Dave,
Thanks for the reply. Using a 2.6 kernel would be a great idea. I have
written drivers for 2.4 and 2.6 and actually, this project might get
by without interrupts and just require the /dev/mem mmap interface.
Not yet sure.
I am always interested in alternatives, but I am attempting to do this
on the cheap first. I currently am working with an old system that
scans about 10,000 I/O points using CAMAC serial highway. I'm stuck
with this I/O architecture at the moment because the signal crosses 25
million volts at six different locations and the price of open-air
ethernet is too high for now. The current system doesn't use LAMs and
I am currently driving everything from a VMEbus interface using only
programmed I/O.
The idea, is to build a compatible synchronous serial engine in the
fpga and divide the system into six pieces, each driven by it's own
TS-7300.
I wouldn't mind gutting the current fpga, except for the wishbone
component, since I can get by without the extra H/W. Its not clear if
I could do that without causing problems however. The code is less
modular than it might be.
TS recommended this board to me. They never mentioned an x86 one that
included the capability of enhanced (I suppose for a price) support.
In your opinion, is the x86 option a better development platform for
my project?
I'm newbie when it comes to fpga development so any suggestions,
pointers, recommended readings, etc. will be greatly appreciated.
John
--- In David Hawkins <> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> > Success, finally.
>
> Great.
>
> > The following procedure was used to get the open core bitstream
> > working on the TS-7300.
>
> Thanks for the write-up. One of these days, I'll repeat
> your procedure :)
>
> > One comment before proceeding. It seems that Technologic Systems is
> > not the least bit interested in this. I initially purchased a TS-7800
> > after being led to believe that this same kind of thing would be
> > possible, i.e., being able to alter the fpga code for custom use.
> > Recently (8/08), tech support indicated that doing such a thing was
> > still on their todo list, but near the bottom of a list that was
> > continually growing larger. At the same time, this individual reported
> > that the TS-7300 already supported this objective and that a GPL
> > project had been published on the open cores website. All this is
> > indeed true but because of the apparent lack of activity in this group
> > (are there other, similar groups that have made use of this feature?)
> > and the complete absence of interest by Technologic Systems in
> > providing any kind of assistance to their customers, I am wondering if
> > there are problems with this board or the fpga implementations. Does
> > anyone have any information in this regard?
>
> I don't think there are any issues with the board design.
>
> I was given a TS-7300 board to evaluate by a colleague, and
> determined (based on his skill levels) that he was better off
> using a TS x86 board, with a serially controlled FPGA.
>
> If you're familiar with FPGA designs, don't care about
> keeping the functionality of the default configuration, and
> are happy with Linux, and device drivers, the board can be
> made to work.
>
> However, you're right, the 'open-source' nature of the project
> means 'you're on your own' ... well, not really, you're left
> to the open-source support system :)
>
> Given that you have to write device drivers for the board,
> the first thing I would do would be to get Linux 2.6 running
> on the board. There are people who have done this.
>
> If you want to discuss what you are planning to do with the
> board, I could give you suggestions on the FPGA side of things.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|