| 00:00.35 | beewoolie | It lowers costs. After all, these bit-serial interfaces are an improvement, too. |
| 00:28.01 | [g2] | anythoughs on bittorrent versus emule ? |
| 00:28.31 | lennert | emule is a stupid name? |
| 00:28.54 | ka6sox-office | I think so. |
| 00:30.28 | prpplague | beewoolie: hey |
| 00:30.33 | prpplague | beewoolie: whats cookin? |
| 00:30.50 | beewoolie | me 2 me 2 me 2 me 2 yipee!! |
| 00:31.01 | lennert | beewoolie: ? |
| 00:31.21 | beewoolie | I started with the Internet late in life. I'm just catching up. |
| 00:31.23 | ka6sox-office | beewoolie is cooking? |
| 00:31.33 | lennert | oh |
| 00:31.36 | lennert | the aol-phase |
| 00:31.44 | beewoolie | prpplague: hey man. Been working on some JTAG stuff. |
| 00:32.02 | beewoolie | BTW, I asked Jun about the wiggler code you sent. He claims ignorance. |
| 00:32.06 | lennert | 'aol phase', actually. (i keep connecting noun parts..) |
| 00:32.42 | beewoolie | prpplague: I'll have a 2232 working in a week or so. |
| 00:33.17 | prpplague | beewoolie: yea i got your email just been swampped with a big high dollar legacy project |
| 00:33.25 | prpplague | beewoolie: should be free'd up mid of next week |
| 00:48.35 | lennert | I.430 specifies that for ISDN S/T cables.. "..the difference in the resistance of conductors of a pair shall not exceed 6% or 60Mohms, whichever is greater." |
| 00:48.48 | lennert | 60 Mohms, eh.. |
| 01:12.09 | *** join/#openjtag vmaster_ (i=vmaster@p549B6905.dip.t-dialin.net) |
| 01:29.03 | lennert | [g2]: you know stuff about BRI ISDN, what is the Activation bit used for? it's described in the frame format but i don't see it referenced anywhere in I.430. |
| 01:29.38 | [g2] | lennert I know a little about T1/E1 but not really ISDN |
| 01:29.43 | lennert | okay |
| 01:29.56 | [g2] | is BRI 2D + 1B ? |
| 01:30.00 | lennert | yup |
| 01:30.21 | [g2] | I think the 2D are just like the channelized T1/E1 |
| 01:30.24 | lennert | 192kHz bit rate, 4000 frames of 48 bits per second |
| 01:30.42 | lennert | (actually, it's D + 2B) |
| 01:30.49 | lennert | 32 of those 48 are the B channels |
| 01:30.51 | [g2] | right |
| 01:30.53 | lennert | 4 are D |
| 01:31.15 | [g2] | it's been a while |
| 01:31.34 | [g2] | 2B + 4D ? |
| 01:31.41 | lennert | then there are some low bandwidth channels between the TE and NT for enabling selftest, loopback |
| 01:31.44 | lennert | no, 2B + 1D |
| 01:31.50 | lennert | but 4 bits out of the 48 are for D |
| 01:31.55 | lennert | and 32 out of 48 are for B |
| 01:32.13 | lennert | that makes the D data rate 16000 bits/sec |
| 01:32.18 | lennert | and the B data rate 2x64000 bits/sec |
| 01:32.25 | [g2] | nod |
| 01:32.32 | [g2] | that sounds familiar |
| 01:32.37 | lennert | the rest is framing and balance |
| 01:32.41 | lennert | but there is one "Activation bit" |
| 01:32.47 | lennert | which doesn't seem to be documented anywhere else |
| 01:32.54 | [g2] | and the signalling on the 16000 bit channel is the tricky part |
| 01:33.02 | lennert | that's LAPD |
| 01:33.09 | lennert | related to LAPB and HDLC |
| 01:33.16 | lennert | all Q.xxx stuff |
| 01:33.21 | lennert | i finally have those Q.xxx standards in .pdf now |
| 01:33.32 | [g2] | does the Activation bit just toggle high and low ? |
| 01:33.33 | lennert | instead of antiquated microsoft word 2.0 format (which no modern program can read anymore) |
| 01:33.42 | lennert | i don't know, it doesn't say |
| 01:34.33 | lennert | ok, so, thanks |
| 01:34.35 | [g2] | I forget or never really knew how the clocking was done with ISDN |
| 01:34.40 | lennert | well |
| 01:34.44 | lennert | the NT clocks the BRI off the network |
| 01:34.54 | lennert | there is the 'U' interface between the NT and the ISDN network |
| 01:35.05 | lennert | the BRI (the S/T interface) is clocked off the U interface |
| 01:35.23 | lennert | and the ISDN equipment synchronises to that 192kHz clock and synchronise the transmissions back to the NT to that clock |
| 01:35.50 | lennert | (with 2 bits delay) |
| 01:36.02 | [g2] | my Q is how the NT derives the clock from the signal |
| 01:36.13 | [g2] | what's the clock recovery mechanism |
| 01:36.21 | lennert | which signal? the signal from the network or the signal from the terminal equipment? |
| 01:37.07 | [g2] | often the network is the master and the CPE just recovers clock from there right ? |
| 01:37.10 | lennert | yeha |
| 01:37.16 | [g2] | the Xmit is slaved to the RX |
| 01:37.18 | lennert | i assume with a PLL of some sort |
| 01:37.23 | [g2] | then they jitter together |
| 01:37.30 | [g2] | and there aren't any frame slips |
| 01:37.34 | lennert | the S/T uses inverse AMI to ensure enough transitions |
| 01:37.47 | lennert | not sure what U uses |
| 01:37.54 | lennert | probably something like that too |
| 01:38.20 | [g2] | I thought in E1 the Channel 0 or 16 whichever had something in it to derive the clock |
| 01:38.29 | lennert | yeah |
| 01:38.34 | [g2] | T1 can get it from the framing |
| 01:38.40 | lennert | could be |
| 01:38.54 | [g2] | I'm pretty sure that's how it's recovered with T1 |
| 01:39.37 | [g2] | So there's either some bits in the D channel or in the wrapper of the 2B + D envelope |
| 01:39.47 | [g2] | s/bits/bit(s) |
| 01:40.37 | lennert | i can't find where the U interface is defined |
| 01:40.54 | lennert | well, S/T uses AMI |
| 01:40.56 | lennert | which is ternary |
| 01:41.04 | lennert | i.e. there is not just on/off but -1, 0 and 1 |
| 01:41.17 | lennert | a sequence of 11111 is sent on the line as 0000000 |
| 01:41.25 | lennert | but a sequence of 00000 is sent as -1 +1 -1 +1 -1 |
| 01:41.38 | lennert | 010101010101 is sent as -1 0 +1 0 -1 0 +1 0 etc |
| 01:41.53 | [g2] | I thnk that's how the recover the frame and clock |
| 01:41.58 | lennert | yeah |
| 01:42.08 | lennert | to find the start of the 48-bit frame, look for a code violation |
| 01:42.15 | [g2] | and the -1 and +1 are used to not build up cap. on the line |
| 01:42.20 | lennert | so instead of -1 +1 -1 there will be -1 +1 +1 or something |
| 01:42.33 | lennert | yes, to keep it DC-free |
| 01:43.04 | [g2] | and the bit-stuffing in HDLC had to do with the repeater lenght |
| 01:43.09 | [g2] | at least for T1 iirc |
| 01:43.24 | [g2] | cause 45 years go the electronics were a little different |
| 01:43.27 | lennert | not sure about HDLC yet |
| 01:43.30 | lennert | :) |
| 01:43.36 | lennert | stuff changes.. |
| 01:43.48 | [g2] | the bit-stuffing prevents more than 5 1's iirc |
| 01:44.10 | [g2] | it inserts an extra bit with a 0 |
| 01:44.11 | lennert | oooh |
| 01:44.15 | [g2] | maybe it's 6 1 |
| 01:44.17 | [g2] | 1s |
| 01:44.17 | lennert | i see what you mean |
| 01:44.32 | lennert | B8ZS? |
| 01:44.39 | lennert | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B8ZS |
| 01:44.44 | [g2] | no HDLC |
| 01:44.48 | lennert | oh |
| 01:45.01 | lennert | HDLC is carried |
| 01:45.01 | [g2] | B8ZS is clear channel |
| 01:45.08 | lennert | HDLC is carried inside the D-channel, no? |
| 01:45.20 | [g2] | yes it's bit oriented |
| 01:45.32 | lennert | you don't need to prevent more than X 1s at that level because the lower layers do the proper escaping, right? |
| 01:45.54 | [g2] | well it's transparent |
| 01:46.07 | lennert | yeah |
| 01:46.08 | [g2] | you don't know if you're running over fiber or a T1 |
| 01:46.16 | lennert | oh |
| 01:46.28 | lennert | so this crap is actually done on two different layers for T1? |
| 01:46.33 | [g2] | so yes it's transparent to the upper layers |
| 01:47.04 | lennert | damn, i can't find the U specs |
| 01:47.04 | [g2] | it's just an interface |
| 01:47.35 | [g2] | with B8ZS you just glob together N 64K channels |
| 01:47.43 | [g2] | like 1,3,5,7 and 9 |
| 01:47.52 | [g2] | that'd be 5x64K |
| 01:48.07 | lennert | B8ZS is replacing 00000000 by 000V10V1 iirc |
| 01:48.26 | [g2] | that's sounds right too |
| 01:48.35 | lennert | (V = violation code) |
| 01:48.40 | [g2] | you couldn't have too many 0s on the line either :) |
| 01:48.45 | lennert | of course ;) |
| 01:48.57 | lennert | actually, you can't have any bits on the line or it'll break! |
| 01:49.34 | [g2] | I thought they'd just fall out of the middle :) |
| 01:49.47 | lennert | indeed, they could |
| 01:49.55 | dwery-away | hey.. I left you all with JTAG and now.. whate are all those ISDN acronyms? :-D |
| 01:50.09 | lennert | dwery-away: sorry :) |
| 01:50.13 | lennert | dwery-away: switched subjects :) |
| 01:50.14 | dwery-away | it remembers me the good old days when I was a XyXEL betatester :-D |
| 01:50.21 | lennert | ZyXEL ? |
| 01:50.21 | dwery-away | ZyXEL |
| 01:50.24 | lennert | yeah |
| 01:50.29 | lennert | i have an adsl modem of theirs |
| 01:50.41 | prpplague | i had one of their isdn modems |
| 01:50.43 | dwery-away | i'm plenty of old ISDN routers and TAs... |
