Forums

best evm for virtex-4 and linux

Started by Anonymous January 11, 2006
Can anyone suggest the best evm board for virtex-4 and linux? How has
people's experience been with it? Are USB drivers included in the linux os
builds they provide?

Thanks,
Clark


"Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:MM9xf.5246$Kp.178@southeast.rr.com...
> Can anyone suggest the best evm board for virtex-4 and linux? How has > people's experience been with it? Are USB drivers included in the linux os > builds they provide? > > Thanks, > Clark >
I may be mistaken but I think there are no Virtex4 linux ready currently shipping with both device and host support drivers for USB Virtex-4 based modules from http://www.hydraxc.com/ eg LX15, LX25 and FX12 based units are currently all shipping, but the included ucLinux reference design does not include USB drivers, this will be supplied later on, currently only some standalone USB firmware samples are included. There are possible other boards or modules with partial USB support, but with device and host (OTG) support already included I doubt that you find anything at the moment, you can possible find something with host support only Antti
Thanks. But that brings up another question: Is it better to go with ucLinux
or use the PPC version of linux? I suspect the latter if I have the FX part,
right?

"Antti Lukats" <antti@openchip.org> wrote in message
news:dq3cvk$o1n$00$1@news.t-online.com...
> "Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:MM9xf.5246$Kp.178@southeast.rr.com... > > Can anyone suggest the best evm board for virtex-4 and linux? How has > > people's experience been with it? Are USB drivers included in the linux
os
> > builds they provide? > > > > Thanks, > > Clark > > > I may be mistaken but I think there are no Virtex4 linux ready currently > shipping with both device and host support drivers for USB > > Virtex-4 based modules from > http://www.hydraxc.com/ > > eg LX15, LX25 and FX12 based units are currently all shipping, but the > included ucLinux reference design does not include USB drivers, this will
be
> supplied later on, currently only some standalone USB firmware samples are > included. > > There are possible other boards or modules with partial USB support, but > with device and host (OTG) support already included I doubt that you find > anything at the moment, you can possible find something with host support > only > > Antti > >
"Antti Lukats" <antti@openchip.org> wrote in message 
news:dq3cvk$o1n$00$1@news.t-online.com...
> "Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:MM9xf.5246$Kp.178@southeast.rr.com... >> Can anyone suggest the best evm board for virtex-4 and linux? How has >> people's experience been with it? Are USB drivers included in the linux >> os >> builds they provide? >> >> Thanks, >> Clark >> > I may be mistaken but I think there are no Virtex4 linux ready currently > shipping with both device and host support drivers for USB > > Virtex-4 based modules from > http://www.hydraxc.com/ > > eg LX15, LX25 and FX12 based units are currently all shipping, but the > included ucLinux reference design does not include USB drivers, this will > be supplied later on, currently only some standalone USB firmware samples > are included. > > There are possible other boards or modules with partial USB support, but > with device and host (OTG) support already included I doubt that you find > anything at the moment, you can possible find something with host support > only > > Antti > >
Interesting board! Do you know other "mini" modules? Many Thanks Marco
"Marco T." <marcotoschi@nospam.it> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:dq3nck$v19$1@nnrp.ngi.it...
> > "Antti Lukats" <antti@openchip.org> wrote in message > news:dq3cvk$o1n$00$1@news.t-online.com... >> "Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag >> news:MM9xf.5246$Kp.178@southeast.rr.com... >>> Can anyone suggest the best evm board for virtex-4 and linux? How has >>> people's experience been with it? Are USB drivers included in the linux >>> os >>> builds they provide? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Clark >>> >> I may be mistaken but I think there are no Virtex4 linux ready currently >> shipping with both device and host support drivers for USB >> >> Virtex-4 based modules from >> http://www.hydraxc.com/ >> >> eg LX15, LX25 and FX12 based units are currently all shipping, but the >> included ucLinux reference design does not include USB drivers, this will >> be supplied later on, currently only some standalone USB firmware samples >> are included. >> >> There are possible other boards or modules with partial USB support, but >> with device and host (OTG) support already included I doubt that you find >> anything at the moment, you can possible find something with host support >> only >> >> Antti >> >> > > Interesting board! Do you know other "mini" modules? > > Many Thanks > Marco >
there are, but not with so complete set of features on board. * memec mini-modules * suzaku * and one v4 module comes in CF card format * with Altera there one small format thing on the hydraxc webpage isnt much online, but there are also 2 different evaluation base boards available for easy getting started the low cost only has the connectors mainly, the high end base board has Virtex4+DDR2 and DVI out and header for camera Antti
Anonymous wrote:
> Thanks. But that brings up another question: Is it better to go with ucLinux > or use the PPC version of linux? I suspect the latter if I have the FX part, > right?
