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


Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #13464 > unrolled thread

Small, fast, resource-rich processor

Started byTim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really>
First post2013-09-11 11:11 -0500
Last post2013-09-11 22:19 -0400
Articles 8 on this page of 428 — 35 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.arch.embedded


Contents

  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

Page 22 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 20 21 [22]


#13518

FromDavid Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no>
Date2013-09-12 23:41 +0200
Message-ID<efudnf3GIdK4qK_PnZ2dnUVZ7sednZ2d@lyse.net>
In reply to#13510
On 12/09/13 21:39, Hans-Bernhard Bröker wrote:
> On 12.09.2013 14:09, David Brown wrote:
>
>> gcc for ARM has direct support for "long long fract", which is 1.63
>> fixed point (exact sizes vary according to target - stupidly there is no
>> equivalent of <stdint.h> for fixed point in C).
>
> Why would there be such a thing?  After all, there are no fractional
> integers in the language to begin with, so what use could a header
> documenting their non-existing properties be?
>
> Fixed-point integer types exist in C only as non-standard extensions,
> like the proposed "Extensions for the programming language C to support
> embedded processors".  It's up to the implementors of such extensions
> how they publish their properties.  The above-mentioned proposal has
> <stdfix.h>, other approaches will have their own, similar headers.
>

They are covered in the ISO TR 18037 "Embedded C" technical report. 
This doesn't quite hold the status of C11 or earlier C standards, but it 
is close, and compilers (such as gcc and clang) have implemented them on 
some targets.  There may be some compilers that have previously 
implemented non-standard fixed point extensions, and will keep these for 
compatibility, but the TR 18037 is generally viewed as the way ahead for 
fixed point support in C.  (Some other TR 18037 features, like named 
address spaces, are also seeing real-world use in compilers - while 
others such as the I/O extensions, are less likely to be useful.)

It strikes me as strange ("stupid" is perhaps too strong) that the TR 
18037 committee have not made exact size types for fixed point data.  I 
understand that they want to give compiler developers freedom to pick 
different sizes that are more efficient on a particular target, but it 
is a great disservice to users.  Typedefs like these would be fine:

<http://wiki.leaflabs.com/Fixed_Point_Math>



[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#13515

FromTim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really>
Date2013-09-12 16:08 -0500
Message-ID<mMKdnb4f8dzbsK_PnZ2dnUVZ5jydnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#13492
On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:09:30 +0200, David Brown wrote:

> On 12/09/13 03:03, Tim Wescott wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:39:44 -0400, Randy Yates wrote:
>> 
>>> Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam@nowhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Consider TMS64xx SOMs made by LogicPD and others.
>>>>>
>>>>> E.g., Orsys. There are some FPGA daughtercards you can use with them
>>>>> as well. Not PC-104.
>>>>
>>>> Correction: The Orsys is just a board, not a SOM (although not sure
>>>> where you'd draw the line).
>>>
>>> Also, nevermind! The 67x doesn't do double precision FP in hardware
>>> either.
>>>
>>> Tim, are you sure you need doubles? That seems to limiting your
>>> choices.
>> 
>> Yes.  Or at least I either need doubles or 64-bit fixed-point.  There's
>> a Kalman filter buried in there that's both using most of the clock
>> ticks and requires double precision.
> 
> gcc for ARM has direct support for "long long fract", which is 1.63
> fixed point (exact sizes vary according to target - stupidly there is no
> equivalent of <stdint.h> for fixed point in C).
> 
> Dropping the requirement of floating point doubles will make life much
> easier.
> 
> 
>> But the problem seems to have solved itself.  The customer had
>> originally asked for a custom board doing "demodulation" sitting next
>> to a SBC PC doing graphics.

Can you point to documentation for that?  I didn't find any reference to 
"fract" in the header files of my version (4.7.4) -- is it really build-
in, like "int"?