| 01:50.57 | dwery-away | the TAs where fine.. you can't find a TA like theirs nowadays |
| 01:51.09 | lennert | ah |
| 01:51.15 | lennert | the U interface uses 2B1Q |
| 01:51.20 | dwery-away | they were small ISDN PBX |
| 01:51.59 | lennert | U = ANSI T1.601 |
| 01:53.25 | lennert | 80 ksymbols/sec at 4 levels (2 bits per symbol) |
| 01:54.22 | lennert | it's not like AMI.. so i assume the clock can be derived from the framing |
| 01:54.48 | [g2] | QPSK ? |
| 01:54.59 | lennert | no, not phase shift encoding |
| 01:55.04 | lennert | they don't use a carrier |
| 01:55.15 | [g2] | FSK |
| 01:55.30 | lennert | just -2.5V for 00, -0.83V for 01, 0.83V for 11 and +2.5V for 10 |
| 01:55.36 | [g2] | ASK |
| 01:55.41 | [g2] | AM |
| 01:55.43 | lennert | [x] none of the above |
| 01:55.48 | [g2] | AM |
| 01:56.09 | lennert | not AM either |
| 01:56.13 | [g2] | VM |
| 01:56.15 | [g2] | :) |
| 01:56.32 | lennert | what's that? :) |
| 01:56.48 | [g2] | Voltage Modulation :) I just made it up |
| 01:57.05 | lennert | hehe |
| 01:57.09 | [g2] | I don't think it's really called that |
| 01:57.19 | lennert | well, it's kind of like Amplitude Shift Keying, except that it doesn't use modulation |
| 01:57.28 | [g2] | right |
| 01:57.37 | [g2] | there's no carrier |
| 01:57.38 | lennert | you can say it's ASK with DC +2.5V as the 'carrier' wave :) |
| 01:57.47 | lennert | DC instead of a sine |
| 01:57.50 | lennert | [g2]: indeed |
| 01:58.21 | lennert | so, as i said.. you get all the ITU specs, and the U ISDN spec is not part of the series cause it's an ANSI spec |
| 01:58.23 | [g2] | and how do they recover the clock ? |
| 01:58.32 | lennert | [g2]: i don't have the spec.. |
| 01:58.44 | lennert | [g2]: not from the data bits, i assume |
| 01:58.51 | lennert | [g2]: so from the framing somehow |
| 01:59.07 | lennert | [g2]: there's 12kbps (out of 160kbps) used for framing |
| 01:59.14 | [g2] | nod. there's most likely a framing wapper |
| 01:59.29 | [g2] | bps or sps |
| 01:59.56 | lennert | bps/sps ? |
| 02:00.05 | [g2] | cause that's 6k symbols or 80k symbols |
| 02:00.37 | lennert | the start of each frame probably has some clear pattern |
| 02:01.13 | [g2] | nod, but I'm just saying the framiing and data are running at half the rate |
| 02:01.21 | [g2] | due to the physical encoding |
| 02:01.23 | lennert | yeah, they do |
| 02:01.26 | lennert | 2 bits per symbol |
| 02:01.54 | [g2] | so 12kps is really 6k symbols per second.... that's all I was saying |
| 02:02.07 | lennert | yeah, okay, got it |
| 02:02.17 | [g2] | you get twice at long to process the symbol |
| 02:02.30 | [g2] | I didn't know what the real data rate was |
| 02:02.51 | lennert | 'real' data, 64+64+16 |
| 02:03.06 | [g2] | nod |
| 02:03.10 | lennert | 12 for framing and 4 for loop management |
| 02:03.38 | lennert | =160 |
| 02:04.05 | lennert | still didn't figure out what the activation bit is :) |
| 02:04.25 | [g2] | sorry I don't know |
| 02:04.34 | lennert | no i mena, i'm looking through the docs |
| 02:04.43 | [g2] | nod |
| 02:05.51 | [g2] | lennert did you test you UART or just simulate it to find out the rate it would support ? |
| 02:06.00 | [g2] | s/your UART |
| 02:09.39 | lennert | i tested it on the s3 board and it seemed to work okay |
| 02:09.47 | lennert | i only tested it up to 115k2 though |
| 02:10.06 | lennert | but the timing report said it should work up to 50MHz-ish |
| 02:10.13 | [g2] | right, but I thought you said that it could run to like 1M |
| 02:10.17 | [g2] | in theory |
| 02:10.22 | lennert | (that's oversampled clock rate) |
| 02:10.46 | lennert | ok, let me synthesize it to see what it says, i'm kind of vague on the actual rate |
| 02:11.30 | lennert | i didn't test 1M |
| 02:11.47 | lennert | not yet :) |
| 02:11.58 | lennert | don't have a suitable receiver |
| 02:12.05 | lennert | maybe i could test it in loopback |
| 02:12.08 | [g2] | lennert you don't have to... I was wondering whether you had tested it or just synth'd it |
| 02:12.49 | lennert | extensively tested, on the s3 board, only up to 115.200 |
| 02:12.56 | lennert | <PROTECTED> |
| 02:12.58 | lennert | hum |
| 02:13.11 | [g2] | I meant at the 1M rate |
| 02:13.33 | [g2] | ka6sox-office had mentioned something about how fast the OC could run |
| 02:13.44 | [g2] | open-collector |
| 02:13.46 | lennert | OC? |
| 02:13.57 | lennert | oh |