Being the maintainer of the MicroBlaze uClinux port, and offering commercial services for the platform, I'm obviously biased :), however I think the decision is not as automatic as you suggest. Unless you are prepared to shell out a reasonable number of dollars to MontaVista, developing for uClinux with the free tools is a lot easier than PPC. There are some guides out there on DIY Linux for Xilinx PPC, but they aren't for the faint-hearted. The board port/bringup procedure for uClinux on MicroBlaze is also a lot faster than PPC Linux, with the free auto-config tools. It depends on what you are trying to do, and how much you value your time. Is this a hobbyist, study or commercial project? Regards, John
> > "Antti Lukats" <antti@openchip.org> wrote in message > news:dq3cvk$o1n$00$1@news.t-online.com... > >>"Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag >>news:MM9xf.5246$Kp.178@southeast.rr.com... >> >>>Can anyone suggest the best evm board for virtex-4 and linux? How has >>>people's experience been with it? Are USB drivers included in the linux > > os > >>>builds they provide? >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Clark >>> >> >>I may be mistaken but I think there are no Virtex4 linux ready currently >>shipping with both device and host support drivers for USB >> >>Virtex-4 based modules from >>http://www.hydraxc.com/ >> >>eg LX15, LX25 and FX12 based units are currently all shipping, but the >>included ucLinux reference design does not include USB drivers, this will > > be > >>supplied later on, currently only some standalone USB firmware samples are >>included. >> >>There are possible other boards or modules with partial USB support, but >>with device and host (OTG) support already included I doubt that you find >>anything at the moment, you can possible find something with host support >>only >> >>Antti >> >> > > >
This is a commercial project. I was under the impression Xilinx provides a
working Linux build for the V4? I don't expect to be doing much Linux
hacking per se, maybe just a custom device driver to interface to my DSP
circuit/code.

"John Williams" <jwilliams@itee.uq.edu.au> wrote in message
news:newscache$6670ti$oeg$1@lbox.itee.uq.edu.au...
> Anonymous wrote: > > Thanks. But that brings up another question: Is it better to go with
ucLinux
> > or use the PPC version of linux? I suspect the latter if I have the FX
part,
> > right? > > Being the maintainer of the MicroBlaze uClinux port, and offering > commercial services for the platform, I'm obviously biased :), however I > think the decision is not as automatic as you suggest. > > Unless you are prepared to shell out a reasonable number of dollars to > MontaVista, developing for uClinux with the free tools is a lot easier > than PPC. There are some guides out there on DIY Linux for Xilinx PPC, > but they aren't for the faint-hearted. > > The board port/bringup procedure for uClinux on MicroBlaze is also a lot > faster than PPC Linux, with the free auto-config tools. > > It depends on what you are trying to do, and how much you value your time. > > Is this a hobbyist, study or commercial project? > > Regards, > > John > > > > > > > "Antti Lukats" <antti@openchip.org> wrote in message > > news:dq3cvk$o1n$00$1@news.t-online.com... > > > >>"Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > >>news:MM9xf.5246$Kp.178@southeast.rr.com... > >> > >>>Can anyone suggest the best evm board for virtex-4 and linux? How has > >>>people's experience been with it? Are USB drivers included in the linux > > > > os > > > >>>builds they provide? > >>> > >>>Thanks, > >>>Clark > >>> > >> > >>I may be mistaken but I think there are no Virtex4 linux ready currently > >>shipping with both device and host support drivers for USB > >> > >>Virtex-4 based modules from > >>http://www.hydraxc.com/ > >> > >>eg LX15, LX25 and FX12 based units are currently all shipping, but the > >>included ucLinux reference design does not include USB drivers, this
will
> > > > be > > > >>supplied later on, currently only some standalone USB firmware samples
are
> >>included. > >> > >>There are possible other boards or modules with partial USB support, but > >>with device and host (OTG) support already included I doubt that you
find
> >>anything at the moment, you can possible find something with host
support
> >>only > >> > >>Antti > >> > >> > > > > > >
"Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:rRFxf.9618$Kp.656@southeast.rr.com...
