From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Fri Sep 1 01:42:16 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2017 18:42:16 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: I'm working on replies to both of your last two messages and hope to send them in the next 6-12 hours. I'm trying to finish some other stuff while I have sunlight. From lkcl at lkcl.net Fri Sep 1 02:10:18 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 02:10:18 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Richard Wilbur wrote: > On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 5:27 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > wrote: >> damn. i just noticed: the via transition here is at 90 degrees. >> i've been switching off except 1 layer at a time so didn't notice. >> arse. >> >> i'll need to shift all but the TX2 via set down a fixed amount so i >> can get a second wiggle in the right-hand one one layer 1, to make the >> track come in to the top right corner (1 o clock). rather than as they >> do now: from right side (3 o clock). > > Not necessarily bad on the same scale as you might think. Our board > is ~47mil thick while the copper is ~1mil thick, so when a signal > plunges into a via from top to bottom it's already making a 90 degree > turn into and out of the via. > > I'm not criticizing your attempt to straighten out some corners we > have control over in the signal path, just pointing out that vias > themselves present the signal with a couple 90 degree turns. understood. which would be why they're best minimised and you're also supposed to keep them as close together as possible. i did however hear somewhere that it's really really bad to make via tracks turn 180 back on themselves, and in the same vein it makes sense not to turn them too much other than being a sort-of "continuation" of "as if" they were on the same layer... thx about the other responses. l. From rekado at elephly.net Fri Sep 1 12:36:45 2017 From: rekado at elephly.net (Ricardo Wurmus) Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2017 13:36:45 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] gnu/linux distro of interest? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <87tw0mwsz6.fsf@elephly.net> calmstorm at posteo.de writes: > https://www.voidlinux.eu/ > > Luke I know you might have interest in this, because you are not fond of > systemd correct? Sorry to bring that topic up again, > > But I think you may have interest in this gnu/linux distro for that > reason. Also, it is free software if you don't load the non-free > repository. > > The bad? If you do load the module it isn't free software. GuixSD doesn’t use systemd either and is an FSF-endorsed variant of the GNU system. A port for aarch64 is underway; packages are already built for armhf (i.e. Guix works as a package manager on armhf systems), but there’s no complete GuixSD port for armhf yet. I encourage people to help out with the port; you can join guix-devel at gnu.org or #guix on IRC (freenode) to discuss. -- Ricardo GPG: BCA6 89B6 3655 3801 C3C6 2150 197A 5888 235F ACAC https://elephly.net From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Fri Sep 1 17:01:46 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 10:01:46 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:07 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Richard Wilbur > wrote: >> I have a question about one of the traces: In the layout picture it appears that something resembling a via coincides with HTX1P following the second wiggle after the trace turns NE. If it is a via, what is it doing there? If not, what is it? > > you've lost me, sorry. i don't know if you have access to an image > editor but an arrow pointing would help - i know you're using an > iphone so that might be a leetle awwkward... Borrowing my wife's laptop I used the bundled Paint program to scratch some marks on the image from your wiggles progress message. What I'm referring to has been in the layout pictures for a while longer than the image I used to note it and I was curious but had bigger fish to fry. >> Of course, hopefully you never have need of soldering or desoldering the μHDMI connector by hand. Looks best left to the oven. [...] > this is why we'll be doing a test run of some low-cost 2-layer PCBs > (1in x 1in) just with the DC3 land pattern and some test jumpers, > which will go through the oven to make sure that the DC3 actually sits > down and all pins connect to their pads. > > lot less risky than $USD 2,000 for complete PCBs only to find that > after 5-8 weeks yet another footprint layout doesn't work..... Good plan. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: eoma68_a20_275question_connector_bot.png Type: image/png Size: 234547 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lkcl at lkcl.net Fri Sep 1 19:01:35 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 19:01:35 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Richard Wilbur wrote: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:07 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 7:59 AM, Richard Wilbur >> wrote: >>> I have a question about one of the traces: In the layout picture it appears that something resembling a via coincides with HTX1P following the second wiggle after the trace turns NE. If it is a via, what is it doing there? If not, what is it? >> >> you've lost me, sorry. i don't know if you have access to an image >> editor but an arrow pointing would help - i know you're using an >> iphone so that might be a leetle awwkward... > > Borrowing my wife's laptop I used the bundled Paint program to scratch > some marks on the image from your wiggles progress message. *grin* > What I'm > referring to has been in the layout pictures for a while longer than > the image I used to note it and I was curious but had bigger fish to > fry. ah! ok, i know what it is - it's the centre mark of a big pad on the layer below. nice feature (gets in the way, here) - the centre of a pad is marked with a to-scale circle that is displayed on all layers. in this case, as that's a 1206 component the circle is huuuge.... and coincidentally the same size as a VIA :) so... can be safely ignored. l. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Untitled1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 61203 bytes Desc: not available URL: From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Fri Sep 1 20:02:02 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 13:02:02 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: <8C8084DD-5F4D-42AA-93E7-46152BAA548B@gmail.com> On Sep 1, 2017, at 12:01, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > ah! ok, i know what it is - it's the centre mark of a big pad on the > layer below. nice feature (gets in the way, here) - the centre of a > pad is marked with a to-scale circle that is displayed on all layers. > in this case, as that's a 1206 component the circle is huuuge.... and > coincidentally the same size as a VIA :) > > so... can be safely ignored. Thank you for setting my mind at ease. From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Fri Sep 1 21:38:39 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:38:39 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 4:01 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Richard Wilbur > wrote: [...] > mrhm grumble i have to redo those nice length-matchings.... agaaainn aaargh :) I feel your pain. (I don't know whether this helps, but I've heard it is for a good cause.;>) >>> or... i _could_ just put in a copper-to-diffpair Design Rule of "15 >>> mil" clearance - that would keep the flood-fill away. >> >> I think this is the most maintainable solution. > > ok attached is the result of doing that. layer 1 just after the SoC > the "surround" on the vias is well over 15mil away, on *all* layers... > including GND. all VIAs are now avoided by the specified 15mil. > > ... seems a bit much, to me.... This is an attempt to maintain the impedance of the differential pairs to ground which helps reduce the common mode signal (which will radiate as EMI). With re-reading I noticed that the same document from TI ("HDMI Design Guide") which recommends the clearance between differential traces and any copper not a part of that same differential pair be d >= 3s [1] also mentions in the summary of routing guidelines some geometry recommendations among which is d > 2s [2]. In doing some more reading on the subject, a TI High-Frequency Analog design seminar slide mentions that it is common to put ground planes along both sides of the microstrip differential pair but at a larger distance than we have room to accommodate.(width > spacing, d > 2w)[3] I believe we can abide by all of these constraints at d = 3s. Thus my recommendation to move ground shields on the outside of the pairs to 15mil away from the closest pair and remove the ground shields between the pairs because that will constitute 15mil spacing between pairs. The seminar notes also suggest vias tying the ground in the signal layer to the ground plane below the differential pair at least every 100mil along the signal path--quite a fence[3]. Obviously, we have to accommodate the signals on other layers, as well. The images as I received them were named: received saved as ----------- ------------- Untitled3.jpg eoma68_a20_275b_connector_bot.jpg Untitled2.jpg eoma68_a20_275b_processor_top.jpg Untitled1.jpg eoma68_a20_275b_processor_bot.jpg Untitled4.jpg eoma68_a20_275b_processor_gnd.jpg What I notice in eoma68_a20_275b_connector_bot.jpg is that the ground shield traces and ground vias which violate the 15mil differential-pair-to-anything-else clearance stick out noticeably from the ground fill. For the vias on the edge of the ground fill, one possible solution would be to sneak them back inside the ground fill. For ground vias that we need to be closer to the differential pair traces or shouldn't move for other reasons (lack of space), can we remove the via pad on the layer where they violate the clearance (in this case layer 6)? That would minimize the coupling without changing the connection between other ground layers. In eoma68_a20_275b_processor_top.jpg, what I see looks good. I like the curves on XN traces and angles on XP since the curves minimize length to make a turn this also reduces the amount of intra-pair skew (and thus how much compensation is required). I notice HTX2N didn't get the same treatment. Is that because HTX2P makes an extra turn on its way to the via? In regard to eoma68_a20_275b_processor_bot.jpg I notice that Toradex mentions spacing of parallel traces containing the same signal should be >= 4 * trace width.[4] (For us that would be 4*5mil = 20mil.) Thus all their pictures of intra-pair skew compensation don't have parallel sections (unless they are very short like the tricks in figure 31[5]): _ _ _ \_/ \_/ or _ _ _/ \_/ \_ instead of _ _ \ / | | <---parallel sections of same signal \_/ They reserve parallel sections of same signal for large meanders involved in inter-pair (between pairs) skew compensation. I would try and move the bottom ground shield trace (and associated fence vias) down 1mil so that the trace attains the 15mil clearance with HTXCN. Again, the ground vias and ground shield traces that are closer than 15mil to differential traces and can be moved to respect that boundary would help improve the symmetry and keep the impedance up. Specifically, the ground shield trace just north of the signal vias which land the signals on layer 6, could move up parallel with the north edge of the adjacent ground fill. Likewise the ground shield trace on the west side of HTXCN could move even with the edge of the ground fill on that side. My name for eoma68_a20_275b_processor_gnd.jpg is a hypothesis as to what I guess this is a picture of--one of the ground planes over the top layer adjacent to the processor where the signal vias carry the signal from top to bottom. Is that a correct hypothesis? The keep outs look good from a signal impedance standpoint. It looks like there is no pad on this layer (ground?) on the vias and the 15mil clearance rule is having the expected effect. What did this part of this layer look like before we instituted the 15mil clearance rule? What clearance did we have before? Specifically, did we already have a hole extending over all the signal vias' keep outs or were there fingers of ground that made it between (preferably connecting north to south)? I don't especially like making such a large hole in the ground plane. If it were only one of two ground planes with that hole I wouldn't worry about it at all. This is both planes plus the power plane. So let's consider it for a moment. Please correct any errors of fact or perspective, below. 1. Each HDMI differential signal via is composed of a 6mil diameter plated-through hole and pads on appropriate layers. 2. The clearance imposes a 15mil radius around the hole = 36mil void in non-signal layer. (This then happens in power and both ground planes.) 3. The return current (from common mode signal) wants to follow the signal in relatively low impedance back to the signal source/driver which implies a power or ground pin of the driver close to the signal pin. Where are the power and ground pins on the SoC relative to the HDMI signal pins? Does the SoC have both positive and negative supply connections (e.g. +3.3V, -3.3V)? Are any of the pins suggestively named such as: VHDMI+, VHDMI- or VDIFF+, VDIFF-? 4. The return current will detour as needed (but it raises the impedance of the path). Probably want to keep the detours down to ~200mil. 5. Where on ground and power planes is the power flow most apparent? (Are we blocking the direct path for any high-power flow? Where are the power sources?[voltage convertors/regulators] Where are the power sinks?[users of power: SoC, etc.]) References: [1] TI HDMI, p. 5.2 [2] TI HDMI, p. 8, #10 [3] TI Analog, p. 14, beware: they label dimensions differently [4] Toradex, page 17, section 6.2 [5] Toradex, page 25, figure 31 Bibliography: Texas Instruments (TI HDMI): "HDMI Design Guide", High-Speed Interface Products, June 2007, http://e2e.ti.com/cfs-file/__key/telligent-evolution-components-attachments/00-138-01-00-00-10-65-80/Texas-Instruments-HDMI-Design-Guide.pdf Texas Instruments (TI Analog): "Section 5: High Speed PCB Layout Techniques", High Speed Analog Design and Application Seminar, Date?, http://www.ti.com/lit/ml/slyp173/slyp173.pdf Toradex: "Layout Design Guide", v1.0, 14 April 2015, http://docs.toradex.com/102492-layout-design-guide.pdf From eaterjolly at gmail.com Tue Sep 5 05:53:35 2017 From: eaterjolly at gmail.com (Jean Flamelle) Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 00:53:35 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] [Formerly "Re: Standards Organization as a Potentially Universal Free/Libre Software Developement Sustenance Model: Message-ID: On 5/31/17, John Luke Gibson wrote: > Neverminding the ridiculous length of that subject line.. > > I just thought an interesting thought. > > First, a little context, (I know how rms feels about blockchains) I > was investigating slock.it and thinking to myself "why don't they just > make a hardware standard like eoma instead of closing their > development and calling it open?" (Like, Pi-Top is [n]ever gonna > release those stl files) > (I realize that's a loaded 'just' cause it sounds easy, but is one of > the most difficult possible) > > Then, it dawned on me: Lulzbot doesn't do that.. Wait, Lulzbot > exclusively uses open software in their development.. Then *bam* like > a boulder (nothing to do with Lulzbot): GPL-violations, improper GUI > training, failing to extend using APIs/Addons, failing to > bugsmash/'track-issues', failing to participate in mailing-lists and > irc, failing to simply fork when development goals conflict, planned > esoteric-ism and/or planned obsolescence, failure to secure clientèle > data by using fully free systems (when relevant), failure to > participate-in and be-aware-of public conversations about the > underlining security of said systems (when relevant), failure to > disclose supplychain information/identities (when relevant), failure > at general transparency. > > All of these things traditionally go wrong with not only companies > that use open source, but companies in-general. > > Then, it truly truly dawned on me, free software needs standards > organizations as well. > From eaterjolly at gmail.com Tue Sep 5 06:18:37 2017 From: eaterjolly at gmail.com (Jean Flamelle) Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 01:18:37 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] The Libre Guild of Program Changers [Formerly "Re: Standards Organization as a Potentially Universal Free/Libre Software Developement Sustenance Model: Message-ID: So to kind of clarify on my original idea a bit. (finally found the words) Essentially, the point of libre software is that anyone can change it to do what they want the program to do, and, if someone doesn't have the know-how, they can ask someone else. That's the heart of the idea. There should be an organization not-unlike an artists' guild, where people can go to and commission customizations to libre software. The idea of a standards organization, was more meant as a certain standard expected of all guild members. Projects live mostly off of donations, but they can certified based on their members' respective statuses in the guild and their portfolio of commissioned mods they've accomplished. Supposedly major companies could commission a major modified fork from a project (like Blender or Gimp) and that there would be a certification mark the commissioning company could bear indicating that they supported as well as respected free software in this way. (i.e. not trying to convince the foundation to sign an NDA, close or obfuscate parts of the fork, or write any kind of exploitive or otherwise disreputable software.) And, if a company dedicates their own staffed developers to the effort, basically the mark would also indicate that those developers weren't disruptive and were respectful. On 5/31/17, John Luke Gibson wrote: > Neverminding the ridiculous length of that subject line.. > > I just thought an interesting thought. > > First, a little context, (I know how rms feels about blockchains) I > was investigating slock.it and thinking to myself "why don't they just > make a hardware standard like eoma instead of closing their > development and calling it open?" (Like, Pi-Top is [n]ever gonna > release those stl files) > (I realize that's a loaded 'just' cause it sounds easy, but is one of > the most difficult possible) > > Then, it dawned on me: Lulzbot doesn't do that.. Wait, Lulzbot > exclusively uses open software in their development.. Then *bam* like > a boulder (nothing to do with Lulzbot): GPL-violations, improper GUI > training, failing to extend using APIs/Addons, failing to > bugsmash/'track-issues', failing to participate in mailing-lists and > irc, failing to simply fork when development goals conflict, planned > esoteric-ism and/or planned obsolescence, failure to secure clientèle > data by using fully free systems (when relevant), failure to > participate-in and be-aware-of public conversations about the > underlining security of said systems (when relevant), failure to > disclose supplychain information/identities (when relevant), failure > at general transparency. > > All of these things traditionally go wrong with not only companies > that use open source, but companies in-general. > > Then, it truly truly dawned on me, free software needs standards > organizations as well. > From njansen1 at gmail.com Tue Sep 5 13:42:29 2017 From: njansen1 at gmail.com (Neil Jansen) Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 08:42:29 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] The Libre Guild of Program Changers [Formerly "Re: Standards Organization as a Potentially Universal Free/Libre Software Developement Sustenance Model: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 1:18 AM, Jean Flamelle wrote: > > Essentially, the point of libre software is that anyone can change it > to do what they want the program to do, and, if someone doesn't have > the know-how, they can ask someone else. The point of libre software is the freedom to do those things. Those things you list are the outcome of having that freedom. I'm nitpicking but I think that distinction is important. > That's the heart of the idea. There should be an organization > not-unlike an artists' guild, where people can go to and commission > customizations to libre software. I'm not sure 'guild' would be the right word for such a group, due to the negative connotation of the word in some contexts. Writer's guilds and trade guilds, for example, are quite philosophically different from what the FOSS community does. It could be said that they respected neither freedom nor the art in which they were practicing. Traditional and modern guilds have been criticized for being cartel-like and rent-seeking. The word might have more or less stigma depending on locale. Where I live, it's a pretty derogatory term in that context. As far as commissioning software goes, I think that a lot of end-users of open-source software that don't necessarily program or contribute much would probably like that idea, if they had some sort of a system to organize those ideas. If it were a website, maybe it would look sort of like Kickstarter and/or Indiegogo, but where people could vote without giving any money, as an option, with possibly a donation button and donation amount tracker indicator, where the user could donate in bitcoin or some other hopefully more convenient manner. There's work that I would commission today if there were a popular platform to put it on. Certification would be a plus, but honestly, if it's licensed GPL or similar, I'm already more than happy can't can't really ask for much more than that. Hardware? That's a whole 'nother story. That's what really deserves well- written and well-followed standards. That's where free and/or libre organizations should be focusing their time. Current standards for it are: 1) vague 2) not 100% libre 3) Violated without repercussion From phil at hands.com Tue Sep 5 18:53:15 2017 From: phil at hands.com (Philip Hands) Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2017 19:53:15 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] The Libre Guild of Program Changers [Formerly "Re: Standards Organization as a Potentially Universal Free/Libre Software Developement Sustenance Model: In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <87tw0hm3qs.fsf@whist.hands.com> Neil Jansen writes: ... > As far as commissioning software goes, I think that a lot of end-users > of open-source software that don't necessarily program or contribute > much would probably like that idea, if they had some sort of a system > to organize those ideas. If it were a website, maybe it would look > sort of like Kickstarter and/or Indiegogo, but where people could vote > without giving any money, as an option, with possibly a donation > button and donation amount tracker indicator, where the user could > donate in bitcoin or some other hopefully more convenient manner. Great care needs to be taken when considering paying people to do things that they might otherwise do for the love of it. If you introduce a monetary incentive, and the work is then done by people who's primary motive is money, then while the volume of contributions might well go up, the quality could plummet. You may then find that those unpaid heroes that stand as gatekeepers, triaging patches that come into free software projects, suddenly find themselves drowning in excrement. They may be just a little upset when they discover that the reason their lives just got noticeably worse it that other people are being paid to do that to them. If the problem is sufficiently bad they may lose their motivation. Net result: the project that you were hoping to help gets some crappy patches, and loses some long-term contributors. Perhaps my view is overly skewed by they way it didn't work for Debian, with Dunc-Tanc -- see for instance: https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2006/10/msg00026.html On the other hand, Debian's LTS _is_ done pretty-much in this way, and doesn't cause much angst -- but it's very clear to everyone that nobody was doing that job before someone organised a way to pay for it. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY From eaterjolly at gmail.com Tue Sep 5 23:25:59 2017 From: eaterjolly at gmail.com (Jean Flamelle) Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2017 18:25:59 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] The Libre Guild of Program Changers [Formerly "Re: Standards Organization as a Potentially Universal Free/Libre Software Developement Sustenance Model: In-Reply-To: <87tw0hm3qs.fsf@whist.hands.com> References: <87tw0hm3qs.fsf@whist.hands.com> Message-ID: On 9/5/17, Philip Hands wrote: > Great care needs to be taken when considering paying people to do things > that they might otherwise do for the love of it. > > If you introduce a monetary incentive, and the work is then done by > people who's primary motive is money, then while the volume of > contributions might well go up, the quality could plummet. > > You may then find that those unpaid heroes that stand as gatekeepers, > triaging patches that come into free software projects, suddenly find > themselves drowning in excrement. > Which I think that illustrates the need for more guild-like behavior, where notoriety and respect of skill is proportional to one's influence networking commissioners. The way to avoid an organization similar to modern guilds is to ensure sincere meritocracy, and the way to do that is complete, uncompromising, as well as loud transparency. From lkcl at lkcl.net Wed Sep 6 01:54:33 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2017 01:54:33 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] The Libre Guild of Program Changers [Formerly "Re: Standards Organization as a Potentially Universal Free/Libre Software Developement Sustenance Model: In-Reply-To: <87tw0hm3qs.fsf@whist.hands.com> References: <87tw0hm3qs.fsf@whist.hands.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 6:53 PM, Philip Hands wrote: > Great care needs to be taken when considering paying people to do things > that they might otherwise do for the love of it. > > If you introduce a monetary incentive, and the work is then done by > people who's primary motive is money, then while the volume of > contributions might well go up, the quality could plummet. can and has. thanks for raising this point, phil. there are a number of projects where this has genuinely happened. the primary one i recall is the KDE4 project, which received a $EUR 10m EU Grant about... 10(?) years ago. they implemented a look-alike copy of *the* worst and most hated version of Windows that has ever been created: WIndows Vista. look also at what happens with redhat. the employees of many of the projects dominated by redhat basically rush ahead "coding without thought for the consequences". it seems to be the [extremely general, brush-sweeping] case that there is a certain limted-per-time-unit amount of "creativity" - i.e. retrospective and reflective thought - that any one individual is capable of. if you *compress time* in which they *act* on those thoughts - for example by paying them money to work on something - then you are genuinely, genuinely in danger of doing two things: (1) decreasing the "number of reflective thoughts per unit of actual OUTPUT per hour" (2) decreasing their energy and capacity to HAVE "reflective thoughts per unit of time" there are some really famous cases of people doing all the thinking first, followed by doing 100% of typing non-stop, second. these include bram cohen (creator of bittorrent) and dr richard stallman (famously known for overloading, filling and having to wait for the keyboard buffer of the terminal on which he was typing source code, straight from his head without ever having written a single word of it down on paper or keyboard before beginning) these people are exceptions. for pretty much everyone else, actually receiving money and using it to work *full time* on a project is a disaster. so my advice would be - if anyone's asking - if you _are_ looking to fund someone, make sure that they're doing it on a non-full-time basis, or at least look for _some_ sort of sign that there is at least a huge amount of thought and planning gone into what they are asking you to back. l. From doark at mail.com Sat Sep 9 16:43:40 2017 From: doark at mail.com (doark at mail.com) Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 11:43:40 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] python coding help needed (sin, cosine, blah blah) In-Reply-To: References: <20170807184639.00566acd@ulgy_thing> Message-ID: <20170909114340.6e9b35f3@ulgy_thing> On Fri, 18 Aug 2017 06:58:54 +0100 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 11:24 PM, wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 05:43:48 -0400 > > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > >> > >> https://math.stackexchange.com/ (bla) > >> > >> hiya david: okay! so someone kindly edited the question to put the > >> proper links in, so the question's actually understandable. Unfortunately I've not been able to finish this. I've tried luke, but my laptop's battery just went totally bad, my desktop's HD filled up all the way and my family has been in need of my help. I just don't have the time to do this either, and with the hurricane coming (to Florida), I'm not certain what's going to become of me or this house (yes, I'm staying with my family). We will probably loose power and water at the least. In case you've not heard it's a CAT 5! AND there is another one behind it! I've done several of the calculations by hand and I understand how to do it, just not with a computer nor with your program, plus I don't have the python bindings for openscand so you program still will not work (yes I set python's path correctly). I've created a simple gif that illustrates the steps that the computer must take. This should help you to not have to take shots in the dark when trying to figure this out. 1. Create a polygon. 2. Separate the polygon into squares or right triangles. 3. Enlarge based on sizes of pulleys. 4. Measure angles of side and use this to calculate the angles of your pulleys. Sincerely, David From doark at mail.com Thu Sep 7 23:45:44 2017 From: doark at mail.com (doark at mail.com) Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2017 18:45:44 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Conflict-free minerals In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170820164607.034dce92@ulgy_thing> On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 08:15:26 +0100 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > thus sadly they no longer have the right to distribute the FP2. or > future products. if they continue to do so they will be operating as > an illegal criminal cartel (an Organised Crime Syndicate) *not* a > Cooperative. Does this refer to their "US Legal rights" to distribute their products or that we should not give them the right to distribute their products to us by virtue of a purchase? Thanks, David From lkcl at lkcl.net Sun Sep 10 01:12:07 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 01:12:07 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] python coding help needed (sin, cosine, blah blah) In-Reply-To: <20170909114340.6e9b35f3@ulgy_thing> References: <20170807184639.00566acd@ulgy_thing> <20170909114340.6e9b35f3@ulgy_thing> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 4:43 PM, wrote: > Unfortunately I've not been able to finish this. I've tried luke, but my > laptop's battery just went totally bad, my desktop's HD filled up all the > way and my family has been in need of my help. hey sounds like you have your hands full > I just don't have the time > to do this either, and with the hurricane coming (to Florida), I'm not > certain what's going to become of me or this house (yes, I'm staying > with my family). We will probably loose power and water at the least. _really_ full :) > In case you've not heard it's a CAT 5! AND there is another one behind it! just been in a typhoon here in taiwan couple months back, i have to say it was utterly cool, 14 storey apartment, we're on the 13th floor and the thing was SWAYING about a foot, for an hour. i was very disappointed that the only damage done was a few tree plants blown over, bits of corrugated iron pin-wheeling down the street, but not even a flicker on the power-grid or the water supply. mind you, this place is set up for year-on-year typhoons. i found it strange (and quotes backwards quotes) as to why you see all these motor cycles running about the place with 2 or 3 1 metre long propane gas cylinders strapped to the back: it's because it's too dangerous to have gas main lines running underground. so everyone cooks with camping gas style kitchen stoves and the hot water heater runs off another one, and you'll never get people being blown up because a tornado ripped up a gas main. > I've done several of the calculations by hand and I understand how to do > it, just not with a computer nor with your program, plus I don't have the > python bindings for openscand there aren't any. pyopenscad is an independent program that *outputs* scad (as a text file). > so you program still will not work (yes I > set python's path correctly). > I've created a simple gif that illustrates the steps that the computer > must take. This should help you to not have to take shots in the > dark when trying to figure this out. :) > 1. Create a polygon. > 2. Separate the polygon into squares or right triangles. > 3. Enlarge based on sizes of pulleys. > 4. Measure angles of side and use this to calculate the angles of your > pulleys. i can manage that with enough guess-work :) thanks david. l. From lkcl at lkcl.net Sun Sep 10 01:15:06 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 01:15:06 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Conflict-free minerals In-Reply-To: <20170820164607.034dce92@ulgy_thing> References: <20170820164607.034dce92@ulgy_thing> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:45 PM, wrote: > On Fri, 11 Aug 2017 08:15:26 +0100 > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > >> thus sadly they no longer have the right to distribute the FP2. or >> future products. if they continue to do so they will be operating as >> an illegal criminal cartel (an Organised Crime Syndicate) *not* a >> Cooperative. > > Does this refer to their "US Legal rights" to distribute their products > or that we should not give them the right to distribute their products to > us by virtue of a purchase? it's copyright law, plain and simple. if you violate the GPLv2 you lose all distribution rights. if you then *continue* to distribute without those rights, you are in criminal infringement of copyright law. if a *company* continues to do that, the company is breaking the law. if a company is breaking the law, it is no longer a company, it is a criminal cartel. it's a simple chain. many people have pointed out however a flaw in this logic, that copyright is a civil offense not a criminal offense. l. From lkcl at lkcl.net Sun Sep 10 02:51:13 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 02:51:13 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] riki200 v3 first print: success Message-ID: http://forums.reprap.org/read.php?177,767087,787441#msg-787441 yay! From mike.valk at gmail.com Mon Sep 11 09:04:32 2017 From: mike.valk at gmail.com (mike.valk at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 10:04:32 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Part sourcing Message-ID: http://www.findchips.com/ We'll that's interesting. Doesn't beat the offline markets in Shenzhen I guess. From ronwirring at Safe-mail.net Mon Sep 11 21:33:24 2017 From: ronwirring at Safe-mail.net (ronwirring at Safe-mail.net) Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 16:33:24 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook Message-ID: https://www.powerpc-notebook.org/en/ Do you know them? Are they credible? Thank you. From lkcl at lkcl.net Tue Sep 12 02:30:52 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 02:30:52 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 9:33 PM, wrote: > https://www.powerpc-notebook.org/en/ > Do you know them? personally, i've been talking to them on and off for a couple of years now. > Are they credible? that's up to you to assess, based on what you see. personally i love their teamwork spriit. l. From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Tue Sep 12 05:26:37 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 00:26:37 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Ugh, PowerPC? Whenever I hear /anything/ about that particular architecture, my mind leaps (with a profound groan) to the old PowerMacs of the late 1990s and early 2000s. IIRC the reason that line died was part popular idiocy and part architecture limitations -- PowerPC couldn't scale its clock cycles fast enough to match x86's stuff, regardless of actual performance and comparisons thereof (to the extent that they can be made!), and people wouldn't buy them as a result, because they thought that clock speed in hundreds of MHz (and, eventually, in GHz) directly correlated with performance and capabilities the way horsepower does (for the most part) with a car, even though clock speed hasn't worked like that basically since computers stopped being the size of file cabinets... as a local friend of mine pointed out, a 1MHz 6502 can run rings around a 4MHz Z80 (and, probably, a 4.77MHz 8086!) -- and that goes back to the mid- and late-/Seventies/! To be fair, the friend I mention is a Commodore /nut/ and thus rather biased (as am I, in the same direction, albeit somewhat less so... I've become rather more fond of the RCA CDP1802, as of late... ah, but *that* architecture was weed-baked-sloth kinds of slow...). So from my perspective, PowerPC was a flash in the pan, and now it's basically irrelevant. Sort of like Ralph Nader, you know? He had his fifteen minutes (a couple times over, really -- first with the Chevy Corvair, and then again when he ran for President in 2000) but they're over now and these days he's basically all alone in the corner by himself because he's old news. I've not heard of anything both innovative and relevant being done with PowerPC since Apple dropped it like the radioactive potato that it was... so forgive the extreme skepticism here and now as well. Mind you, I'm not saying that that project should dry up and blow away -- I don't think that, even for a hot minute -- but I really don't think their choice of architecture is wise, nor do I think they're going to capture even a meaningful portion of the /hobbyist/ computing market, and that's a niche kind of a segment to begin with... not to mention that popular idiocy with regard to technology is at an all-time high and climbing fast (ugh ugh ugh)... Hey, I've been wrong before. Maybe they're /totally/ the future of computing and they start this huge revolution that completely changes everything forever and kills off x86 and Windows the way x86 and DOS knocked off CP/M and 8080/Z80-based computing. Or... not. /My/ money's on "or not", and that they either fizzle out without anyone else really noticing, or spend their efforts only to become instantly mired in irrelevancy, or (most likely) some unfortunate combination of both -- but I guess we'll just have to wait and see, to know for sure... ...good lord, I'm only 31 and I'm already turning into that overly-opinionated uncle everyone has at their holiday table that just can't shut up about, well, dang near everything... I'll pipe down for a while now. (Sorry, everybody... maybe I really do need one of those On-And-On Anon twelve-step meetings for people who just can't shut up...) ...we now return to your regularly-unscheduled programming... From lkcl at lkcl.net Tue Sep 12 05:29:04 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 05:29:04 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 5:26 AM, Christopher Havel wrote: > Ugh, PowerPC? Whenever I hear /anything/ about that particular ibm has power9 in 14nm, up to 4ghz now and using 2400mhz ECC DDR4. l. From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Tue Sep 12 05:32:24 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 00:32:24 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Forgive my own stupidity on the subject, but what's the difference between PowerPC as implemented in the PowerMacs of yore, and this "Power9" thing you mention? I assume there *are* differences? I haven't really paid that stuff attention (mostly because I didn't think it was worth it!) in well over a decade. ...although, that does sound like it's got some promise to it... From lkcl at lkcl.net Tue Sep 12 05:34:28 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 05:34:28 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Christopher Havel wrote: > Forgive my own stupidity on the subject, but what's the difference between > PowerPC as implemented in the PowerMacs of yore, probably power8. > and this "Power9" thing > you mention? I assume there *are* differences? I haven't really paid that > stuff attention (mostly because I didn't think it was worth it!) in well > over a decade. google them. wikipedia. look up Talos II From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Tue Sep 12 05:46:27 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 00:46:27 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ...okay, I understood probably about 3/4 of what I read, but I am rather impressed. Sounds like they've come a ways since Apple dumped them a decade or so ago. I still think that very few members of the general public will be interested, but that's mostly because most people cling hard to what they're familiar with, and (sadly) a massive portion of that is Windows... On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton < lkcl at lkcl.net> wrote: > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Christopher Havel > wrote: > > Forgive my own stupidity on the subject, but what's the difference > between > > PowerPC as implemented in the PowerMacs of yore, > > probably power8. > > > and this "Power9" thing > > you mention? I assume there *are* differences? I haven't really paid that > > stuff attention (mostly because I didn't think it was worth it!) in well > > over a decade. > > google them. wikipedia. look up Talos II > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk > From andreas at grapentin.org Tue Sep 12 06:06:35 2017 From: andreas at grapentin.org (Andreas Grapentin) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 07:06:35 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170912050635.GA12987@parabola-pocket.localdomain> you should probably also take a look at the open power foundation. IBM is being much more friendly these days, with academia as well. -A On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:46:27AM -0400, Christopher Havel wrote: > ...okay, I understood probably about 3/4 of what I read, but I am rather > impressed. Sounds like they've come a ways since Apple dumped them a decade > or so ago. I still think that very few members of the general public will > be interested, but that's mostly because most people cling hard to what > they're familiar with, and (sadly) a massive portion of that is Windows... > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton < > lkcl at lkcl.net> wrote: > > > --- > > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 5:32 AM, Christopher Havel > > wrote: > > > Forgive my own stupidity on the subject, but what's the difference > > between > > > PowerPC as implemented in the PowerMacs of yore, > > > > probably power8. > > > > > and this "Power9" thing > > > you mention? I assume there *are* differences? I haven't really paid that > > > stuff attention (mostly because I didn't think it was worth it!) in well > > > over a decade. > > > > google them. wikipedia. look up Talos II > > > > _______________________________________________ > > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk > > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ my GPG Public Key: https://files.grapentin.org/.gpg/public.key ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Tue Sep 12 06:18:22 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 01:18:22 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: <20170912050635.GA12987@parabola-pocket.localdomain> References: <20170912050635.GA12987@parabola-pocket.localdomain> Message-ID: I'm not sure if you're talking to me or Luke... if it's me, the only product line of Intel's that I'm interested in is now a ghost... namely the Atom SoCs, like the Z3735F, which they stupidly killed off because I guess they don't like all those Chinese clones of the Compute Stick or something. Dunno. Given all of those clones that are on eBay (as sticks and as so-called "MiniPC" boxes), it's not like they weren't shifting enough chips or anything... and the only thing I don't like about them (other than poor Linux support, which has mostly been rectified already) is that you can't backport them to Win7 because of the low-level interface crap that W7 doesn't have drivers for because nobody took up the bother. ...for the record, I'll use Win7 for a few things... but don't ask me to use anything newer, I don't trust it and I can't stand the look... From lkcl at lkcl.net Tue Sep 12 06:24:14 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:24:14 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] pre-2.7.5 JAE DC3 micro-hdmi connector test PCB success Message-ID: http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 From lkcl at lkcl.net Tue Sep 12 06:33:13 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 06:33:13 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: <20170912050635.GA12987@parabola-pocket.localdomain> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 6:18 AM, Christopher Havel wrote: > I'm not sure if you're talking to me or Luke... if it's me, the only > product line of Intel's that I'm interested in is now a ghost... namely the > Atom SoCs, like the Z3735F, which they stupidly killed off stupidly yes > because .. they don't care if they're cloned: intel makes money selling the SoCs if they're cloned or not-cloned. no the reason is: they make a specific batch of the processors, making it a large batch so that they can tune one of the wafer manufacturing machines over a period of several months to get it up to as close to a 100% yield as they can, then stockpile them. remember this is intel trying its hand at what it thinks is *mass-volume* marketing. when that lot runs out, they have a choice: (1) make some more (and by "more" i mean '10 to 100 million") - again starting the entire tuning process from scratch because it's unlikely to be the exact same machines or conditions (2) recognise that the SoC is by now hopelessly out of date, and would totally fail to sell even if it was done at a good yield, so can it completely. this is how it works. you can't just turn on the tap on these foundries and out pops a working set of wafers with 5,000 fully working ICs 100% on every wafer. the first wafers are hopelessly poor yield: 10 to 25% if you're extremely lucky. it's only by slowly working out what's wrong that you can fine-tune the machine in a hundred different ways to get the yields up, and that literally takes months. so to get the best return on profit with these mass-produced SoCs you have to take an enormous risk each time and make several million. now, for the LONG TERM processors it's a totally different matter. those intel puts out at something insane like a 5 to 10 times markup. and that markup covers the poor yields involved in restarting a production run. From maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me Tue Sep 12 11:12:43 2017 From: maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me (Alexander