| 02:13.59 | lennert | how do you mean? |
| 02:14.44 | [g2] | that's what I'm trying to understand. He mentioned there might be a rate limiting factor and I didn't really grasp why |
| 02:14.56 | lennert | well |
| 02:15.08 | lennert | he probably means that if you use OC, your output can't switch too fast? |
| 02:15.30 | lennert | OC = external pull-up resistor, and the output buffer shorts the output to ground or floats it |
| 02:15.47 | lennert | if you float it, it takes a while for the output to go back high |
| 02:15.59 | [g2] | RC tie |
| 02:16.01 | [g2] | RC time |
| 02:16.08 | lennert | depends on how stiff you pull-up is or how much current you sink into it |
| 02:16.21 | lennert | kind of, yes, since your transmission line is kind of a C |
| 02:16.40 | lennert | with a regular resistor it'll go exponentially back to 1 |
| 02:16.43 | lennert | with a current source linearly |
| 02:16.51 | lennert | check the SMBus specs, it has a good explanation about this |
| 02:16.57 | lennert | the SMBus is open collector too |
| 02:17.00 | lennert | and they have the same issues |
| 02:17.12 | [g2] | thx for the reference |
| 02:17.17 | lennert | a regular RS232 connection is not OC though (since there's only one master) |
| 02:17.23 | [g2] | is JTAG driven OC ? |
| 02:17.24 | lennert | so i wonder if this is what he meant |
| 02:17.28 | lennert | JTAG is OC, yes |
| 02:17.33 | lennert | external pullups |
| 02:17.39 | lennert | so, same issu |
| 02:17.40 | lennert | e |
| 02:18.07 | lennert | http://www.smbus.org/specs/smbus20.pdf |
| 02:18.24 | *** join/#openjtag ka6sox (n=ka6sox@nslu2-linux/ka6sox) |
| 02:18.35 | [g2] | now that's great timing :) |
| 02:18.38 | lennert | see page 10 |
| 02:18.52 | lennert | page 15 for the smbus model |
| 02:18.59 | lennert | (Cbus and Rp) |
| 02:19.11 | lennert | hi ka6sox |
| 02:19.25 | ka6sox | hiya |
| 02:19.30 | ka6sox | whazzup? |
| 02:19.52 | lennert | talking about OC :) |
| 02:20.19 | ka6sox | cool...I'm here |
| 02:20.20 | [g2] | lennert's sch00l1ng me |
| 02:20.45 | lennert | i just explained OC and how rise/fall time is affected by the stiffness of your pullups |
| 02:21.04 | ka6sox | the problems with OC and FPGA/CPLD's are well known :) |
| 02:21.11 | lennert | and pointed [g2] to the smbus spec (http://www.smbus.org/specs/smbus20.pdf) which has purty diagrams |
| 02:21.12 | ka6sox | exactly. |
| 02:21.23 | ka6sox | good plan. |
| 02:21.50 | lennert | p10 and p15 mostly |
| 02:21.56 | [g2] | is I2C OC too ? |
| 02:21.58 | ka6sox | some have a step function in them where they go to 3.3v quickly and then sorta creep up to the OC pullup voltage. |
| 02:22.01 | lennert | [g2]: yeah |
| 02:22.28 | ka6sox | its definately OC. |
| 02:22.32 | lennert | ka6sox: you get linear voltage rise with a current source and exponential with a resistor.. |
| 02:22.49 | lennert | ka6sox: so you can do the linear thing to get there quicker.. |
| 02:23.04 | ka6sox | ya..but its still a step function. |
| 02:23.22 | lennert | how do you mean, step function? |
| 02:23.51 | [g2] | _|--- |
| 02:24.37 | lennert | the voltage rise isn't a step function, is it? |
| 02:25.11 | ka6sox | yes it is...it rises quickly to Vio and then slowly up to Vpullup |
| 02:25.50 | lennert | if you let it float? doesn't it go exponential all the way if you have a pullup resistor? |
| 02:26.06 | lennert | what exact configuration are you thinking of? :) |
| 02:26.13 | lennert | maybe we're thinking of different circuits |
| 02:26.55 | ka6sox | the OC with a pullup |
| 02:27.57 | beewoolie | ka6sox: Is the Memec ijc-2 cable supported by wince jtag? |
| 02:30.10 | lennert | ka6sox: OC is an RC circuit, is it not? |
| 02:30.59 | lennert | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RC_circuit |
| 02:31.06 | lennert | i'm thinking of those diagrams |
| 02:31.19 | lennert | {capacitor,resistor} voltage step-response |
| 02:45.47 | lennert | yeah, time for sleep, 5 AM here |
| 02:45.49 | lennert | g'nite all! |
| 02:46.54 | [g2] | nite |
| 02:47.13 | ka6sox | [g2] how is the download coming? |
| 02:47.22 | [g2] | so far so good |
| 02:47.30 | [g2] | 8% |
| 02:47.37 | ka6sox | ah |
| 02:47.38 | ka6sox | :) |
| 02:47.43 | [g2] | started about an hour ago |
| 02:48.17 | ka6sox | ah cool. |
| 02:48.25 | [g2] | I dl'd and SCP a few iso's without error |
| 02:48.44 | [g2] | Knoppix and a couple Ubuntu's |
