Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] User experience with E1x0 boards

[Philip Balister]

On 04/22/2011 07:05 PM, Almohanad Fayez wrote:
> I've always wondered about the design difference between the E100 and the work 
> you did with Chris Anderson's board ... now I know.  BTW where do you have your 
> driver code posted for the E100 and any documentation, if it exists yet :) ? I 
> found slides that you presented on April 13th.

Those slides are a recent as it gets. There may be video of that talk in 
a few months.

Driver code is here:

https://github.com/balister/linux-omap-philip

Philip

> I want to get acquainted with what you did in hopes that I can get hold of an 
> E100 this summer.
>
> al fayez
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Balister<address@hidden>
> To: GNURadio Discussion List<address@hidden>
> Sent: Fri, Apr 22, 2011 6:29 pm
> Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] User experience with E1x0 boards
>
>
> On 04/22/2011 06:00 PM, Almohanad Fayez wrote:
>
>   I haven't worked with the E100 per se but I've worked with the Beagleboard +
> SRP1 which is the same thing except the E100 uses SPI to communicate with the
> rocessor versus USB.  So I've done work on integrating the OMAP3530 DSP with
> he GPP within GNU Radio.  I feel that the use of the DSP is a MUST to make the
> ost out of the E100 and with my Beagleboard + USRP setup I was able to run some
> M flowgraphs but one of my bottlenecks was the USB USRP interface which the
> 100 would definitely fix.
> Al points are good, except the E100 uses the GPMC bus to communicate
> ith the FPGA. 16 bit wide data bus instead of 1 :)
> Philip
> >
>   Basically with the E100 I feel that you need to get your hands "dirty" where
> ou might need to rewrite some GNU Radio components to make use of the NEOS
> oprocessor, which Philip Balister has done some good work in that respect, and
> ou would also need to make use of the C64x+ DSP which I can point you to the
> ource code I've developed.
>
>   The E100 has a lot of untapped potential at the moment and I hope to see more
> omentum in working with the NEOS and DSP which is what I'm focusing on and
> illing to help people to get started on.
>
>
>   al fayez
>
>
>   -----Original Message-----
>   From: Colby Boyer<address@hidden>
>   To: GNU Radio Discussion<address@hidden>
>   Sent: Fri, Apr 22, 2011 5:43 pm
>   Subject: [Discuss-gnuradio] User experience with E1x0 boards
>
>
>   Hi All,
>   My lab is interested in purchasing some USRPs. It is pretty settled
>   hat some of the boards will be the N2x0 series, but I am interested
>   o hear from people who have used the E1x0 boards. From what I can
>   ell, the E1x0 board should have better latency performance than the
>   2x0 and should have a better interface with the FPGA (GPIO pins);
>   lso, it has an onboard DSP. It seems that the latency would be the
>   ain motivation for the product, from an experimental point of view.
>   Has anyone tried integrating processing on the FPGA and DSP to get
>   etter latency results? Your thoughts on the board versus the N2x0?
>   If you want to take the discussion off list, feel free to.
>   Thanks,
>   olby
>   _______________________________________________
>   iscuss-gnuradio mailing list
>   address@hidden
>   ttps://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>
>
>
>
>
>   _______________________________________________
>   Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>   address@hidden
>   https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
> _______________________________________________
> iscuss-gnuradio mailing list
> address@hidden
> ttps://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio