>>>> Have you done FPGA work?
>>>
>>> I haven't done much - but I have done enough to be entirely confident in
>>> claiming that implementing a Kalman filter in an FPGA would be /much/
>>> harder and more time consuming for an FPGA expert than implementing the
>>> same thing in software would be for a software expert (given equal
>>> knowledge of the maths, etc.).
>>
>> Good, then please explain what aspect of the filter is hard to do in an
>> FPGA...
>>
>
> See above.

Ok, I think this sums it up.  You have done just enough FPGA work to 
appreciate that it is not the same as coding in an HLL, but clearly you 
have not become proficient in it.  More importantly, I think you are a 
bit stuck in the sequential code mindset.  This might not be a problem 
using FPGAs, but it is nice if you open up a little more and see the 
full capabilities.

I once gave some free advice to a software guy who had been tasked by 
his company with porting a design to an FPGA.  I forget the details but 
he wanted to start out with a "hello world" program.  A number of us 
advised him that this was not so simple a task in an FPGA, but he 
motored on and proved us wrong.  With just a little coaching he was able 
to complete his task an I was not able to turn it into a consulting gig. 
  He was rather grateful for my support and convinced his employer to 
send me a $500 check.

So clearly if you are open to what can be done with an FPGA, they aren't 
so hard to use after all.


>>> I have done enough FPGA work to know that it is certainly /possible/ in
>>> an FPGA - and that with a good enough FPGA developer it would not be as
>>> bad as many might think.  I think that tools such as MyHDL could make it
>>> more tractable than traditional Verilog or VHDL.  Possibly the most
>>> efficient way would be to write the code in C, get it all working
>>> nicely, then use something like Altera's tools for converting C into
>>> FPGA hardware.  But that leaves you with the question of why you should
>>> bother with the FPGA step at all.
>>
>> Or why bother with the C step at all?  Why is it hard to code a KF in an
>> HDL?  I keep repeating the question and no one ever answers it.  Claims
>> are made repeatedly, but with *NO* supporting evidence, just more opinion.
>>
>
> See above.
>
> Note also that I think most people here agree that it would be
> significantly to implement KF in an FPGA than in software (even if they
> might not use the word "nightmare").  Thus it is /you/ who is making the
> extraordinary claim here, and it is /you/ who need to provide evidence
> suggesting it is not hard.

Ok, I won't dispute that for many users, FPGA design is harder than 
software.  My statement was that calling it a "nightmare" is inaccurate. 
  I have provided plenty of evidence and you have as well.  You said 
that FPGAs are Turing complete.  HDLs are as well.  They are also very 
facile (if you don't mind strong typing in the case of VHDL) and the 
debug tools are excellent.  What more do you want?


>>>>> When you have a good, working Kalman implementation in software, and
>>>>> you
>>>>> need to run it 100 times faster with little regard for hardware costs -
>>>> /then/ it is time to break out the FPGA and transfer it over.
>>>>
>>>> More bias... this assumes that the *only* utility of an FPGA is to make
>>>> things run very fast and that FPGA hardware costs are much higher than
>>>> CPU hardware costs.  Really?  I have FPGA boards that sell for under
>>>> $50.  I believe the hardware cost the OP talked about was a SBC of some
>>>> sort which is not likely to be under $50.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You could make a processor card for a great deal less than $50 that will
>>> do the job - the OP is looking at SBC solutions as a way of minimising
>>> development costs, not for minimising unit costs.
>>
>> Really?  The OP said he implemented the algorithm on a standard MCU, the
>> type you can put on a<$50 PCB and it ran *way* too slow.  What
>> processor card would you use?
>>
>
> In the OP's situation when he only needs a small number of systems, I
> would probably do as he did and use a big processor (like an SBC) for
> speed of development.  If I wanted to have minimal costs, I would
> re-implement it with fixed point (which is a minor change, once the
> algorithm is working, and easy to test and debug) and use a Cortex-M4
> for two or three dollars.

The OP tested the algorithm on an ARM and said it wasn't fast enough.  I 
seriously doubt that you would be able to run it adequately on a $3 ARM 
since that would be the low, slow end of ARM devices.  I'm pretty sure 
you would have a hard time getting hardware floating point on a $3 
device much less double precision.  BTW, by the time you add all the 
support circuity and put it on a board, that $3 chip will have a retail 
cost of $50 or close to it.


>>> I know that FPGA's have many uses other than making things run fast -
>>> but in this case, I don't see any potential benefits for calculating
>>> Kalman filters other than possibly high speed (for a given price, board
>>> space, power, etc.).  Can /you/ give any other potential benefits?  You
>>> can take it as a given that a microcontroller will be cheaper if unit
>>> costs are important, since the whole thing could be re-implemented in
>>> fixed point and run in an ARM for a couple of dollars.
>>
>> You have drifted off target.  The original issue was the statement that
>> using FPGAs is a "nightmare".  Where did I ever say an FPGA is a better
>> solution for this KF than using a GP CPU?
>>
>> Again, the OP has said that an ARM processor he used was way too slow.
>> You can get faster ones, but they *aren't* "a couple of dollars".
>>
>
> There are chips that are certainly fast enough for under about $10, even
> if you stick to DP FP.

How long is a piece of sting?  We can't really say what the OP's 
algorithm will run on specifically, can we?  Although he did say 
something about wanting 1 MFLOPS IIRC.  You might be able to run that on 
a $35 raspberry Pi.

-- 

Rick

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-11 11:11 -0500
  Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Rich Webb <webb.ra@example.net> - 2013-09-11 12:45 -0400
    Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Frank Miles <fpm@u.washington.edu> - 2013-09-11 16:59 +0000
  Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-11 10:08 -0700
    Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-11 12:27 -0500
      Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-11 11:23 -0700
        Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-11 11:32 -0700
      Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-11 11:30 -0700
  Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-11 18:26 +0000
    Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-11 13:37 -0500
      Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2013-09-11 21:51 +0200
        Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-11 16:46 -0400
          Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-12 14:00 +0200
          Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Anders.Montonen@kapsi.spam.stop.fi.invalid - 2013-09-14 10:24 +0000
      Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 02:38 -0400
        Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-15 01:52 -0700
          Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 12:33 -0400
            Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-15 13:02 -0500
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 14:33 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-09-15 12:09 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2013-09-15 22:12 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 16:32 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-16 09:17 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-16 10:21 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-16 13:53 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-17 07:31 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-17 04:46 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-09-17 10:46 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-17 22:30 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-17 22:43 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor gtwrek@sonic.net (Mark Curry) - 2013-09-18 14:35 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor upsidedown@downunder.com - 2013-09-18 18:41 +0300
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-18 09:12 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 07:57 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-19 22:22 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-20 05:44 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-20 00:05 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-20 14:18 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor upsidedown@downunder.com - 2013-09-20 16:24 +0300
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-20 08:31 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-20 12:43 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-20 20:29 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor gtwrek@sonic.net (Mark Curry) - 2013-09-20 21:39 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-20 15:27 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-20 23:52 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-20 18:52 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-20 19:38 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-24 01:20 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-24 01:22 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-09-24 03:33 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-24 21:17 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-22 10:56 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-22 20:08 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-22 12:21 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-23 00:12 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-22 16:50 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-23 09:12 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-23 06:49 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-23 16:31 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-24 01:13 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-24 02:15 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-24 15:56 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-09-23 00:46 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-22 23:18 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Arlet Ottens <usenet+5@c-scape.nl> - 2013-09-23 09:00 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-23 00:18 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Arlet Ottens <usenet+5@c-scape.nl> - 2013-09-23 09:27 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-23 06:56 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-09-23 10:50 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-28 13:04 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor upsidedown@downunder.com - 2013-09-20 15:41 +0300
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-20 14:33 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor upsidedown@downunder.com - 2013-09-20 15:55 +0300
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-20 08:42 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-23 09:06 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-28 12:07 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2013-09-29 22:15 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-01 00:33 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-10-01 10:25 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-03 10:26 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-10-03 19:07 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Scott Hemphill <hemphill@hemphills.net> - 2013-10-03 19:17 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Scott Hemphill <hemphill@hemphills.net> - 2013-10-03 21:00 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-18 11:29 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-18 10:20 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-18 21:53 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-19 09:48 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-19 09:38 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-19 11:24 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-19 10:53 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-19 13:12 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-19 15:31 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-19 15:44 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-19 22:53 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-20 08:37 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-30 17:48 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-01 00:37 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-01 09:14 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2013-09-22 21:31 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-23 00:19 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-23 09:23 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-23 09:00 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-23 11:31 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-28 13:02 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-28 22:54 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-28 22:33 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-28 22:29 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-29 10:01 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2013-09-29 23:02 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-30 10:36 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-30 14:09 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 01:27 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-10-01 05:46 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-10-01 09:19 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 03:28 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-10-01 10:13 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 12:39 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-10-01 16:56 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-10-01 18:59 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 17:25 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-01 18:37 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-01 19:29 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-01 19:31 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-10-01 16:36 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-01 20:51 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-01 21:08 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-10-02 09:08 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Mel Wilson <mwilson@the-wire.com> - 2013-10-02 09:36 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-10-02 17:16 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) upsidedown@downunder.com - 2013-10-03 10:15 +0300
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-10-03 02:32 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2013-10-03 15:45 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-03 09:06 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-03 17:18 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) stephenXXX@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2013-10-03 16:51 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-03 10:11 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-02 09:52 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-10-03 09:35 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-10-03 03:26 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-10-03 13:27 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-03 12:55 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-10-04 16:59 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-10-02 01:02 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) "Boudewijn Dijkstra" <sp4mtr4p.boudewijn@indes.com> - 2013-10-03 16:28 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-03 08:03 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-10-03 19:15 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-03 15:50 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-10-03 15:27 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-03 16:37 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-10-03 21:51 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2013-10-04 00:02 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-10-02 00:12 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor (die evil thread, die!!!) robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-10-03 10:24 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-10-02 00:13 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-10-02 06:51 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-02 09:55 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-02 09:58 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 03:12 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-02 09:49 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 12:04 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-02 12:51 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-10-02 15:18 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 19:46 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-10-01 23:09 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-19 03:53 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-19 01:45 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-19 04:34 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-19 02:17 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor gtwrek@sonic.net (Mark Curry) - 2013-09-19 16:49 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 17:05 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-19 13:08 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 20:22 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-19 14:42 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-20 00:34 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-19 22:15 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-20 08:43 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-19 22:16 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-19 12:28 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-19 15:08 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-18 12:52 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-09-18 10:23 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 08:03 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-09-19 12:53 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-18 21:31 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-19 04:18 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-19 02:02 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 16:47 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor j.m.granville@gmail.com - 2013-09-24 19:54 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-25 19:12 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-25 11:50 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-26 01:26 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-26 09:11 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-26 02:12 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-26 13:46 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-26 09:55 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-26 18:44 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-26 12:31 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-26 23:09 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-26 08:45 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 07:44 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-19 03:58 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-19 09:45 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 16:50 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 07:31 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-17 11:30 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor gtwrek@sonic.net (Mark Curry) - 2013-09-17 21:11 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-18 13:11 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-17 11:42 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Al Clark <aclark@danvillesignal.com> - 2013-09-17 14:06 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-17 16:44 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-17 11:43 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-17 13:22 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-18 17:17 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-18 16:46 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-18 09:16 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-18 14:13 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-18 20:00 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2013-09-18 19:56 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-19 09:56 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-18 14:01 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-18 12:35 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-18 23:28 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-18 16:39 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-18 17:26 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-18 17:56 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-22 17:53 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-23 01:00 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-23 00:15 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-23 11:31 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-23 21:15 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-23 22:41 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-24 02:57 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-23 18:42 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-23 21:16 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-23 20:31 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-24 12:01 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-19 03:14 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-19 00:53 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-19 09:58 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-18 16:43 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-19 03:21 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-19 00:54 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 08:25 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-26 09:03 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-26 06:47 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-26 09:46 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-26 10:06 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-26 13:45 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-26 23:54 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-29 08:31 -0400
                Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-09-29 23:37 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-30 01:16 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-29 22:31 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-30 10:06 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-30 11:12 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-30 09:24 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 01:33 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-30 22:48 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 03:04 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-01 00:27 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 03:32 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-09-30 11:37 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-30 13:40 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-30 11:43 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-30 17:07 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-30 11:38 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-09-30 18:57 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-30 12:36 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor jhallen@TheWorld.com (Joseph H Allen) - 2013-09-30 20:15 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-09-30 20:38 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 02:55 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-10-01 11:50 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 12:53 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-10-01 17:34 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 17:31 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-10-02 12:15 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 12:19 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-10-03 11:55 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-03 01:04 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-04 00:19 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-03 23:07 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-01 20:06 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-01 22:38 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 03:09 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-02 00:51 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 03:58 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-02 01:27 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 04:24 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-02 01:54 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 19:51 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-03 00:17 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-04 00:27 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-03 23:09 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-04 09:30 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-06 10:53 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-09 05:12 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-09 02:24 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2013-10-09 12:05 +0000