| 02:49.21 | [g2] | Knoppix was pulled around 500KB/s and the ubuntus were local at 1.8MB |
| 02:49.45 | [g2] | http woud probbly be faster |
| 02:49.58 | [g2] | I'll have to try that tomorrow |
| 02:50.04 | ka6sox | you are wgetting it? |
| 02:50.56 | [g2] | yeah |
| 02:51.21 | [g2] | I was saying that locally I did a SCP for the ubunutu xfers |
| 02:51.28 | ka6sox | ah |
| 02:51.38 | ka6sox | okay I"m going out to a meeting for a bit...bbiaw. |
| 02:51.47 | [g2] | cheers and thx |
| 02:51.55 | ka6sox | np...cya! |
| 03:09.51 | beewoolie | [g2]: holy mackerel. Cable broadband? |
| 03:10.54 | [g2] | beewoolie ??? |
| 03:11.05 | beewoolie | [g2]: Hey |
| 03:12.05 | [g2] | beewoolie the cable broadband runs at 11MBs to 60MBs :) |
| 03:12.12 | beewoolie | sheesh |
| 03:12.23 | [g2] | 100Mbs and 1000Mbs |
| 03:45.44 | beewoolie | [g2]: dollface says hi |
| 03:46.10 | [g2] | hey dollface |
| 03:46.58 | [g2] | beewoolie do you know Vincent Sander's nick ? |
| 03:49.30 | *** join/#openjtag [g2-lap] (n=g2@cpe-066-057-008-035.nc.res.rr.com) |
| 03:50.12 | beewoolie | [g2-lap]: Who's that? |
| 03:51.43 | [g2-lap] | http://linuxdevices.com/news/NS2222705755.html |
| 03:51.59 | [g2-lap] | http://www.simtec.co.uk/products/EB675001DIP/ |
| 03:52.45 | [g2] | 32MB ram, 4MB flash, CPLD and room to grow a little |
| 03:53.00 | [g2] | sounds about perfect for a little JTAG device no ? |
| 03:53.40 | [g2] | "custom cost-effective in lots about 25"... |
| 03:55.16 | beewoolie | Depends on how fast it can run. |
| 03:55.25 | beewoolie | That is, how fast it can signal the jtag port. |
| 03:56.02 | beewoolie | The only thing that the USB device won't be able to do is reach the 20MHz scanningfrequency. |
| 03:57.03 | [g2] | the ARM runs at 60Mhz |
| 03:57.16 | beewoolie | So it might get there. |
| 03:57.30 | [g2] | well, it depends on how it's wired to the CPLD |
| 03:57.40 | [g2] | I'm guessing at least 8 or 16 bits wide |
| 03:57.43 | [g2] | maybe 32 |
| 03:58.15 | [g2] | I'd guess the CPLD is hung off a chip select |
| 03:58.34 | beewoolie | indeed. |
| 03:58.42 | beewoolie | I'm going to work on getting something working first. |
| 03:59.06 | beewoolie | They use a closed source boot loader. |
| 03:59.37 | [g2] | yeah so ppl don't have to JTAG |
| 03:59.55 | [g2] | but it does have a JTAG header |
| 04:00.12 | [g2] | so we could self-reprogram it |
| 04:00.25 | [g2] | well not the _same_ unit obviously :) |
| 04:00.51 | beewoolie | It has a jtag header. |
| 04:00.59 | beewoolie | Oh, you saw that.... |
| 04:01.09 | [g2] | 40 lines tothe Xilinx |
| 04:01.16 | beewoolie | Really, the 32KB ram version would be interesting for the JTAG dongle. |
| 04:01.28 | beewoolie | Especially if we can get it really cheap. |
| 04:01.40 | [g2] | they are $175 Q1 |
| 04:01.48 | [g2] | and $50 in "Quantity" |
| 04:01.49 | beewoolie | No xilinx on the cheapo model. |
| 04:01.54 | beewoolie | Hmm. |
| 04:01.58 | [g2] | Xilinx CPLD |
| 04:02.13 | beewoolie | Not on the cheapest one, tho. |
| 04:02.30 | [g2] | I'm sure they could do a custom unit |
| 04:02.47 | beewoolie | Oh, sure. |
| 04:02.53 | [g2] | in Q25 |
| 04:03.21 | beewoolie | I read that. Is that the same sort of range where the loft boards were customizable by the vendor? |
| 04:03.30 | [g2] | heh it support WOL |
| 04:03.41 | beewoolie | Wake on lan? Nice. |
| 04:04.01 | [g2] | WOL your personal JTAG butler :) |
| 04:11.59 | [g2] | that article was from a couple months ago |
| 04:25.03 | [g2] | ah... |
| 04:34.51 | beewoolie | bbiab |
| 04:35.33 | *** join/#openjtag beewoolie-afk (n=beewooli@206.124.142.26) |
| 06:05.45 | dollface | hi [g2] |
| 06:05.53 | dollface | beewoolie is making dinner for me |
| 06:06.51 | dollface | and beewoolie is having adventures with ka6sox's JTAG dongle |
| 06:07.10 | dollface | don't you wish you were here? |
| 06:09.23 | [g2] | heh |
| 06:10.29 | dollface | goodnight [g2] |
| 06:10.44 | [g2] | g'nite dollface |
| 06:11.03 | [g2] | say g'nite to bee for me |
| 06:11.12 | dollface | will do |
| 06:11.14 | dollface | bzzz |
| 06:11.16 | [g2] | thx |
| 08:44.01 | lennert | [g2]: Vince is "kyllikki" |
| 09:59.14 | *** join/#openjtag dyoung-away (n=dyoung@nslu2-linux/dyoung) |
| 10:10.41 | vmaster | ohhh, that simtek board looks nice |
| 11:33.52 | *** join/#openjtag bullet (n=bullet@230.59.76.83.cust.bluewin.ch) |
| 13:13.01 | prpplague | anyone know a good channel to discuss libusb apps? |