> This is a commercial project. I was under the impression Xilinx provides a > working Linux build for the V4? I don't expect to be doing much Linux > hacking per se, maybe just a custom device driver to interface to my DSP > circuit/code. > > "John Williams" <jwilliams@itee.uq.edu.au> wrote in message > news:newscache$6670ti$oeg$1@lbox.itee.uq.edu.au... >> Anonymous wrote: >> > Thanks. But that brings up another question: Is it better to go with > ucLinux >> > or use the PPC version of linux? I suspect the latter if I have the FX > part, >> > right? >> >> Being the maintainer of the MicroBlaze uClinux port, and offering >> commercial services for the platform, I'm obviously biased :), however I >> think the decision is not as automatic as you suggest. >> >> Unless you are prepared to shell out a reasonable number of dollars to >> MontaVista, developing for uClinux with the free tools is a lot easier >> than PPC. There are some guides out there on DIY Linux for Xilinx PPC, >> but they aren't for the faint-hearted. >> >> The board port/bringup procedure for uClinux on MicroBlaze is also a lot >> faster than PPC Linux, with the free auto-config tools. >> >> It depends on what you are trying to do, and how much you value your >> time. >> >> Is this a hobbyist, study or commercial project? >> >> Regards, >> >> John >>
I stand here with John - the Xilinx PPC linux setup is not for faint-hearted. That is because of Xilinx politics - everybody who is not MontaVista gets just ignored - DENX was doing lots of work towards PPC linux support but as Xilinx did not talk to them so Denx dropped any further work on Xilinx support for PPC linux. Thats too bad. Setting up a new MicroBlaze uCLinux systems is just a piece of cake So if you need some DSP code setup uClinux/Microblaze, connect your DSP functions to FSL links and you are all set -- Antti Lukats http://www.xilant.com
"Antti Lukats" <antti@openchip.org> wrote in message
news:dq7m71$s50$03$1@news.t-online.com...
> "Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:rRFxf.9618$Kp.656@southeast.rr.com... > > This is a commercial project. I was under the impression Xilinx provides
a
> > working Linux build for the V4? I don't expect to be doing much Linux > > hacking per se, maybe just a custom device driver to interface to my DSP > > circuit/code. > > > > "John Williams" <jwilliams@itee.uq.edu.au> wrote in message > > news:newscache$6670ti$oeg$1@lbox.itee.uq.edu.au... > >> Anonymous wrote: > >> > Thanks. But that brings up another question: Is it better to go with > > ucLinux > >> > or use the PPC version of linux? I suspect the latter if I have the
FX
> > part, > >> > right? > >> > >> Being the maintainer of the MicroBlaze uClinux port, and offering > >> commercial services for the platform, I'm obviously biased :), however
I
> >> think the decision is not as automatic as you suggest. > >> > >> Unless you are prepared to shell out a reasonable number of dollars to > >> MontaVista, developing for uClinux with the free tools is a lot easier > >> than PPC. There are some guides out there on DIY Linux for Xilinx PPC, > >> but they aren't for the faint-hearted. > >> > >> The board port/bringup procedure for uClinux on MicroBlaze is also a
lot
> >> faster than PPC Linux, with the free auto-config tools. > >> > >> It depends on what you are trying to do, and how much you value your > >> time. > >> > >> Is this a hobbyist, study or commercial project? > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> John > >> > > I stand here with John - the Xilinx PPC linux setup is not for > faint-hearted. > > That is because of Xilinx politics - everybody who is not MontaVista > gets just ignored - DENX was doing lots of work towards PPC linux > support but as Xilinx did not talk to them so Denx dropped any further > work on Xilinx support for PPC linux. Thats too bad. > > Setting up a new MicroBlaze uCLinux systems is just a piece of cake > So if you need some DSP code setup uClinux/Microblaze, connect > your DSP functions to FSL links and you are all set > > -- > Antti Lukats > http://www.xilant.com > >
That's interesting. So if I have an FX12 part, for example, your suggestion is that I run uclinux in a soft core and implement my DSP code in the PPC core? This is the opposite of what I had expected. What do I give up for ucLinux versus PPC Linux? Speed? Device driver support? Also, what's your suggestion for unit control? I imagined a webserver interfaced to some type of CGI. Maybe perl scripts or php? Thanks, Clark
"Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:wuOxf.10419$Kp.2204@southeast.rr.com...