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#13522

FromDavid Brown <david.brown@removethis.hesbynett.no>
Date2013-09-13 01:00 +0200
Message-ID<VOOdnWy7zekQ2q_PnZ2dnUVZ8ladnZ2d@lyse.net>
In reply to#13515
On 12/09/13 23:08, Tim Wescott wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:09:30 +0200, David Brown wrote:
>
>> On 12/09/13 03:03, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>> On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:39:44 -0400, Randy Yates wrote:
>>>
>>>> Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam@nowhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Consider TMS64xx SOMs made by LogicPD and others.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> E.g., Orsys. There are some FPGA daughtercards you can use with them
>>>>>> as well. Not PC-104.
>>>>>
>>>>> Correction: The Orsys is just a board, not a SOM (although not sure
>>>>> where you'd draw the line).
>>>>
>>>> Also, nevermind! The 67x doesn't do double precision FP in hardware
>>>> either.
>>>>
>>>> Tim, are you sure you need doubles? That seems to limiting your
>>>> choices.
>>>
>>> Yes.  Or at least I either need doubles or 64-bit fixed-point.  There's
>>> a Kalman filter buried in there that's both using most of the clock
>>> ticks and requires double precision.
>>
>> gcc for ARM has direct support for "long long fract", which is 1.63
>> fixed point (exact sizes vary according to target - stupidly there is no
>> equivalent of <stdint.h> for fixed point in C).
>>
>> Dropping the requirement of floating point doubles will make life much
>> easier.
>>
>>
>>> But the problem seems to have solved itself.  The customer had
>>> originally asked for a custom board doing "demodulation" sitting next
>>> to a SBC PC doing graphics.
>
> Can you point to documentation for that?  I didn't find any reference to
> "fract" in the header files of my version (4.7.4) -- is it really build-
> in, like "int"?
>

It may depend on the build - I believe support for fixed point is a 
compile-time option on gcc (like support for different languages).  In 
particular, it is only available on some targets.

Your gcc installation should have a directory such as 
"lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/4.7.3/include" - look there for a "stdfix.h" file 
alongside "stdint.h" and "stdbool.h".

Disclaimer - I haven't actually tried using the fixed point types as yet.

<http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Fixed_002dPoint.html>
<http://wiki.leaflabs.com/index.php?title=Fixed_Point_Math>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#13526

FromTim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.really>
Date2013-09-12 23:03 -0500
Message-ID<mMKdnbcf8dznE6_PnZ2dnUVZ5jydnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#13522
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 01:00:29 +0200, David Brown wrote:

> On 12/09/13 23:08, Tim Wescott wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:09:30 +0200, David Brown wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/09/13 03:03, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:39:44 -0400, Randy Yates wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam@nowhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Consider TMS64xx SOMs made by LogicPD and others.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> E.g., Orsys. There are some FPGA daughtercards you can use with
>>>>>>> them as well. Not PC-104.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Correction: The Orsys is just a board, not a SOM (although not sure
>>>>>> where you'd draw the line).
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, nevermind! The 67x doesn't do double precision FP in hardware
>>>>> either.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tim, are you sure you need doubles? That seems to limiting your
>>>>> choices.
>>>>
>>>> Yes.  Or at least I either need doubles or 64-bit fixed-point. 
>>>> There's a Kalman filter buried in there that's both using most of the
>>>> clock ticks and requires double precision.
>>>
>>> gcc for ARM has direct support for "long long fract", which is 1.63
>>> fixed point (exact sizes vary according to target - stupidly there is
>>> no equivalent of <stdint.h> for fixed point in C).
>>>
>>> Dropping the requirement of floating point doubles will make life much
>>> easier.
>>>
>>>
>>>> But the problem seems to have solved itself.  The customer had
>>>> originally asked for a custom board doing "demodulation" sitting next
>>>> to a SBC PC doing graphics.
>>
>> Can you point to documentation for that?  I didn't find any reference
>> to "fract" in the header files of my version (4.7.4) -- is it really
>> build-
>> in, like "int"?
>>
>>
> It may depend on the build - I believe support for fixed point is a
> compile-time option on gcc (like support for different languages).  In
> particular, it is only available on some targets.
> 
> Your gcc installation should have a directory such as
> "lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/4.7.3/include" - look there for a "stdfix.h" file
> alongside "stdint.h" and "stdbool.h".
> 
> Disclaimer - I haven't actually tried using the fixed point types as
> yet.