| 13:13.11 | lennert | dunno, sorry |
| 13:13.53 | prpplague | thanks |
| 13:20.30 | vmaster | oh, if you find one, let me know |
| 13:46.40 | dyoung-away | vmaster: If you can find peteru on #openslug or #nslu2-linux, he knows quite a bit about libusb stuff |
| 13:51.00 | *** join/#openjtag prpplague (n=billybob@72.22.152.142) |
| 14:18.36 | [g2] | lennert morning :) |
| 14:19.05 | [g2] | lennert are you familiar with those boards from Simtec ? |
| 14:20.00 | [g2] | The OKI 675001 Module ? |
| 14:20.16 | lennert | not familiar with them, no |
| 14:20.39 | [g2] | it's a 60Mhz arm with a CPLD on board |
| 14:20.51 | lennert | no idea |
| 14:21.34 | [g2] | well I think we could setup the CPLD to do Bit shifting and drive it from the ARM 32bits at a time |
| 14:21.37 | [g2] | there's DMA too |
| 14:21.52 | [g2] | and ethernet |
| 14:22.02 | lennert | what does it cost? |
| 14:22.15 | [g2] | $175 Q1 < $50 in quantity |
| 14:22.37 | [g2] | they'll even do custom orders for as little as Q25 |
| 14:22.47 | lennert | kind of the same price as the platform usb cable but without the software ;) |
| 14:24.17 | [g2] | I'd guess around the same price. |
| 14:25.30 | [g2] | there's 42 IO pins to the CPLD |
| 14:25.49 | [g2] | from the processor |
| 14:26.32 | lennert | that's quite a bunch |
| 14:26.40 | vmaster | but only 72 macrocells |
| 14:26.57 | vmaster | that could be a bit tight |
| 14:27.44 | [g2] | vmaster good point, I'll bet that not the largest CPLD in the family, but I dunno |
| 14:28.50 | lennert | larger ones cost more though.. |
| 14:29.34 | [g2] | yeah like fpga where an extra $40 gets you 600K on the S3 |
| 14:30.25 | vmaster | mhh, guess the package options are more of a restriction than the few extra $ for a larger cpld |
| 14:30.44 | [g2] | it's a XL9572XL |
| 14:31.02 | [g2] | I'm checking where that is in family |
| 14:31.04 | lennert | an xc3s200 goes for $24 and an xc3s1000 goes for $47 at avnet |
| 14:31.38 | lennert | the xc3s1000-ft256 goes for $51, so it's not all that much more expensive |
| 14:31.52 | [g2] | ok $23 800K gates, nod |
| 14:33.27 | vmaster | 9572 is the second smallest |
| 14:34.19 | [g2] | same footprint ? |
| 14:34.28 | vmaster | depends on the package they use |
| 14:34.50 | vmaster | http://www.xilinx.com/products/95xlsh.pdf |
| 14:35.04 | vmaster | there's a matrix of packages and device sizes |
| 14:36.24 | [g2] | thx my google-fu was lacking on the XL9572XL search |
| 14:37.25 | vmaster | mhh, but i guess an atmel sam7 would still be a better choice if we're going for a uC w/ ethernet solution |
| 14:37.54 | vmaster | the built-in serial controller makes life a lot easier |
| 14:39.04 | [g2] | vmaster I just looking at this because it seemed cheap, in the right area, and built, and customizable in Q25 |
| 14:40.09 | [g2] | I heard an interesting quote abou Goal setting.. It's not the goal, its the person you become trying to reach the goal |
| 14:41.22 | [g2] | it is wonderful to have some varied ideas and have ppl interesting in trying to achieve this |
| 14:48.40 | [g2] | hey it looks like simtec sells mini-pci based arm boards too |
| 14:50.31 | prpplague | [g2]: yea simtec makes some good stuff |
| 14:50.58 | prpplague | [g2]: their staff can be quirky to work with though if you need tech support |
| 14:51.05 | prpplague | [g2]: atleast imho |
| 15:24.20 | [g2] | do you guys know how to have the partition table reloaded ? |
| 15:58.36 | lennert | [g2]: with an ioctl |
| 15:58.59 | lennert | [g2]: or start fdisk and 'w' your partition table (be sure that it doesn't replace a mac disklabel with a dos disklabel for example!) |
| 16:01.33 | [g2] | lennert thx, I think mount -o remount / does it too :0 |
| 16:01.35 | [g2] | :) |
| 16:01.58 | lennert | oh, does it? odd.. |
| 16:02.24 | lennert | ooook |
| 16:02.32 | lennert | /sbin/blockdev --rereadpt /dev/hda |
| 16:02.40 | lennert | that ought to work |
| 16:02.51 | prpplague | anyone got experience doing usb from the slave end of things? |
| 16:03.49 | [g2] | lennert _that_ looks really handy thx |
| 16:34.12 | sgmiller | prpplaque, what are you looking for? |
| 16:36.35 | prpplague | sgmiller: just doing alot of usb dev at the momment, between a sa-1110 device and a host pc |
| 16:36.52 | prpplague | sgmiller: mainly using libusb and a kernel driver on the slave |
