Subject: Re[2]: [linux-audio-dev] Fwd: Creative's IP concerns
From: Rick Burnett (destinytech_AT_spacey.net)
Date: Thu Jan 24 2002 - 16:32:48 EET
Actually, I am curious why they would want to let you know the bit
sequencing technique. Most companies that are using the FPGA are not
going to want other people being able to be able to extract their
design from the FPGA. I am not sure if you can, but I imagine this
would be one reason for that. Plus, most FPGA vendors have software
and hardware for programming it, I know Xilinx does.
It also depends what these chips are used for, and what they also
contain in them. More and more FPGAs are including the option of hard
blocks inside for various things (ie memory, cpu, pll). It is
possible they use the FPGA for lots of combinational logic to save
space on the board. I know I worked with a company that used PALs to
do this (Programmable Array Logic). Because it saved money on space
for them.
Being in the chip business, and FPGAs being our main competition, I
can tell you that lots of people use them. However, they are slower
than custom silicon, and are not used for things requiring the fastest
you can get in a technology.
Rick
Thursday, January 24, 2002, you wrote:
>> Pieter wrote:
>>
>> >--cut---
>> >
>> >>*Are* any of creative's competitors releasing specs for chips that do
>> >>advanced effects? I understand RME and MidiMan have been quite open,
>> >>but they use FPGA chips, and am I right in thinking those are
>> >>off-the-shelf chips with already open specs?
>> >>
>> >
>> >FPGA (= 'Field Programmable Gate Array') chips are indeed open
>> spec (well,
>> >most of them). But the problem is that the chip specs are no
>> source of info
>> >for writing drivers. Let me explain a little about FPGA:
>> >
>> It's worse than that. To program the FPGA you have to take the netlist
>> from your design program and then create a chip-specific bit sequence.
>> How this is done is secret. So you can't program any reasonably
>> up-to-date FPGAs with open-source software. I have hammered on the
>> doors of many manufactueres asking "how does keeping this bit sequence
>> secret help you sell more FPGAs?" but the answer is a long silence.
>>
P> I didn't know it was that bad. I did get a course in FPGA programming,
P> but as we had to use XilinX foundation manager, I didn't experience
P> that problem. Anyway, I was just trying to point out that even if you
P> get the (programming) specs of the FPGA, they wouldn't be usefull if
P> you don't know how RME used it (eg: what pins are PCI). Could be hard
P> to figure it out. And you would have to rewrite 'firmware', which was
P> not the intention.
P> PP
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Jan 24 2002 - 16:17:59 EET