Ross) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 11:12:43 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] pre-2.7.5 JAE DC3 micro-hdmi connector test PCB success In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8907c5b1-9021-fc8a-8117-6bb1f433fd73@aross.me> Yay working hdmi connector! Good work too all involved. Thanks again. :) From hendrik at topoi.pooq.com Tue Sep 12 14:15:48 2017 From: hendrik at topoi.pooq.com (Hendrik Boom) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:15:48 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: <20170912050635.GA12987@parabola-pocket.localdomain> Message-ID: <20170912131548.GA546@topoi.pooq.com> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 06:33:13AM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > no the reason is: they make a specific batch of the processors, > making it a large batch so that they can tune one of the wafer > manufacturing machines over a period of several months to get it up to > as close to a 100% yield as they can, then stockpile them. Wasn't the power processor used in Sony's playstations a while back, with something like five or six CPUs and some other thing to coordinate them? I heard they got around the yield problem by making them all with extra processors so they could make a subset of them that happened to work available in the actual delivered machine. -- hendrik From mike.valk at gmail.com Tue Sep 12 15:21:27 2017 From: mike.valk at gmail.com (mike.valk at gmail.com) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 16:21:27 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: <20170912131548.GA546@topoi.pooq.com> References: <20170912050635.GA12987@parabola-pocket.localdomain> <20170912131548.GA546@topoi.pooq.com> Message-ID: 2017-09-12 15:15 GMT+02:00 Hendrik Boom : > Wasn't the power processor used in Sony's playstations a while back, > with something like five or six CPUs and some other thing to > coordinate them? Yes the PS3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cell_(microprocessor) And they used repeatatly in a cluster setup, US Air Force had a setup of 1760 PS3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_cluster > I heard they got around the yield problem by making > them all with extra processors so they could make a subset of > them that happened to work available in the actual delivered machine. That's a common practice these days. Small defects hinder speed. Thus sell them with a lower speed rating. That's why overclocking yields different results for different cpu's the CPU's are sold batched on the lowest common. With bigger defects they can overcome by adjusting microcode to compensate. With the rise of multi core. Defect cores are disabled and those CPU's are sold as cpu's with less cores. Sometimes you can get lucky and can re-enable core's. So same CPU is sold in different guises. Just according to quality and sometimes demand. From mike.valk at gmail.com Tue Sep 12 15:24:29 2017 From: mike.valk at gmail.com (mike.valk at gmail.com) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 16:24:29 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] pre-2.7.5 JAE DC3 micro-hdmi connector test PCB success In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2017-09-12 7:24 GMT+02:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton : > http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ Huzzah From raphael.melotte at gmail.com Tue Sep 12 15:48:58 2017 From: raphael.melotte at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?UmFwaGHDq2wgTcOpbG90dGU=?=) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 16:48:58 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] pre-2.7.5 JAE DC3 micro-hdmi connector test PCB success In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: >micro-hdmi connector test PCB success Yay good job ! From lkcl at lkcl.net Tue Sep 12 15:49:40 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 15:49:40 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] pre-2.7.5 JAE DC3 micro-hdmi connector test PCB success In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 3:24 PM, mike.valk at gmail.com wrote: > 2017-09-12 7:24 GMT+02:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton : >> http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ > > Huzzah :) From pablo at parobalth.org Wed Sep 13 11:09:43 2017 From: pablo at parobalth.org (Pablo Rath) Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 12:09:43 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] pre-2.7.5 JAE DC3 micro-hdmi connector test PCB success In-Reply-To: <8907c5b1-9021-fc8a-8117-6bb1f433fd73@aross.me> References: <8907c5b1-9021-fc8a-8117-6bb1f433fd73@aross.me> Message-ID: <20170913100942.pwhtor4zmbjxkdz2@cherry> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:12:43AM +0100, Alexander Ross wrote: > Yay working hdmi connector! > Just for clarification and to make sure that I understood correctly; The test PCB did confirm that the soldering problems are solved and the connector doesn't fall off. We will have to wait for the 2.7.5 PCBs (2000 $, 4-6 weeks once 2.7.5 layout is finished) to know if there will be a usable HDMI-signal to the Micro-HDMI-Connector. Right? kind regards Pablo From vkontogpls at gmail.com Wed Sep 13 11:21:58 2017 From: vkontogpls at gmail.com (Bill Kontos) Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 13:21:58 +0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook In-Reply-To: References: <20170912050635.GA12987@parabola-pocket.localdomain> <20170912131548.GA546@topoi.pooq.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 5:21 PM, mike.valk at gmail.com wrote: > > Small defects hinder speed. Thus sell them with a lower speed rating. > That's why overclocking yields different results for different cpu's > the CPU's are sold batched on the lowest common. > > With bigger defects they can overcome by adjusting microcode to compensate. > > With the rise of multi core. Defect cores are disabled and those CPU's > are sold as cpu's with less cores. Sometimes you can get lucky and can > re-enable core's. > > So same CPU is sold in different guises. Just according to quality and > sometimes demand. > In theory this is correct, in practice, at least on the x86 area intel's desktop cpus are mostly quad cores, and on laptops all the dual cores so far have been SoCs with the chipset on the die, while the mobile quad cores were not. So it's not possible for intel to ship dual cores derived from quadcores. On gpus this is common practice, to the point that I remember some amd card that some cores were disabled via firmware which people just flashed to reenable them with varying success given that in most cases those cores were disabled for a reason. From lkcl at lkcl.net Wed Sep 13 11:40:42 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 11:40:42 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] pre-2.7.5 JAE DC3 micro-hdmi connector test PCB success In-Reply-To: <20170913100942.pwhtor4zmbjxkdz2@cherry> References: <8907c5b1-9021-fc8a-8117-6bb1f433fd73@aross.me> <20170913100942.pwhtor4zmbjxkdz2@cherry> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Pablo Rath wrote: > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 11:12:43AM +0100, Alexander Ross wrote: >> Yay working hdmi connector! >> > > Just for clarification and to make sure that I understood correctly; > The test PCB did confirm that the soldering problems are solved and the > connector doesn't fall off. We will have to wait for the 2.7.5 PCBs > (2000 $, 4-6 weeks once 2.7.5 layout is finished) to > know if there will be a usable HDMI-signal to the Micro-HDMI-Connector. > Right? that's correct. From monnier at iro.umontreal.ca Thu Sep 14 13:16:34 2017 From: monnier at iro.umontreal.ca (Stefan Monnier) Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 08:16:34 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] ppcnotebook References: Message-ID: > Forgive my own stupidity on the subject, but what's the difference between > PowerPC as implemented in the PowerMacs of yore, and this "Power9" thing > you mention? IBM has always had a line of beefy POWER processors (some of which implement the PowerPC instruction set, others not (tho it's always very close)), for use in their workstations and mainframes. Those are/were of no use to Apple who needed low-power CPUs for its laptops. Stefan From mike.valk at gmail.com Fri Sep 15 09:00:06 2017 From: mike.valk at gmail.com (mike.valk at gmail.com) Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 10:00:06 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Retrfit a Nokia and KiCad fun Message-ID: https://hackaday.com/2017/09/12/hackaday-prize-entry-retrofit-a-nokia/ https://hackaday.io/project/21263-nokia-3210-retro-fit-board Quote from the project log: "With the patched I submitted you can turn KiCad into a 'I know what I am doing' mode. Which meas you can place any type of via anywhere. You should not do it though. Vias are pretty well constraint by the manufacturer of the board. Since KiCad does not know of any layer thickness, production technologies and such it restricts to what is a sensible lowest common denominator." Hmm so KiCad does not have a "PCB manufacturer constraints" input? How handy... NOT From lkcl at lkcl.net Fri Sep 15 15:24:27 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 15:24:27 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Retrfit a Nokia and KiCad fun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 9:00 AM, mike.valk at gmail.com wrote: > Hmm so KiCad does not have a "PCB manufacturer constraints" input? How > handy... NOT i've just started hacking on a 2-layer 4in x 2.5in PCB with eagle (pre-existing, GPLv3) and hoolyy cow is it.... i mean it's a successful program, it works, it generates gerbers and so on but jesus christ is it utterly painful to use. no push-and-shove (at least kicad has that now), you can't just "select" something, you have to "Move" it first then and only then can you modify its properties by right-mouse-buttoning on it... only problem is.... you moved it.... group selection goes wrong on a constant utterly painful monotonous basis... i'm sort of amazed and impressed that people actually get things done with it. l. From lkcl at lkcl.net Sat Sep 16 15:23:35 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2017 15:23:35 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ ok so after the successful DC3 test this is the last final check before sending the gerbers off to the factory for pre-production prototyping. in the end i used a "keepout" area on both layers 1 and 3, drawn by hand, to ensure that no GND flooding gets near the HDMI traces on layers 1 and 6. l'm including layer 3 as an example of how the group of HDMI vias that come just out of the A20 punch a large hole: GND-flooded layers 2 and 5 as well as 4 (power plane) will also look like that. richard if you want to zoom in on those pictures you should be able to click on them in a browser, then expand them: they're actually around 2,500 pixels wide, i just asked them to be displayed in that HTML page as only 1024 otherwise they wouldn't fit :) you can see i removed the GND traces in between, and generally kept everything except VIAs away from them. it's not perfect but thanks to your help i'm pretty happy with it. if there's nothing major i want to send this off. l. From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Fri Sep 15 22:33:13 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 15:33:13 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Feedback? Message-ID: <17A3D68E-3F7E-47F2-9299-C32849E437EF@gmail.com> Luke, How are things going? Congratulations on a successful surface-mount board soldering trial of the JAE micro HDMI connector! I sent my latest recommendations regarding the high-frequency HDMI layout on 1 Sep. I was looking forward to some feedback with respect to some of the questions and suggestions I raised there. 1. Did you receive the message (it referred to 4 images you attached to a previous post)? 2. Does it need pictures showing what I'm talking about? 3. Please let me know if something doesn't make any sense so I can try to explain it better--so it does make sense. It is very possible that some of the things I recommended can't be done on this layout. That's okay. Let me know and I can see if there is another technique we can use to achieve the same goal or dismiss it as not necessary for a working system. Sincerely, Richard From lkcl at lkcl.net Sat Sep 16 18:00:52 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2017 18:00:52 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Feedback? In-Reply-To: <17A3D68E-3F7E-47F2-9299-C32849E437EF@gmail.com> References: <17A3D68E-3F7E-47F2-9299-C32849E437EF@gmail.com> Message-ID: hi richard, yes, sorry, possible cross-over: sent a message just a few hours ago, been busy, generated some images after flood-fill, will look up in the archives the message you're referring to tomoroww. l. --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:33 PM, Richard Wilbur wrote: > Luke, > > How are things going? Congratulations on a successful surface-mount board soldering trial of the JAE micro HDMI connector! > > I sent my latest recommendations regarding the high-frequency HDMI layout on 1 Sep. I was looking forward to some feedback with respect to some of the questions and suggestions I raised there. > > 1. Did you receive the message (it referred to 4 images you attached to a previous post)? > 2. Does it need pictures showing what I'm talking about? > 3. Please let me know if something doesn't make any sense so I can try to explain it better--so it does make sense. > > It is very possible that some of the things I recommended can't be done on this layout. That's okay. Let me know and I can see if there is another technique we can use to achieve the same goal or dismiss it as not necessary for a working system. > > Sincerely, > Richard > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk From acassis at gmail.com Fri Sep 15 14:16:32 2017 From: acassis at gmail.com (Alan Carvalho de Assis) Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 10:16:32 -0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Retrfit a Nokia and KiCad fun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Mike, On 9/15/17, mike.valk at gmail.com wrote: > https://hackaday.com/2017/09/12/hackaday-prize-entry-retrofit-a-nokia/ > https://hackaday.io/project/21263-nokia-3210-retro-fit-board > > Quote from the project log: > "With the patched I submitted you can turn KiCad into a 'I know what I > am doing' mode. Which meas you can place any type of via anywhere. You > should not do it though. Vias are pretty well constraint by the > manufacturer of the board. Since KiCad does not know of any layer > thickness, production technologies and such it restricts to what is a > sensible lowest common denominator." > > Hmm so KiCad does not have a "PCB manufacturer constraints" input? How > handy... NOT > Of course it has. But you need to realize that even Gerber doesn't have advanced information you need for more complex designs (i.e PCB dozens of layers with different type of impedance, etc). For that you need an EDA with IPC-2581 support that even Eagle (AFAIK) doesn't have and many other commercial EDAs also don't. BR, Alan From lasich at gmail.com Sat Sep 16 19:46:55 2017 From: lasich at gmail.com (Hrvoje Lasic) Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2017 20:46:55 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Retrfit a Nokia and KiCad fun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Of course it has. But you need to realize that even Gerber doesn't > have advanced information you need for more complex designs (i.e PCB > dozens of layers with different type of impedance, etc). For that you > need an EDA with IPC-2581 support that even Eagle (AFAIK) doesn't have > and many other commercial EDAs also don't. Impedance has no connection to gerbers. You agree with manufacturer PCB type (thickens of prepag for each layer) and based on that you calculate thickness of line to meet certain impedance. It is totally designers responsibility. From acassis at gmail.com Sat Sep 16 20:38:37 2017 From: acassis at gmail.com (Alan Carvalho de Assis) Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2017 16:38:37 -0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Retrfit a Nokia and KiCad fun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 9/16/17, Hrvoje Lasic wrote: > > Impedance has no connection to gerbers. You agree with manufacturer PCB > type (thickens of prepag for each layer) and based on that you calculate > thickness of line to meet certain impedance. It is totally designers > responsibility. It is true for Gerber! That what I said! See page 5: http://www.ipc2581.com/Samples/Consortium-Update%20on%20IPC-2581-V3.pdf BR, Alan From njansen1 at gmail.com Sat Sep 16 20:57:43 2017 From: njansen1 at gmail.com (Neil Jansen) Date: Sat, 16 Sep 2017 15:57:43 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Retrfit a Nokia and KiCad fun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Alan Carvalho de Assis wrote: > > > For that you > need an EDA with IPC-2581 support that even Eagle (AFAIK) doesn't have Although IPC-2581 is pretty new I think it's a great idea. A lot of board houses are apparently starting to request this from customers although I've never come across it. I'd be thrilled if all of the EDA packages started to support it. Some folks have asked the support team at EAGLE about it, over the years: https://www.element14.com/community/thread/14080/l/support-for-ipc-2581?displayFullThread=true Translation: We'll promise to ask our management, and never get back to you... Now, after the acquisiton by Autodesk: https://forums.autodesk.com/t5/eagle-forum/ipc-2581/td-p/7336057 Translation: No current plans to do it, no date given, but gives a Machiavellian "Keep your eyes peeled" corporate comment. From lkcl at lkcl.net Sun Sep 17 08:29:42 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 08:29:42 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Feedback? In-Reply-To: References: <17A3D68E-3F7E-47F2-9299-C32849E437EF@gmail.com> Message-ID: hiya richard, ok yes, took a look at what you wrote, http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/pipermail/arm-netbook/2017-September/014681.html and yes, really, a cutout and markup of the bits of the image you're re referring to would really do it. i've removed the 15mil clearance design rule, reverted back to the *standard* 6mil clearance that was is in place everywhere (and is now back in place as the standard blanket rule, no exceptions, i.e. it's all 6mil clearance from everything-to-everything.. oh... except the board edge of course, which is and always was 12mil) so *part* of what you wrote is slightly out-of-date having done the flood-fill and also removed the GND spacing tracks... also suggest in future we refer to the online image names in full e.g. http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/eoma68-a20-275-layer1-hdmi.jpg as that is unambiguous. so i'll stop sending images to the list and will use the URLs instead. l. From pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de Sun Sep 17 18:47:41 2017 From: pelzflorian at pelzflorian.de (pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)) Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 19:47:41 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Conflict-free minerals In-Reply-To: References: <20170820164607.034dce92@ulgy_thing> Message-ID: <20170917174741.GB1250@floriannotebook.localdomain> On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 01:15:06AM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > many people have pointed > out however a flaw in this logic, that copyright is a civil offense > not a criminal offense. > Actually I’m not so sure depending on the jurisdiction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Copyright_Law_in_the_United_States From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Mon Sep 18 06:22:10 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 01:22:10 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] riki200 v3 first print: success In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hey, Luke, this might be useful to you... (I *think* I have the right thread here... lol...) https://hackaday.com/2017/09/17/better-stepping-with-8-bit-micros/ From lkcl at lkcl.net Mon Sep 18 07:07:04 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 07:07:04 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] riki200 v3 first print: success In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 6:22 AM, Christopher Havel wrote: > Hey, Luke, this might be useful to you... (I *think* I have the right > thread here... lol...) > > https://hackaday.com/2017/09/17/better-stepping-with-8-bit-micros/ they're using DMA - which is really what you're supposed to be doing anyway. the entire arduino software ecosystem was never designed to actually give people proper access to the hardware. anything that's a 180mb download and requires a 200mb runtime environment to compile and upload an executable that's only 16k in size *really* isn't going to end well. so they're stepping well outside of the "normal" boundaries - good luck to them. personally i feel it's much better to use a faster 32-bit processor, and to stick reaaasonably within an eco-system. however.... RepRapFirmware is just... genuinely much better-designed than Marlin. it's written in c++, it takes full advantage of OO techniques (Marlin does not. at all). it's also event-driven which means that the highest priority - based on a timer - is the actual stepper moving, with other "tasks" running to handle keeping the queue full... lots more as well. also as it's timer-based and event-driven it's *automatically* far superior to what Marlin does. if you wanted to use DMA (if it isn't already) it would be far easier to use that in RepRapFirmware than Marlin. Marlin is a hard-coded for-loop with an interrupt for handling moves, but it's bit-banged (!) and... yeah. anyway. back to PCB work... l. From valhalla-l at trueelena.org Mon Sep 18 10:15:02 2017 From: valhalla-l at trueelena.org (Elena ``of Valhalla'') Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 11:15:02 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] riki200 v3 first print: success In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> On 2017-09-18 at 07:07:04 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > the entire arduino software ecosystem was never designed to actually > give people proper access to the hardware. anything that's a 180mb > download and requires a 200mb runtime environment to compile and > upload an executable that's only 16k in size *really* isn't going to > end well. Well, IIRC they do bundle gcc(-avr), which tends to be quite big, but doesn't really need to be downloaded again if you already have it from your distribution, and the runtime environment is only needed if you want to use their IDE instead of your favourite editor + a Makefile (and there is (was?) at least one example Makefile somewhere in the arduino package). Looking at the installed sizes on debian (which has an older version for license reasons) I see that the libraries are about 6½MB and the IDE itself is just 1½MB. https://packages.debian.org/sid/arduino-core https://packages.debian.org/sid/arduino To really reduce size they would have to drop gcc, but I don't think that would be a reasonable choice for just the aim of side reduction. Other than assuming that beginners will be fine with just their IDE (and targeting their documentation at them), I don't think they ever did anything to prevent people from going deeper on their own, as they learned more, including using the arduino board as an AVR devboard completely ignoring the arduino software. > so they're stepping well outside of the "normal" boundaries - good > luck to them. Fully agree here: what they are doing lately makes them at the very least quite irrelevant to the Open Hardware world. -- Elena ``of Valhalla'' From mike.valk at gmail.com Mon Sep 18 10:49:37 2017 From: mike.valk at gmail.com (mike.valk at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 11:49:37 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Conflict-free minerals In-Reply-To: <20170917174741.GB1250@floriannotebook.localdomain> References: <20170820164607.034dce92@ulgy_thing> <20170917174741.GB1250@floriannotebook.localdomain> Message-ID: 2017-09-17 19:47 GMT+02:00 pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) : > On Sun, Sep 10, 2017 at 01:15:06AM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >> many people have pointed >> out however a flaw in this logic, that copyright is a civil offense >> not a criminal offense. >> > > Actually I’m not so sure depending on the jurisdiction: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Copyright_Law_in_the_United_States It depends on the location. Copyright is not an international law. From lkcl at lkcl.net Mon Sep 18 11:33:42 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 11:33:42 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] riki200 v3 first print: success In-Reply-To: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Elena ``of Valhalla'' wrote: > On 2017-09-18 at 07:07:04 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >> the entire arduino software ecosystem was never designed to actually >> give people proper access to the hardware. anything that's a 180mb >> download and requires a 200mb runtime environment to compile and >> upload an executable that's only 16k in size *really* isn't going to >> end well. > > Well, IIRC they do bundle gcc(-avr), which tends to be quite big, but > doesn't really need to be downloaded again if you already have it from > your distribution, and the runtime environment is only needed if you > want to use their IDE instead of your favourite editor + a Makefile (and > there is (was?) at least one example Makefile somewhere in the arduino > package). yehyeh... it wasn't always like that. > Looking at the installed sizes on debian (which has an older version for > license reasons) I see that the libraries are about 6½MB and the IDE > itself is just 1½MB. phil was instrumental in arranging that. > https://packages.debian.org/sid/arduino-core > https://packages.debian.org/sid/arduino yep he recommended to the arduino package maintainer that the actual core parts not be glommed together with a runtime and IDE and everything else. then there's avr-utils, a few other things, the libraries as well: you can now basically mix and match and use editors and minimal build dependencies... but seriously that's *not* the way it's normally done [by beginners] > To really reduce size they would have to drop gcc, but I don't think > that would be a reasonable choice for just the aim of side reduction. yehyeh. > Other than assuming that beginners will be fine with just their IDE (and > targeting their documentation at them), I don't think they ever did > anything to prevent people from going deeper on their own, as they > learned more, including using the arduino board as an AVR devboard > completely ignoring the arduino software. yeah if you've ever heard of the OSMC (Open Source Motor Controller) that uses a PIC, i bought one back in... 2003 or so. 1,000 lines of c, using not even gcc. no libraries, nothing. .... when i first heard about arduino i was really shocked at how much the dev environment was. >> so they're stepping well outside of the "normal" boundaries - good >> luck to them. > > Fully agree here: what they are doing lately makes them at the very > least quite irrelevant to the Open Hardware world. ho hum :) i really wanted to use RADDS because the Duet 0.8.5 and the Duet-NG are almost as much as an entire 3D printer can be sourced for here... only to find that the damn thing's non-free! they're happy to provide a non-commercial license... ... it was the last straw. i spent the weekend making an improved version of RAMPS 1.4 - called RD3D (yes after R2D2...) and it's been sent for first PCB manufacturing, already, this morning. yes i rushed it, yes i realised i'm using only a 500mA regulator which means it might be current-limited: i'll just have to drop a different LDO in place using some wires. http://reprap.org/wiki/RD3D/1.0 but guess what? it's GPLv3 and it's *properly open*. and awesome. 6 steppers (RAMPS has 5) and 4 MOSFETs (RAMPS has 3) and an on-board MicroSD card and and and. it was a very... busy... weekend :) l. From mike.valk at gmail.com Mon Sep 18 12:29:01 2017 From: mike.valk at gmail.com (mike.valk at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:29:01 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Mali / Lima Message-ID: It seems that someone has picked up the tainted project. https://github.com/yuq?tab=repositories From lkcl at lkcl.net Mon Sep 18 12:46:47 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 12:46:47 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Mali / Lima In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 12:29 PM, mike.valk at gmail.com wrote: > It seems that someone has picked up the tainted project. > > https://github.com/yuq?tab=repositories good for them. all that fuss by ARM, and what do they get? an employee from AMD carrying on the work. mwahaahha From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Mon Sep 18 14:14:18 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 07:14:18 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Feedback? In-Reply-To: References: <17A3D68E-3F7E-47F2-9299-C32849E437EF@gmail.com> Message-ID: <666F7C09-58CB-44B1-8F38-D1F8DF76A2EE@gmail.com> Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 17, 2017, at 01:29, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > hiya richard, ok yes, took a look at what you wrote, > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/pipermail/arm-netbook/2017-September/014681.html > and yes, really, a cutout and markup of the bits of the image you're > re referring to would really do it. Will see what I can do after looking at the new images. > i've removed the 15mil clearance > design rule, reverted back to the *standard* 6mil clearance that was > is in place everywhere (and is now back in place as the standard > blanket rule, no exceptions, i.e. it's all 6mil clearance from > everything-to-everything.. oh... except the board edge of course, > which is and always was 12mil) I'm mildly surprised to hear that the default clearance (everything-to-everything) used to be 6mil: either it changed and I missed the announcement or it was that value before I got involved. The value I understood for minimum clearance was 5mil[1]. The recommendations regarding impedance are based on space-restrictions and the minimum trace size and spacing you quoted as 5mil. The differential pair impedance calculations and recommendations are based on the distance between traces in the pair being near-field and the clearance to other traces putting them in far-field. That's why we're striving to keep the spacing, s, between the traces of the differential pair small so we can achieve far-field (clearance d>=3s) with the other traces (in our limited space). > so *part* of what you wrote is slightly out-of-date having done the > flood-fill and also removed the GND spacing tracks... Sounds like progress. > also suggest in > future we refer to the online image names in full e.g. > http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/eoma68-a20-275-layer1-hdmi.jpg > as that is unambiguous. so i'll stop sending images to the list and > will use the URLs instead. I think that is a fine idea. More specific with less guesswork involved. Reference: [1] http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/pipermail/arm-netbook/2017-July/014402.html From calmstorm at posteo.de Mon Sep 18 14:31:55 2017 From: calmstorm at posteo.de (zap) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 09:31:55 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Conflict-free minerals In-Reply-To: References: <20170820164607.034dce92@ulgy_thing> <20170917174741.GB1250@floriannotebook.localdomain> Message-ID: <2e418029-b4b0-d78e-f954-85c7e7d22b5d@posteo.de> > It depends on the location. Copyright is not an international law. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk Thank god its not an international law, its bad enough we have copyright in any part of the world... I just think 30 years is more than enough for a copyright to last matter of fact, 15 years for software and 30 for books, is more than sufficient. Given how quickly things become obsolete regarding software... From lkcl at lkcl.net Mon Sep 18 18:21:32 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 18:21:32 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Feedback? In-Reply-To: <666F7C09-58CB-44B1-8F38-D1F8DF76A2EE@gmail.com> References: <17A3D68E-3F7E-47F2-9299-C32849E437EF@gmail.com> <666F7C09-58CB-44B1-8F38-D1F8DF76A2EE@gmail.com> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Richard Wilbur wrote: > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Sep 17, 2017, at 01:29, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >> >> hiya richard, ok yes, took a look at what you wrote, >> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/pipermail/arm-netbook/2017-September/014681.html >> and yes, really, a cutout and markup of the bits of the image you're >> re referring to would really do it. > > Will see what I can do after looking at the new images. thx richard. i didn't do the TX2 double-wiggle, i don't think there's enough space (because of the GND vias... which i can't remove) >> i've removed the 15mil clearance >> design rule, reverted back to the *standard* 6mil clearance that was >> is in place everywhere (and is now back in place as the standard >> blanket rule, no exceptions, i.e. it's all 6mil clearance from >> everything-to-everything.. oh... except the board edge of course, >> which is and always was 12mil) > > I'm mildly surprised to hear that the default clearance (everything-to-everything) used to be 6mil: either it changed and I missed the announcement or it was that value before I got involved. The value I understood for minimum clearance was 5mil[1]. 5 mil - yes, sorry. i didn't check the actual design rules and it's been a couple of weeks, stuff drops out of my memory quite fast. l. From bernardlprf at openmailbox.org Wed Sep 20 00:46:20 2017 From: bernardlprf at openmailbox.org (mdn) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 01:46:20 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] libre board ? Message-ID: <59C1AC4C.8060804@openmailbox.org> Hello, People shared this to me what do you think about it ? https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/librecomputer/libre-computer-board-next-gen-4k-sbc-dev-board-for Has long has it's not RYF the "libre" wording creates some doubts in my mind. Have a nice day. -- Librement BERNARD ENG: Please be kind enough to use GPG for our future conversations: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en/ If this email isn't PGP signed then it isn't mine. -If you can't compile it dump it. From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Tue Sep 19 23:26:02 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 16:26:02 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ > > ok so after the successful DC3 test this is the last final check > before sending the gerbers off to the factory for pre-production > prototyping. 3*Cheer! > in the end i used a "keepout" area on both layers 1 and > 3, drawn by hand, to ensure that no GND flooding gets near the HDMI > traces on layers 1 and 6. "keepout" on layers 1 and 6, right? Not a bad idea, especially since it allows the situations at both ends of the traces to avoid design rule check (DRC) failures because we have copper that has to be closer than 15mil there. > l'm including layer 3 as an example of how > the group of HDMI vias that come just out of the A20 punch a large > hole: GND-flooded layers 2 and 5 as well as 4 (power plane) will also > look like that. Could you put a similar snapshot of layers 2, 4, 5 on hands.com (or wherever you think appropriate)? I'm interested to see what holes/voids and connections the power and ground planes have. What are the names of the power pins on the A20? What voltages do you supply it? (Are any of them Vdiff+/-, e.g?) I'm interested in tracking down the power supply pins for the differential HDMI signals as that is where our return path for common-mode signal has to go. I've read a little (not nearly as much as I'd like, but I lack time) about using a taper to match impedance differences while minimizing the reflection coefficient.[*] I'm thinking we can use it at both ends of this layout to great advantage. We taper from 5mil clearance around the A20 on layer 1 to 15mil clearance on layer 6. Later we taper from 15mil clearance to whatever the closest copper is at the ESD and connector lands. Is the closest copper on layer 1, around the A20, 5mil from the HDMI differential signals? What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the ESD lands? What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the connector lands? (I'm guessing in both cases it is likely the neighbouring lands. Is that correct?) What is the minimum frequency we will be running the HDMI at? (With version 1.4 the highest clock is 340MHz which implies 3.4GHz data rate on each data line. Thus I would expect good edges if we design for harmonics of 34GHz.;>) What is the vertical distance from layer to layer in our board stack? The idea is we can taper the keepouts on our signal vias near the A20 by the layer and avoid such an abrupt change from layer 1 to layer 6. Likewise, we can change the geometry of the keepout as we approach the ESD lands and finally the connector to likewise ease the transition. > richard if you want to zoom in on those pictures you should be able to > click on them in a browser, then expand them: they're actually around > 2,500 pixels wide, i just asked them to be displayed in that HTML page > as only 1024 otherwise they wouldn't fit :) Thank you. I am enjoying the views you posted. > you can see i removed the GND traces in between, and generally kept > everything except VIAs away from them. it's not perfect but thanks to > your help i'm pretty happy with it. if there's nothing major i want > to send this off. There is one place in layer 6 where the space between the CLK pair and the adjacent data pair looks like it exceeds 35mil for a non-trivial distance. I think we could safely reintroduce a ground trace connecting the 2 or 3 vias in that space and thus keep the environment close to 15mil from differential trace to either ground or neighbouring signal. I'm not sure which of the gray dots are vias and which are not. Some of the vias might be able to sneak back into the ground-fill (out of the 15mil differential line clearance). Reference: [*] https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/84098/a-transmission-line-with-continuously-varying-impedance-how-would-reflection-oc https://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedias/klopfenstein-taper -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: eoma68-a20-275-layer6-hdmi-connector-markup.png Type: image/png Size: 299324 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lkcl at lkcl.net Wed Sep 20 08:57:26 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 08:57:26 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Richard Wilbur wrote: > On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > wrote: >> http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ >> >> ok so after the successful DC3 test this is the last final check >> before sending the gerbers off to the factory for pre-production >> prototyping. > > 3*Cheer! :) >> in the end i used a "keepout" area on both layers 1 and >> 3, drawn by hand, to ensure that no GND flooding gets near the HDMI >> traces on layers 1 and 6. > > "keepout" on layers 1 and 6, right? yehyeh. only where needed. not "cut-through to all layers" > Not a bad idea, especially since > it allows the situations at both ends of the traces to avoid design > rule check (DRC) failures because we have copper that has to be closer > than 15mil there. yehyeh >> l'm including layer 3 as an example of how >> the group of HDMI vias that come just out of the A20 punch a large >> hole: GND-flooded layers 2 and 5 as well as 4 (power plane) will also >> look like that. > > Could you put a similar snapshot of layers 2, 4, 5 on hands.com (or > wherever you think appropriate)? they're exactly the same as what you see for layer 3.... except entirely full. ok that's not actually true (i just checked) - do a page-refresh on the URL i just added layer 4 image) > I'm interested to see what > holes/voids and connections the power and ground planes have. there are *no* connections on the GND planes. the power plane (and GND layers) interestingly have done a full surround on the HDMI vias. remember i had to separate them by an unusual distance. > What are the names of the power pins on the A20? What voltages do you > supply it? 1.1, 1.25, 2.5 and 3.3v. > (Are any of them Vdiff+/-, e.g?) no. > I'm interested in > tracking down the power supply pins for the differential HDMI signals > as that is where our return path for common-mode signal has to go. there's no specific power pin for HDMI. the GND pins are grouped in with a whole stack of other GND pins, there's absolutely no way it's practical to get a special GND plane to it: the board is extremely full already. > I've read a little (not nearly as much as I'd like, but I lack time) > about using a taper to match impedance differences while minimizing > the reflection coefficient.[*] I'm thinking we can use it at both > ends of this layout to great advantage. We taper from 5mil clearance > around the A20 on layer 1 to 15mil clearance on layer 6. Later we > taper from 15mil clearance to whatever the closest copper is at the > ESD and connector lands. that's something that it would be helpful to have a rough diagram, even if it's hand-drawn [but see below: i think i understand it] > Is the closest copper on layer 1, around the A20, 5mil from the HDMI > differential signals? yes. everything's 5 mil design rule. > What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the ESD lands? 5 mil > What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the > connector lands? 5 mil > (I'm guessing in both cases it is likely the neighbouring lands. Is > that correct?) > > What is the minimum frequency we will be running the HDMI at? (With > version 1.4 the highest clock is 340MHz which implies 3.4GHz data rate > on each data line. Thus I would expect good edges if we design for > harmonics of 34GHz.;>) :) 1920x1080p60. honestly though if it works at 1280x720p60 i'll be happy. > What is the vertical distance from layer to layer in our board stack? it's a 6 layer 1.2mm PCB. if i have actually set the design parameters right (rather than just telling the factory manually) then the substrates are 1.35mil and the dielectrics 10mil > The idea is we can taper the keepouts on our signal vias near the A20 > by the layer and avoid such an abrupt change from layer 1 to layer 6. i would very much like to have used layer 3 instead of layer 6 for the HDMI signals long straightaway but it is too late now > Likewise, we can change the geometry of the keepout as we approach the > ESD lands and finally the connector to likewise ease the transition. okaaaay i think i understand what you mean. >> richard if you want to zoom in on those pictures you should be able to >> click on them in a browser, then expand them: they're actually around >> 2,500 pixels wide, i just asked them to be displayed in that HTML page >> as only 1024 otherwise they wouldn't fit :) > > Thank you. I am enjoying the views you posted. :) >> you can see i removed the GND traces in between, and generally kept >> everything except VIAs away from them. it's not perfect but thanks to >> your help i'm pretty happy with it. if there's nothing major i want >> to send this off. > > There is one place in layer 6 where the space between the CLK pair and > the adjacent data pair looks like it exceeds 35mil for a non-trivial > distance. I think we could safely reintroduce a ground trace > connecting the 2 or 3 vias in that space and thus keep the environment > close to 15mil from differential trace to either ground or > neighbouring signal. good call. i know exactly where you mean. refresh URL and see new image. http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ ok i did the taper at the DC3 connector end, and i think i got it reasonably ok at the A20 end. haven't run flood-fill. A20 end is a bit of a mess, bit unavoidable. left side is ok. right side... because of the immediate turn and the TX2 line... > I'm not sure which of the gray dots are vias and which are not. Some > of the vias might be able to sneak back into the ground-fill (out of > the 15mil differential line clearance). they're all vias with the exception of the 2 we previously identified as being "centre of component indicator". which.... i don't believe are actually in the images because i specifically selected "one and only one layer" in each. you probably saw those dots because previous images included "all layers". the dots are on... some special layers, don't know which ones. ok. so. i really want to wrap this up, and get the gerbers out. loootta work... :) l. From lkcl at lkcl.net Wed Sep 20 09:01:10 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 09:01:10 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: richard re image, yes yellow vias moved as far as possible, actually deleted the top right one as there's components (ESD) in the way on layer 1. From phil at hands.com Wed Sep 20 09:12:34 2017 From: phil at hands.com (Philip Hands) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 10:12:34 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] riki200 v3 first print: success In-Reply-To: References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> Message-ID: <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes: > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:15 AM, Elena ``of Valhalla'' > wrote: >> On 2017-09-18 at 07:07:04 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >>> the entire arduino software ecosystem was never designed to actually >>> give people proper access to the hardware. anything that's a 180mb >>> download and requires a 200mb runtime environment to compile and >>> upload an executable that's only 16k in size *really* isn't going to >>> end well. >> >> Well, IIRC they do bundle gcc(-avr), which tends to be quite big, but >> doesn't really need to be downloaded again if you already have it from >> your distribution, and the runtime environment is only needed if you >> want to use their IDE instead of your favourite editor + a Makefile (and >> there is (was?) at least one example Makefile somewhere in the arduino >> package). > > yehyeh... it wasn't always like that. > >> Looking at the installed sizes on debian (which has an older version for >> license reasons) I see that the libraries are about 6½MB and the IDE >> itself is just 1½MB. > > phil was instrumental in arranging that. > >> https://packages.debian.org/sid/arduino-core >> https://packages.debian.org/sid/arduino > > yep he recommended to the arduino package maintainer that the actual > core parts not be glommed together with a runtime and IDE and > everything else. Well, I reacted badly to the Java UI (because it was ludicrously broken under tiling window managers -- the menu required you to click the screen elsewhere to get anywhere, and my screen wasn't wide enough to click anything on the sub-menus ;-) ), and noticed that it was actually possible to use a Makefile, and that there were several Makefiles in circulation, so chose what looked to be the most maintained one, and suggested that the author pick up the nice features in the other ones, and then stuck that together as the arduino-core package. Then we worked out how to make the arduino package play nicely with that, in order to remove the duplication, so ironically I'm now an uploader on both, including the Java bits, despite the fact that my only motivation at the start was driven by my aversion to Java. As it happens, I fired up my arduino for the first time since doing the arduino-core uploads last week -- My 5 year old daughter and I are knocking up something to drive some LEDs and a motor in order to make her IKEA kitchen have a working turntable in the microwave, and a blue LED to simulate water coming out of the tap, etc. I was actually using the IDE for that (which now works with Xmonad) just for expediency, but this reminds me that I should use it as an excuse to make sure that arduino-core still works. > http://reprap.org/wiki/RD3D/1.0 Cool :-) BTW you called it 'R3D3' in the penultimate paragraph. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY From lkcl at lkcl.net Wed Sep 20 09:26:41 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 09:26:41 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] riki200 v3 first print: success In-Reply-To: <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Philip Hands wrote: > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes: >> yep he recommended to the arduino package maintainer that the actual >> core parts not be glommed together with a runtime and IDE and >> everything else. > > Well, I reacted badly to the Java UI (because it was ludicrously broken > under tiling window managers -- ohh that's right. you use xmonad. written in 1200 lines of haskell if i recall. fricking awesome and scary at the same time :) > the menu required you to click the > screen elsewhere to get anywhere, and my screen wasn't wide enough to > click anything on the sub-menus ;-) ), and noticed that it was actually > possible to use a Makefile, and that there were several Makefiles in > circulation, so chose what looked to be the most maintained one, and > suggested that the author pick up the nice features in the other ones, > and then stuck that together as the arduino-core package. cool! yyyeah... have you noticed btw that the way they do "finding of libraries" is... to indiscriminately extend make's "VPATH". all and any headers, object files, modules, executables... *all* of those are searched for in *every single one* of the paths. if you happen to have the same filename somewhere anywhere in those paths, you're hosed. it's a total global namespace .... nightmare. nnnngh! whyyyy do they doo thiiiiis! > As it happens, I fired up my arduino for the first time since doing the > arduino-core uploads last week -- My 5 year old daughter and I are > knocking up something to drive some LEDs and a motor in order to make > her IKEA kitchen have a working turntable in the microwave, and a blue > LED to simulate water coming out of the tap, etc. ha, cool! yeah i bought something called a "Sparki" robot for me and lilyana to play with. which was for about... 2 days. the GUI on that however i have to say is extremely cool. it's block-based like a jigsaw, and it auto-generates actual code which you can then look at to see if it does what you expected. >> http://reprap.org/wiki/RD3D/1.0 > > Cool :-) yeah. just added a 4th MOSFET (2 fans, 1 extruder, 1 heater or 2 extruders, 1 fan, 1 heater), an I2C EEPROM, and whoops added in a 4th endstop (X, Y, Z, Z-probe - Z-probe veeery important if you want to do auto-bed-levelling... *sigh*...) but i have to say, it is completely insane that i've been driven to design and have manufactured my own 3D printing PCB. so i had to add that last section in order to explain it - mostly it's for the crowd-funding people who might be going, "wtf???" > BTW you called it 'R3D3' in the penultimate paragraph. ah good call, thx phil. l. l. From phil at hands.com Wed Sep 20 16:29:09 2017 From: phil at hands.com (Philip Hands) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 17:29:09 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] riki200 v3 first print: success In-Reply-To: References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> Message-ID: <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Philip Hands wrote: >> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes: > >>> yep he recommended to the arduino package maintainer that the actual >>> core parts not be glommed together with a runtime and IDE and >>> everything else. >> >> Well, I reacted badly to the Java UI (because it was ludicrously broken >> under tiling window managers -- > > ohh that's right. you use xmonad. written in 1200 lines of haskell > if i recall. fricking awesome and scary at the same time :) > >> the menu required you to click the >> screen elsewhere to get anywhere, and my screen wasn't wide enough to >> click anything on the sub-menus ;-) ), and noticed that it was actually >> possible to use a Makefile, and that there were several Makefiles in >> circulation, so chose what looked to be the most maintained one, and >> suggested that the author pick up the nice features in the other ones, >> and then stuck that together as the arduino-core package. > > cool! > > yyyeah... have you noticed btw that the way they do "finding of > libraries" is... to indiscriminately extend make's "VPATH". all and > any headers, object files, modules, executables... *all* of those are > searched for in *every single one* of the paths. > > if you happen to have the same filename somewhere anywhere in those > paths, you're hosed. > > it's a total global namespace .... nightmare. nnnngh! whyyyy do > they doo thiiiiis! > > >> As it happens, I fired up my arduino for the first time since doing the >> arduino-core uploads last week -- My 5 year old daughter and I are >> knocking up something to drive some LEDs and a motor in order to make >> her IKEA kitchen have a working turntable in the microwave, and a blue >> LED to simulate water coming out of the tap, etc. > > ha, cool! yeah i bought something called a "Sparki" robot for me and > lilyana to play with. which was for about... 2 days. the GUI on that > however i have to say is extremely cool. it's block-based like a > jigsaw, and it auto-generates actual code which you can then look at > to see if it does what you expected. Sounds somewhat like scratch. Also in the same vein is the thing from microsoft: 'makecode', that the Love To Code folk at chibitronics are using in conjunction with the Chibi Chip: https://makecode.chibitronics.com/ makecode also supports other microcontrollers boards, it seems: https://makecode.com/ The chibi chip is one of Bunnie's projects, for making it easy to do clever stuff with circuits made out of sticky copper tape and stick-on LEDs and sensors -- I'm awaiting one in the post, having found a UK based seller last week: https://chibitronics.com/shop/love-to-code-chibi-chip-cable/ Bunnie gave a nice talk about it at CCC last year: https://archive.org/details/media.ccc.de-33c3-7975-making_technology_inclusive_through_papercraft_and_sound (for which I happened to be on Main Camera, in the video team filming it) I particularly like his Sauerkraut analogy about always getting the same outcome if you start with the same ingredients. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY From lkcl at lkcl.net Wed Sep 20 17:15:31 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 17:15:31 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] riki200 v3 first print: success In-Reply-To: <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Philip Hands wrote: >> ha, cool! yeah i bought something called a "Sparki" robot for me and >> lilyana to play with. which was for about... 2 days. the GUI on that >> however i have to say is extremely cool. it's block-based like a >> jigsaw, and it auto-generates actual code which you can then look at >> to see if it does what you expected. > > Sounds somewhat like scratch. ah! yes that was the name of its competing... thing. > The chibi chip is one of Bunnie's projects, for making it easy to do > clever stuff with circuits made out of sticky copper tape and stick-on > LEDs and sensors -- I'm awaiting one in the post, having found a UK > based seller last week: > > https://chibitronics.com/shop/love-to-code-chibi-chip-cable/ nice! wasn't there some sort of... circuit pen that you could use to literally draw your own traces? why am i suggesting that you get one when you know full well that your house - from the downstairs to the upstairs will instantly be filled with stickers and line-drawings on the walls... ha, i know why: because i would love to hear that that actually happened :) > I particularly like his Sauerkraut analogy about always getting the same > outcome if you start with the same ingredients. :) From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Wed Sep 20 20:27:56 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 13:27:56 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 11:26 PM, Richard Wilbur > wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton >> wrote: >>> http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ >>> [...] >>> l'm including layer 3 as an example of how >>> the group of HDMI vias that come just out of the A20 punch a large >>> hole: GND-flooded layers 2 and 5 as well as 4 (power plane) will also >>> look like that. >> >> Could you put a similar snapshot of layers 2, 4, 5 on hands.com (or >> wherever you think appropriate)? > > they're exactly the same as what you see for layer 3.... except > entirely full. ok that's not actually true (i just checked) - do a > page-refresh on the URL i just added layer 4 image) Thanks for the image. >> I'm interested to see what >> holes/voids and connections the power and ground planes have. > > there are *no* connections on the GND planes. the power plane (and > GND layers) interestingly have done a full surround on the HDMI vias. > remember i had to separate them by an unusual distance. What clearance to the fill do you have on the HDMI differential signal vias on layer 3, as opposed to 2, 4, and 5? I see it leaves a void on layer 3 but not on layer 4 (or presumably 2 or 5). >> What are the names of the power pins on the A20? What voltages do you >> supply it? > > 1.1, 1.25, 2.5 and 3.3v. > >> (Are any of them Vdiff+/-, e.g?) > > no. Good to know. Thanks. >> I'm interested in >> tracking down the power supply pins for the differential HDMI signals >> as that is where our return path for common-mode signal has to go. > > there's no specific power pin for HDMI. the GND pins are grouped in > with a whole stack of other GND pins, there's absolutely no way it's > practical to get a special GND plane to it: the board is extremely > full already. I'm not looking to provide any special connection to the power or ground pins. I just want to make sure we don't obstruct the return current path any more than necessary on its way from bottom reference ground plane (layer 5) to top reference ground plane (layer 2) to the power supply pins of the differential drivers: 1. ground plane (layer 2) via to SoC ground pin land (layer 1) 2. ground plane (layer 2) via to power supply decoupling capacitor ground land (layer 1), through decoupling capacitor to land on power supply trace (layer 1), through trace to SoC power supply pin land (layer 1). The goal is to avoid unnecessarily impeding this return current path. I'm trying to avoid making the path >~200mil and putting any major obstruction (like a huge layer void) in the way. >> I've read a little (not nearly as much as I'd like, but I lack time) >> about using a taper to match impedance differences while minimizing >> the reflection coefficient.[*] I'm thinking we can use it at both >> ends of this layout to great advantage. We taper from 5mil clearance >> around the A20 on layer 1 to 15mil clearance on layer 6. Later we >> taper from 15mil clearance to whatever the closest copper is at the >> ESD and connector lands. > > that's something that it would be helpful to have a rough diagram, > even if it's hand-drawn [but see below: i think i understand it] Once I figure out the frequency => characteristic taper length situation I'll try to send a drawing and/or image. In the meantime I've been looking at [*]. >> Is the closest copper on layer 1, around the A20, 5mil from the HDMI >> differential signals? > > yes. everything's 5 mil design rule. > >> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the ESD lands? > > 5 mil > >> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the >> connector lands? > > 5 mil > >> (I'm guessing in both cases it is likely the neighbouring lands. Is >> that correct?) In retrospect I didn't phrase those questions sufficiently clearly. Let me try again. I understand that we are using a 5mil design rule clearance for the whole board. We have attempted to impose an additional requirement on the differential pairs for most of their length that the traces of the pair be 5mil from each other but at least 15mil from anything else (including other pairs). What I'm curious about is what copper violates this additional requirement that can't be moved, where is it, and how close does it actually come? If we move the violating copper out to the 15mil boundary, that's great: problem solved. If we can't (or would really rather not), then let's consider where it is along the signal path, how close it is to the differential signals, and what net (signal) it is. 1. When in the signal path can we open up from 5mil to 15mil? If that is part way down the first signal vias then we can try scaling the keepouts on our way through the board. From what I've seen, it looks like we have to get past sorting the signals out into pairs on layer 6 before we have room to do more than 5mil to foreign copper. Is that your understanding? 2. When do we need to scale back down to 5mil? Is that at the signal vias for the two pairs that jump first to layer 1 for ESD? Or is it at the ESD lands? >> What is the minimum frequency we will be running the HDMI at? (With >> version 1.4 the highest clock is 340MHz which implies 3.4GHz data rate >> on each data line. Thus I would expect good edges if we design for >> harmonics of 34GHz.;>) > > :) 1920x1080p60. honestly though if it works at 1280x720p60 i'll be happy. Again I wasn't clear enough with the question--I misled you by mentioning the highest clock frequency. To calculate the length characteristic for this taper, I need to figure out the lowest frequency (minimum) for which we want it to exhibit this impedance. >> What is the vertical distance from layer to layer in our board stack? > > it's a 6 layer 1.2mm PCB. if i have actually set the design > parameters right (rather than just telling the factory manually) then > the substrates are 1.35mil and the dielectrics 10mil Good information. Thanks. >> The idea is we can taper the keepouts on our signal vias near the A20 >> by the layer and avoid such an abrupt change from layer 1 to layer 6. > > i would very much like to have used layer 3 instead of layer 6 for > the HDMI signals long straightaway but it is too late now It would then be stripline (uses 3 layers) instead of microstrip (2 layers). Stripline uses over and under reference planes. >> Likewise, we can change the geometry of the keepout as we approach the >> ESD lands and finally the connector to likewise ease the transition. > > okaaaay i think i understand what you mean. [...] >> There is one place in layer 6 where the space between the CLK pair and >> the adjacent data pair looks like it exceeds 35mil for a non-trivial >> distance. I think we could safely reintroduce a ground trace >> connecting the 2 or 3 vias in that space and thus keep the environment >> close to 15mil from differential trace to either ground or >> neighbouring signal. > > good call. i know exactly where you mean. refresh URL and see new image. > > http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/ Looks good. Thanks. > ok i did the taper at the DC3 connector end, and i think i got it > reasonably ok at the A20 end. haven't run flood-fill. A20 end is a > bit of a mess, bit unavoidable. left side is ok. right side... > because of the immediate turn and the TX2 line... The fine point of it is there is a particular curve involved in Klopfenstein and it requires