> > "Antti Lukats" <antti@openchip.org> wrote in message > news:dq7m71$s50$03$1@news.t-online.com... >> "Anonymous" <someone@microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag >> news:rRFxf.9618$Kp.656@southeast.rr.com... >> > This is a commercial project. I was under the impression Xilinx >> > provides > a >> > working Linux build for the V4? I don't expect to be doing much Linux >> > hacking per se, maybe just a custom device driver to interface to my >> > DSP >> > circuit/code. >> > >> > "John Williams" <jwilliams@itee.uq.edu.au> wrote in message >> > news:newscache$6670ti$oeg$1@lbox.itee.uq.edu.au... >> >> Anonymous wrote: >> >> > Thanks. But that brings up another question: Is it better to go with >> > ucLinux >> >> > or use the PPC version of linux? I suspect the latter if I have the > FX >> > part, >> >> > right? >> >> >> >> Being the maintainer of the MicroBlaze uClinux port, and offering >> >> commercial services for the platform, I'm obviously biased :), however > I >> >> think the decision is not as automatic as you suggest. >> >> >> >> Unless you are prepared to shell out a reasonable number of dollars to >> >> MontaVista, developing for uClinux with the free tools is a lot easier >> >> than PPC. There are some guides out there on DIY Linux for Xilinx >> >> PPC, >> >> but they aren't for the faint-hearted. >> >> >> >> The board port/bringup procedure for uClinux on MicroBlaze is also a > lot >> >> faster than PPC Linux, with the free auto-config tools. >> >> >> >> It depends on what you are trying to do, and how much you value your >> >> time. >> >> >> >> Is this a hobbyist, study or commercial project? >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> >> >> John >> >> >> >> I stand here with John - the Xilinx PPC linux setup is not for >> faint-hearted. >> >> That is because of Xilinx politics - everybody who is not MontaVista >> gets just ignored - DENX was doing lots of work towards PPC linux >> support but as Xilinx did not talk to them so Denx dropped any further >> work on Xilinx support for PPC linux. Thats too bad. >> >> Setting up a new MicroBlaze uCLinux systems is just a piece of cake >> So if you need some DSP code setup uClinux/Microblaze, connect >> your DSP functions to FSL links and you are all set >> >> -- >> Antti Lukats >> http://www.xilant.com >> >> > > That's interesting. So if I have an FX12 part, for example, your > suggestion > is that I run uclinux in a soft core and implement my DSP code in the PPC > core? This is the opposite of what I had expected. > > What do I give up for ucLinux versus PPC Linux? Speed? Device driver > support? > > Also, what's your suggestion for unit control? I imagined a webserver > interfaced to some type of CGI. Maybe perl scripts or php? > > Thanks, > Clark > >
Hi Clark, you dont have to give up PPC, but it is WAY easier to use uClinux/Microblaze, as of using PPC for DSP, well I did not suggest that, you did - and that is defenetly a good idea, so could end up MicroBlaze/uClinux for network and management PPC "ultracontroller" and dedicated DSP for DSP functions and yes, you can use the Xilinx Webserver demo as control application for first demo testing later is up to you if you run uClinux also or not http://www.eubus.net the HCU units there use Spartan3 in DIP40 as the network engine MicroBlaze/uClinux control of those is over telnet and custom protocols -- Antti Lukats http://www.xilant.com