| 16:38.17 | sgmiller | that do you want to "know about the slave end of things" I've made a couple of devices. |
| 16:38.27 | sgmiller | that -> what |
| 16:53.35 | [g2] | sgmiller hey! |
| 16:53.43 | sgmiller | hey! |
| 16:53.49 | [g2] | meet the gang |
| 16:54.01 | sgmiller | hello gang, nice to meet you. |
| 16:54.04 | [g2] | heh |
| 16:54.58 | [g2] | lennert and dwery-zzzz are ARM kernel hackers and lennert's into _everything_.. He's got a V2pro board he's playing with |
| 16:55.13 | [g2] | prpplague and ka6sox-office build some boards and hw |
| 16:55.23 | prpplague | sgmiller: running linux on the slave? |
| 16:55.30 | sgmiller | very good... my kind of folks. |
| 16:55.37 | [g2] | vmaster and ep1220 do a bit of JTAG |
| 16:55.48 | sgmiller | good. |
| 16:55.50 | [g2] | dyoung-away is an all around guy |
| 16:56.18 | lennert | hello sgmiller |
| 16:56.20 | sgmiller | anyone done anything interesting with the PPC on the V2pro? |
| 16:56.22 | sgmiller | hello. |
| 16:56.28 | prpplague | not i |
| 16:56.34 | lennert | me, not yet.. |
| 16:56.45 | lennert | still have some coreconnect docs to wade through :) have you? |
| 16:56.47 | [g2] | I've got a Black Dog |
| 16:57.03 | [g2] | that's got a hardcore running Debian |
| 16:57.06 | sgmiller | nope... |
| 16:57.47 | lennert | i've been meaning for a few days to hack on the v2p board.. but i'm a bit distracted by arm kernel stuff atm |
| 16:58.22 | sgmiller | black dog??? is that the thing with the biometric reader? |
| 16:59.24 | [g2] | yeah |
| 16:59.52 | [g2] | it's quite slick for the money |
| 18:36.51 | *** join/#openjtag prpplague (n=billybob@72.22.152.142) |
| 18:44.42 | *** join/#openjtag prpplague (n=billybob@72.22.152.142) |
| 18:46.06 | *** join/#openjtag beewoolie-afk (n=beewooli@206.124.142.26) |
| 18:46.14 | prpplague | beewoolie-afk: hey hey |
| 18:46.44 | beewoolie-afk | yo |
| 18:46.46 | beewoolie-afk | prpplague: finally got the MMC socket and break-away header. |
| 18:48.55 | beewoolie-afk | ~seen ka6sox-office |
| 18:49.09 | purl | ka6sox-office is currently on #openjtag (1d 22h 16m 2s). Has said a total of 30 messages. Is idling for 18h 17m 46s |
| 18:49.09 | qbot | ka6sox-office is currently on #openjtag (1d 22h 16m 24s). Has said a total of 30 messages. Is idling for 18h 17m 46s |
| 18:49.25 | beewoolie-afk | prpplague: have any experience with the insight ijc-2 JTAG widget? |
| 18:49.41 | ka6sox-office | I'm sorta here. |
| 18:49.57 | beewoolie-afk | ka6sox-office: coo |
| 18:50.04 | ka6sox-office | I used the Wince stuff with that unit about 8 months ago. |
| 18:50.12 | ka6sox-office | and the Xilinx stuff too. |
| 18:50.17 | beewoolie-afk | ka6sox-office: What 'cable' is it? |
| 18:50.25 | ka6sox-office | Xilinx III |
| 18:50.38 | beewoolie-afk | Xilinx supports it, I know, but I haven't found it in wince by grepping. |
| 18:50.47 | beewoolie-afk | Excellent... |
| 18:50.56 | ka6sox-office | its a type III cable. |
| 18:51.04 | beewoolie-afk | It's kinda clever. It supports three output voltages. |
| 18:52.23 | prpplague | beewoolie-afk: cool |
| 18:52.37 | prpplague | beewoolie-afk: no, no experience with that ijc-2 jtag widget |
| 18:52.40 | prpplague | beewoolie-afk: url? |
| 18:52.50 | ka6sox-office | ya . |
| 18:52.52 | beewoolie-afk | prpplague: Can't find one. |
| 18:53.03 | beewoolie-afk | ka6sox-office: It's a Xilinx DLC5 JTAG Parallel Cable III? |
| 18:53.39 | ka6sox-office | beewoolie-afk, Yes I think thats right. |
| 19:08.26 | lennert | well |
| 19:08.33 | lennert | jtag only has to pull down to ground, right? |
| 19:08.38 | lennert | so in theory, it would support any 'voltage' |
| 19:08.44 | lennert | unless i'm mistaken |
| 19:09.17 | beewoolie-afk | lennert: I think the issue is that driving 5V into a 1.3V device could be destructive. |
| 19:09.43 | beewoolie-afk | And I think I am wrong about the three voltage levels. At least, the schematic doesn't show it that way. |
| 19:10.24 | beewoolie-afk | I was simply measuring the output voltages as I exercised the parallel port. |
| 19:11.12 | lennert | add zeners ;) |
| 19:11.49 | beewoolie-afk | You're...a...zeners |
| 19:16.19 | lennert | well really, a jtag dongle doesn't need to drive any voltage into anything |
| 19:16.27 | lennert | TCK, TDI, TMS are high by default |
| 19:16.34 | lennert | you want them zero, you pull 'em down |
| 19:16.37 | lennert | you want them one, you float 'em |
| 19:20.44 | beewoolie-afk | According to the ARM TRM.even though the IEEE spec 'effectively requires TDI and TMS to have internal pullup resistors', they don't do it. |
| 19:21.14 | beewoolie-afk | ...in order to minimize current draw. |
| 19:26.08 | *** join/#openjtag Tiersten (n=tman@nslu2-linux/Tiersten) |
| 19:26.10 | *** join/#openjtag tman_2 (n=tman@ideal.trejan.com) |
| 19:26.12 | *** join/#openjtag Tiersten_ (n=tman@nslu2-linux/Tiersten) |
| 19:26.55 | beewoolie-afk | Tiersten: howdy |
| 19:27.40 | lennert | so |
| 19:27.40 | lennert | you're supposed to drive them both ways? |
| 19:27.40 | beewoolie-afk | That's what the TRM says. |
| 19:27.41 | beewoolie-afk | I'm reading the 922 docs. |
| 19:27.41 | lennert | so if you let them float.. they float |
| 19:27.41 | lennert | hmm |
| 19:27.49 | lennert | well, won't the board have external pullups then? |
| 19:27.54 | lennert | otherwise it's kind of useless |
| 19:28.09 | beewoolie-afk | I would expect that TCK is not floated, but then it all depends on the board design. |
| 19:28.15 | lennert | i mean, if you leave TCK unconnected it might just pick up spurious cycles |
| 19:28.17 | lennert | yeah |
| 19:28.17 | Tiersten | Hey beewoolie |
| 19:29.34 | beewoolie-afk | lennert: The LPD schematic for the lh7a404 has pullups. |
| 19:30.00 | lennert | i think it's reasonable to have external pullups instead of internal ones |
| 19:30.30 | lennert | but if they have real stiff ones that'll put a nasty limit on the maximum speed |
| 19:30.49 | beewoolie-afk | That's dirty. |
| 19:30.52 | lennert | you can just put an extra pullup in your jtag dongle and activate it only when jtag is in use ;) |
| 19:31.06 | lennert | so it'll draw the extra current only when you're using jtag |
| 19:31.38 | beewoolie-afk | The LPD board has 10K pullups on those lines. |
| 19:31.54 | lennert | i have no idea what typical values for bus capacitance are |
| 19:32.01 | vmaster | the arm multi-ice drives both low and high |
| 19:32.59 | lennert | well, you could actually drive it high instead of floating it if you want it to go faster.. i don't think that'd cause any problems |
| 19:33.10 | lennert | oh.. that's probably what ka6sox meant the other day |
| 19:33.35 | beewoolie-afk | As long as you have the right output voltage. QED |
| 19:34.12 | lennert | indeed |
| 19:34.45 | lennert | you deserve an internet |
| 19:34.55 | beewoolie-afk | Heck, I've already got two. |
| 19:35.01 | lennert | hehe |
| 19:42.06 | vmaster | uhm, doesn't the parallel cable iii use the target supplied vcc? |
| 19:42.25 | beewoolie-afk | In english please. |
| 19:42.26 | lennert | yeah |
| 19:42.40 | lennert | there is a vcc pin on the jtag connector |
| 19:43.06 | beewoolie-afk | On the xilinx cable, the VCC from the target is used to detect if the target is present. |
| 20:54.40 | *** join/#openjtag prpplague (n=billybob@72.22.152.142) |
| 23:07.30 | lennert | anyone here studied the ppc405 in the virtex2 pro? |
| 23:07.44 | ka6sox-office | only briefly in a class. |
| 23:07.54 | lennert | oh |
| 23:07.56 | lennert | you had your course? |
| 23:07.59 | lennert | how was that? |
| 23:09.08 | ka6sox-office | it was okay..they mostly spent time on uBlaze. |
| 23:09.23 | lennert | okay |
| 23:09.29 | lennert | was it useful to you? |
| 23:09.33 | ka6sox-office | yes it was. |
| 23:09.35 | ka6sox-office | and still is! |
| 23:09.38 | lennert | okay |
| 23:09.43 | lennert | did you use your xupv2p board yet? |
| 23:09.45 | ka6sox-office | they explained the EDK very well. |
| 23:10.06 | ka6sox-office | it just arrived *after* the course. |
| 23:10.15 | lennert | oh, great |
| 23:10.20 | lennert | didn't play with it yet? |
| 23:10.22 | ka6sox-office | but we had one in class to play with. |
| 23:10.35 | lennert | okay |
| 23:10.36 | ka6sox-office | not yet...I'm going to play with it starting next week or so. |
| 23:10.42 | ka6sox-office | I've been moving. |
| 23:11.01 | lennert | yeah i know |
| 23:11.35 | ka6sox-office | now that I"m out of that period I intend to continue working on the S3/V2 stuff. |
| 23:12.06 | lennert | okay |
| 23:45.43 | lennert | ka6sox-office: so i can send you my xupv2p projects and you can run them! |
| 23:46.21 | *** join/#openjtag ulf_k (n=ulf_kypk@p54BDBA5E.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) |
| 23:52.56 | ka6sox-office | yes! |
| 23:59.27 | lennert | great! |