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-09 08:06 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-04 10:01 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-04 09:38 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-04 15:25 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-04 10:35 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-03 09:43 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-04 00:29 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-04 01:04 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-04 09:40 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-02 10:21 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-02 19:54 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-03 09:48 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-03 00:21 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-03 09:55 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-03 04:45 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-03 13:02 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-03 07:19 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-04 00:02 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-04 00:55 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-04 09:45 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-02 10:06 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-02 02:24 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-02 10:57 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-02 04:31 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-02 15:45 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-10-02 08:29 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-03 00:47 -0700
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-03 09:59 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-10-03 10:09 +0100
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-10-01 01:51 -0400
                Re: Open source FPGA toolchain ?, was: Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-30 10:44 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-27 01:10 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-29 08:36 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-29 22:06 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-30 11:47 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-30 09:14 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-19 01:27 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-19 03:49 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 16:40 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-09-15 14:53 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-16 14:22 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-15 15:12 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-09-15 14:58 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-15 18:19 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-16 14:48 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-16 17:17 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-16 18:41 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-17 11:22 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-17 15:40 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Torfinn Ingolfsen <tingo@home.no> - 2013-09-17 18:44 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-16 14:31 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-17 07:44 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-17 11:46 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 09:21 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-19 12:26 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 20:17 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-18 08:25 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-18 14:16 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-18 12:39 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor langwadt@fonz.dk - 2013-09-18 15:18 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 09:49 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-17 07:35 +0000
            Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-15 13:11 -0700
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 16:26 -0400
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 16:36 -0400
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-17 07:49 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-17 05:30 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-19 10:00 +0000
          Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor gtwrek@sonic.net (Mark Curry) - 2013-09-16 16:51 +0000
            Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-16 14:54 -0400
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor gtwrek@sonic.net (Mark Curry) - 2013-09-16 19:06 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-16 15:22 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Rob Gaddi <rgaddi@technologyhighland.invalid> - 2013-09-17 09:40 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-17 11:48 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-17 15:50 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor gtwrek@sonic.net (Mark Curry) - 2013-09-17 21:03 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-17 17:05 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor gtwrek@sonic.net (Mark Curry) - 2013-09-17 21:16 +0000
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-17 16:38 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-17 21:33 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2013-09-18 10:48 +0300
        Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.please> - 2013-09-15 10:39 -0500
          Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 12:39 -0400
            Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-15 12:58 -0500
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-15 11:33 -0700
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-15 14:40 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.please> - 2013-09-15 14:25 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2013-09-15 13:35 -0700
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-09-15 12:40 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.please> - 2013-09-15 14:57 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-09-15 13:44 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-16 01:46 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-16 10:26 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-16 02:44 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Mel Wilson <mwilson@the-wire.com> - 2013-09-16 09:01 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-16 12:18 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.please> - 2013-09-16 10:06 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor robert bristow-johnson <rbj@audioimagination.com> - 2013-09-16 10:34 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-16 12:09 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-16 17:31 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-16 12:00 -0700
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2013-09-17 07:59 +0000
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-17 10:13 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-17 05:56 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-17 11:37 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-17 16:00 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-17 21:30 +0100
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2013-09-18 12:46 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2013-09-18 18:00 +0100
  Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Don Y <this@isnotme.com> - 2013-09-11 12:10 -0700
  Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam@nowhere.com> - 2013-09-11 14:30 -0500
    Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-11 15:39 -0400
      Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-11 15:46 -0400
        Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-11 20:39 -0400
          Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.please> - 2013-09-11 20:03 -0500
            Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-12 14:09 +0200
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-12 07:11 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-12 16:34 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-12 10:42 -0400
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor dp <dp@tgi-sci.com> - 2013-09-12 12:48 -0700
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-12 16:14 -0500
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2013-09-12 21:39 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2013-09-12 23:41 +0200
              Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-12 16:08 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no> - 2013-09-13 01:00 +0200
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really> - 2013-09-12 23:03 -0500
                Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor David Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com> - 2013-09-13 08:47 +0200
  Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Dave Nadler <drn@nadler.com> - 2013-09-11 15:40 -0700
  Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.please> - 2013-09-11 20:05 -0500
    Re: Small, fast, resource-rich processor Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> - 2013-09-11 22:19 -0400

csiph-web