Dayum -- there it be!

Too bad we're doing it the "project efficient" way.

Do you happen to know if the compiler is smart enough to see that you're 
doing MAC-ish sorts of things, and actually using MAC instructions?

-- 

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#13530

FromDavid Brown <david@westcontrol.removethisbit.com>
Date2013-09-13 08:47 +0200
Message-ID<Br6dney_zouEKK_PnZ2dnUVZ8uOdnZ2d@lyse.net>
In reply to#13526
On 13/09/13 06:03, Tim Wescott wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 01:00:29 +0200, David Brown wrote:
> 
>> On 12/09/13 23:08, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>> On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 14:09:30 +0200, David Brown wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/09/13 03:03, Tim Wescott wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:39:44 -0400, Randy Yates wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Randy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Vladimir Vassilevsky <nospam@nowhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Consider TMS64xx SOMs made by LogicPD and others.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> E.g., Orsys. There are some FPGA daughtercards you can use with
>>>>>>>> them as well. Not PC-104.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Correction: The Orsys is just a board, not a SOM (although not sure
>>>>>>> where you'd draw the line).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, nevermind! The 67x doesn't do double precision FP in hardware
>>>>>> either.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tim, are you sure you need doubles? That seems to limiting your
>>>>>> choices.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes.  Or at least I either need doubles or 64-bit fixed-point. 
>>>>> There's a Kalman filter buried in there that's both using most of the
>>>>> clock ticks and requires double precision.
>>>>
>>>> gcc for ARM has direct support for "long long fract", which is 1.63
>>>> fixed point (exact sizes vary according to target - stupidly there is
>>>> no equivalent of <stdint.h> for fixed point in C).
>>>>
>>>> Dropping the requirement of floating point doubles will make life much
>>>> easier.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> But the problem seems to have solved itself.  The customer had
>>>>> originally asked for a custom board doing "demodulation" sitting next
>>>>> to a SBC PC doing graphics.
>>>
>>> Can you point to documentation for that?  I didn't find any reference
>>> to "fract" in the header files of my version (4.7.4) -- is it really
>>> build-
>>> in, like "int"?
>>>
>>>
>> It may depend on the build - I believe support for fixed point is a
>> compile-time option on gcc (like support for different languages).  In
>> particular, it is only available on some targets.
>>
>> Your gcc installation should have a directory such as
>> "lib/gcc/arm-none-eabi/4.7.3/include" - look there for a "stdfix.h" file
>> alongside "stdint.h" and "stdbool.h".
>>
>> Disclaimer - I haven't actually tried using the fixed point types as
>> yet.
> 
> Dayum -- there it be!
> 
> Too bad we're doing it the "project efficient" way.
> 
> Do you happen to know if the compiler is smart enough to see that you're 
> doing MAC-ish sorts of things, and actually using MAC instructions?
> 

Sorry, I don't know - I haven't done anything like that yet on an ARM.
I am looking forward to trying it sometime.

I can certainly say that gcc is becoming even more popular for the ARM,
and that there are big commercial backers - so we can expect such things
to get into gcc faster than used to be the case.  The official
maintainers of the ARM port are CodeSourcery, who are now part of Mentor
Graphics.  ARM now supports gcc directly with money, expertise, and a
ready-to-use toolchain build.  And Freescale CodeWarrior now has gcc as
well as their own compiler - and gcc is the default for new Kinetis
projects.  (But at the same time as making that great move, they cut
Linux support as a host!)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#13483

FromDave Nadler <drn@nadler.com>
Date2013-09-11 15:40 -0700
Message-ID<a3fb43c8-d10d-4bf9-8a01-93be2083453b@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#13464
Hi Tim - BeagleBone *might* meet your needs.
Native float is single precision, but its fast
enough that it might work.
Much less expensive than PC/104 solutions...

See:
http://beagleboard.org/Products/BeagleBone%20Black
https://www.google.com/search?q=beaglebone+floating+point+performance&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Hope that helps,
Best Regards, Dave

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#13488

FromTim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.please>
Date2013-09-11 20:05 -0500
Message-ID<2aedneV6xODHjqzPnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#13464
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 11:11:04 -0500, Tim Wescott wrote:

> I'm working on a project that needs to have a pretty hefty amount of
> digital signal processing done in more or less real time ("soft" real
> time, if you must split hairs).
> 
> For a variety of reasons I think this algorithm would work best on a
> small single-board computer (my customer disagrees -- but getting it
> shoe-
> horned into the chips I was considering is going to take WORK, and I
> think it'll be cheaper for them to go with more expensive hardware).
> 
> So I'm looking for suggestions.  I mostly build custom boards or I make
> algorithms for other people's hardware -- I've never specified a single-
> board computer that's gone into production.
> 
> I was thinking PC-104, but I've never actually used a PC-104 computer,
> and I have no idea, beyond trade-show displays, how the market has
> evolved.
> 
> So, here's what I think I need.  Anyone who wants to look through this
> and point me to the current crop of solutions for all this is welcome to
> do so -- I'll be grateful.
> 
> Small: PC-104 form factor, or some other solution that's less than about
> 20 square inches of board and less than an inch tall.
> 
> Fast: Something that supports native dual-precision floating point, and
> has a clock rate of 500MHz or better.  This algorithm runs about 5x
> faster than real time as a Linux application on a Dell Dimension 8300.
> That's a 2.8GHz Pentium 4, so if it's running alone it should do more
> with less.
> 
> Resource-rich: The algorithm runs, albeit way slow, on a STM32F407,
> using less than 128kB of memory.  So at least that much memory plus
> whatever is necessary for any OS (see below).
> 
> Ports: Comes with serial ports.  I don't need Ethernet or that stuff.
> Depending on the processor (see below), having a JTAG debug port would
> be nice.
> 
> Extensible: I need something onto which I can easily slap an ADC board,
> or something that talks USB, and suggestions for matching ADC modules
> that talk USB.  My preference is something that has an easy parallel I/O
> implementation, an SPI controller that I can hook to an ADC, and/or some
> generic general-purpose I/O pins that I can bit-bang.
> 
> Long legs: I need something that'll be on the market for at least five
> years, preferably a decade.  Better yet would be something that comes
> from some sort of a standard (that's not on it's last legs) so that if
> today's choice goes out of production tomorrow, we can choose another
> that's form-fit-function compatible.
> 
> Processor: My preference is for ARM or Intel, but I'm open to anything
> for which there's a good port of the gnu tools.
> 
> OS: Depends somewhat on how the "extensible" happens.  If I have to talk
> to an ADC using USB, then I want the board to be running Linux (or
> Windows in a pinch).  Otherwise, I'm happy with putting my own little
> RTOS on there.
> 
> Thanks in advance.

So, the problem has solved itself -- after talking with the customer 
today about various options, they're going to let me implement my 
algorithm to run as a DLL on their graphics platform (a single-board PC).

Yay -- the cheapest second computer is no second computer at all!

-- 
Tim Wescott
Control system and signal processing consulting
www.wescottdesign.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#13490

FromRandy Yates <yates@digitalsignallabs.com>
Date2013-09-11 22:19 -0400
Message-ID<87fvta4w8s.fsf@digitalsignallabs.com>
In reply to#13488
Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.please> writes:
> [...]
> So, the problem has solved itself -- after talking with the customer 
> today about various options, they're going to let me implement my 
> algorithm to run as a DLL on their graphics platform (a single-board PC).
>
> Yay -- the cheapest second computer is no second computer at all!

Excellent! Sounds like the right solution - good system engineering.
-- 
Randy Yates
Digital Signal Labs
http://www.digitalsignallabs.com

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 22 of 22 — ← Prev page 1 … 20 21 [22]

Back to top | Article view | comp.arch.embedded


csiph-web