a length which determines the frequency band over which you get the low reflection coefficient. That's why I'm trying to figure out what frequencies we care about and then see whether we can accommodate the length needed or we just have to make an approximation that is better than nothing. > so. i really want to wrap this up, and get the gerbers out. > > loootta work... :) Indeed. I am trying to reduce the feedback loop delay on this end. Reference: [*] https://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedias/klopfenstein-taper From calmstorm at posteo.de Wed Sep 20 20:59:23 2017 From: calmstorm at posteo.de (zap) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 15:59:23 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license In-Reply-To: References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> Message-ID: <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> I was wondering if you ever thought of creating a hardware encrypted flash drive? I know nitrokey is doing this, but I was wondering if you could make one that could go even up to 128gb and have the software built into it so that you can set a password from your computer then, everytime you put it in you have to type the password in. Also there would be options of: change password upgrade firmware if wanted up to four different hidden folders to store files and of course the strongest encryption + ten mistakes = reset whatever hidden folder you were trying to get into. meaning the files would all be wiped off. And yes this could be an option rather than a requirement. even 64gb would be good to be honest, I just don't like the idea of having to rely on software that may disappear in the future or die out. Nitrokey's weakness is you need their app to access your files. alas... that's why I suggested this. if you did that, even 64gb I would pay 200$ for something of that sort. as long as it is gpl3 software that is. :) Mull it over if you want. From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Wed Sep 20 21:14:07 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 16:14:07 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license In-Reply-To: <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> Message-ID: Forgive my inevitable naivety with regard to this sort of thing, but can't gparted create encrypted partitions, and why wouldn't that be secure enough...? My understanding is that it still takes a few hundred years to crack AES encryption with a standard PC... and the average criminals who are likely to blackmail you, I can't imagine they're well funded enough to buy a supercomputer sufficient to pop the lid on those things in a reasonably timely fashion. Of course, if you piss off the Russian Mob, that's different, at least potentially... but that's also a comparatively pretty rare circumstance, I'd think. From phil at hands.com Wed Sep 20 21:32:00 2017 From: phil at hands.com (Philip Hands) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 22:32:00 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license In-Reply-To: References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> Message-ID: <87bmm5az7j.fsf@whist.hands.com> Christopher Havel writes: > Forgive my inevitable naivety with regard to this sort of thing, but can't > gparted create encrypted partitions, and why wouldn't that be secure > enough...? My understanding is that it still takes a few hundred years to > crack AES encryption with a standard PC... and the average criminals who > are likely to blackmail you, I can't imagine they're well funded enough to > buy a supercomputer sufficient to pop the lid on those things in a > reasonably timely fashion. > > Of course, if you piss off the Russian Mob, that's different, at least > potentially... but that's also a comparatively pretty rare circumstance, > I'd think. Obligatory XKCD: https://www.xkcd.com/538/ ;-) Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Wed Sep 20 21:36:49 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 16:36:49 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license In-Reply-To: <87bmm5az7j.fsf@whist.hands.com> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> <87bmm5az7j.fsf@whist.hands.com> Message-ID: The hover text is pretty much my position on the subject -- although I've been informed that it's a rather obsolescent conclusion. (...to which my response almost always is, "I'm sorry, sir/madam/etc, but I'm all out of kitchen foil." ;) ) From lkcl at lkcl.net Wed Sep 20 23:22:53 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 23:22:53 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Richard Wilbur wrote: >>> I'm interested to see what >>> holes/voids and connections the power and ground planes have. >> >> there are *no* connections on the GND planes. the power plane (and >> GND layers) interestingly have done a full surround on the HDMI vias. >> remember i had to separate them by an unusual distance. > > What clearance to the fill do you have on the HDMI differential signal > vias on layer 3, as opposed to 2, 4, and 5? I see it leaves a void on > layer 3 but not on layer 4 (or presumably 2 or 5). yehyeh. to be honest: i don't know exactly. or, i worked it out a long while ago, and can't remember precisely what it was. >>> What are the names of the power pins on the A20? What voltages do you >>> supply it? >> >> 1.1, 1.25, 2.5 and 3.3v. >> >>> (Are any of them Vdiff+/-, e.g?) >> >> no. > > Good to know. Thanks. > >>> I'm interested in >>> tracking down the power supply pins for the differential HDMI signals >>> as that is where our return path for common-mode signal has to go. >> >> there's no specific power pin for HDMI. the GND pins are grouped in >> with a whole stack of other GND pins, there's absolutely no way it's >> practical to get a special GND plane to it: the board is extremely >> full already. > > I'm not looking to provide any special connection to the power or > ground pins. I just want to make sure we don't obstruct the return > current path any more than necessary on its way from bottom reference > ground plane (layer 5) to top reference ground plane (layer 2) to the > power supply pins of the differential drivers: > 1. ground plane (layer 2) via to SoC ground pin land (layer 1) > 2. ground plane (layer 2) via to power supply decoupling capacitor > ground land (layer 1), through decoupling capacitor to land on power > supply trace (layer 1), through trace to SoC power supply pin land > (layer 1). > > The goal is to avoid unnecessarily impeding this return current path. > I'm trying to avoid making the path >~200mil and putting any major > obstruction (like a huge layer void) in the way. ok - i think i understand. the distance from the first set of vias to the nearest decoupling capacitors is 180mil. those are all at the centre of the A20 processor. >>> I've read a little (not nearly as much as I'd like, but I lack time) >>> about using a taper to match impedance differences while minimizing >>> the reflection coefficient.[*] I'm thinking we can use it at both >>> ends of this layout to great advantage. We taper from 5mil clearance >>> around the A20 on layer 1 to 15mil clearance on layer 6. Later we >>> taper from 15mil clearance to whatever the closest copper is at the >>> ESD and connector lands. >> >> that's something that it would be helpful to have a rough diagram, >> even if it's hand-drawn [but see below: i think i understand it] > > Once I figure out the frequency => characteristic taper length > situation I'll try to send a drawing and/or image. In the meantime > I've been looking at [*]. ooo wow fascinating. hmmm... a bit too much to implement though. PADS can't really conveniently handle that kind of drawing (ok it can but it's a complete fricking pain. you're limited to 45 degree angles, and the mouse-drag is.. erratic in what it decides to allow you to move ). >>> Is the closest copper on layer 1, around the A20, 5mil from the HDMI >>> differential signals? >> >> yes. everything's 5 mil design rule. >> >>> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the ESD lands? >> >> 5 mil >> >>> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the >>> connector lands? >> >> 5 mil >> >>> (I'm guessing in both cases it is likely the neighbouring lands. Is >>> that correct?) > > In retrospect I didn't phrase those questions sufficiently clearly. > Let me try again. sorry! > I understand that we are using a 5mil design rule clearance for the > whole board. except for the board edge, yes. > We have attempted to impose an additional requirement on > the differential pairs for most of their length that the traces of the > pair be 5mil from each other but at least 15mil from anything else > (including other pairs). What I'm curious about is what copper > violates this additional requirement that can't be moved, where is it, > and how close does it actually come? ah. ok. it's components. so, the EMI components, and the VIAs. and if the hand-drawn keepout isn't quite the right distance. ah. and IPSOUT (main power DC line) which i've just adjusted to be outside the 15mil boundary. and... from the A20's pins: i put a GND trace round the back of the VIAs because the next row up includes all the USB signals. i didn't feel comfortable leaving that without a separation (again, 5mil clearance). > If we move the violating copper out to the 15mil boundary, that's > great: problem solved. If we can't (or would really rather not), > then let's consider where it is along the signal path, how close it is > to the differential signals, and what net (signal) it is. > > 1. When in the signal path can we open up from 5mil to 15mil? > > If that is part way down the first signal vias then we can try scaling > the keepouts on our way through the board. From what I've seen, it > looks like we have to get past sorting the signals out into pairs on > layer 6 before we have room to do more than 5mil to foreign copper. > Is that your understanding? no - that whole bottom area coming out from the A20 pins, on layer 1 is completely clear except for the GND vias which are staggered in between where they (immediately... 60 mil...) transition to layer 6. on layer 6 they're clear of copper as well. > 2. When do we need to scale back down to 5mil? > > Is that at the signal vias for the two pairs that jump first to layer > 1 for ESD? Or is it at the ESD lands? that sounds like a question you're asking yourself :) >>> What is the minimum frequency we will be running the HDMI at? (With >>> version 1.4 the highest clock is 340MHz which implies 3.4GHz data rate >>> on each data line. Thus I would expect good edges if we design for >>> harmonics of 34GHz.;>) >> >> :) 1920x1080p60. honestly though if it works at 1280x720p60 i'll be happy. > > Again I wasn't clear enough with the question--I misled you by > mentioning the highest clock frequency. To calculate the length > characteristic for this taper, I need to figure out the lowest > frequency (minimum) for which we want it to exhibit this impedance. ah: i missed "minimum" rather than "maximum". ok 640x480 at 30hz is the lowest possible resolution that people would use... >>> The idea is we can taper the keepouts on our signal vias near the A20 >>> by the layer and avoid such an abrupt change from layer 1 to layer 6. >> >> i would very much like to have used layer 3 instead of layer 6 for >> the HDMI signals long straightaway but it is too late now > > It would then be stripline (uses 3 layers) instead of microstrip (2 > layers). Stripline uses over and under reference planes. mmfh. ok understood. >> ok i did the taper at the DC3 connector end, and i think i got it >> reasonably ok at the A20 end. haven't run flood-fill. A20 end is a >> bit of a mess, bit unavoidable. left side is ok. right side... >> because of the immediate turn and the TX2 line... > > The fine point of it is there is a particular curve involved in > Klopfenstein and it requires a length which determines the frequency > band over which you get the low reflection coefficient. yes. i saw the paper. that's going to be too complex to do. i'd have to construct it by hand in steps, of 45 degrees. or i can actually hand-edit the points and enter in numbers... but i have to create approximate points first (to get a valid non-intersecting polygon...) honestly it's a bit too much hard work. if i was able to manipulate these things in e.g. python i'd say "let's go for it", immediately. > That's why > I'm trying to figure out what frequencies we care about and then see > whether we can accommodate the length needed or we just have to make > an approximation that is better than nothing. one step is fine - two or more gets _really_ awkward. >> so. i really want to wrap this up, and get the gerbers out. >> >> loootta work... :) > > Indeed. I am trying to reduce the feedback loop delay on this end. thx richard. > Reference: > [*] https://www.microwaves101.com/encyclopedias/klopfenstein-taper absolutely fascinating. From calmstorm at posteo.de Thu Sep 21 02:49:35 2017 From: calmstorm at posteo.de (zap) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 21:49:35 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license In-Reply-To: References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> Message-ID: <00acee01-ff57-dd5d-992b-199954e4cd70@posteo.de> On 09/20/2017 04:14 PM, Christopher Havel wrote: > Forgive my inevitable naivety with regard to this sort of thing, but can't > gparted create encrypted partitions, and why wouldn't that be secure > enough...? My understanding is that it still takes a few hundred years to > crack AES encryption with a standard PC... and the average criminals who > are likely to blackmail you, I can't imagine they're well funded enough to > buy a supercomputer sufficient to pop the lid on those things in a > reasonably timely fashion. You could be right, but It would be a good thing for those who lose things they don't want others to access. also, hardware encryption is far stronger than software encryption. > > Of course, if you piss off the Russian Mob, that's different, at least > potentially... but that's also a comparatively pretty rare circumstance, > I'd think. > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Thu Sep 21 06:39:42 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 23:39:42 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: I had a bunch of rehearsals this afternoon, evening, and night. I'll write a technical response tomorrow morning when I'm not so tired. From lkcl at lkcl.net Thu Sep 21 06:45:48 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 06:45:48 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 6:39 AM, Richard Wilbur wrote: > I had a bunch of rehearsals this afternoon, evening, and night. I'll > write a technical response tomorrow morning when I'm not so tired. good call. l. From phil at hands.com Thu Sep 21 11:16:26 2017 From: phil at hands.com (Philip Hands) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 12:16:26 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license In-Reply-To: <00acee01-ff57-dd5d-992b-199954e4cd70@posteo.de> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> <00acee01-ff57-dd5d-992b-199954e4cd70@posteo.de> Message-ID: <8760ccbblx.fsf@whist.hands.com> zap writes: ... > also, hardware encryption is far stronger than software encryption. Faster (potentially), maybe less open to side-channel attacks (if properly designed), but I see no reason that the same algorithm implemented in silicon would be any "stronger" than if it were in software. Most of the time, what you're calling hardware is liable to just be software running on a different processor, perhaps in a box that has been glued shut such that it's less convenient for bugs to be found, fixed and patched. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY From lkcl at lkcl.net Thu Sep 21 12:10:55 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 12:10:55 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license In-Reply-To: <8760ccbblx.fsf@whist.hands.com> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> <00acee01-ff57-dd5d-992b-199954e4cd70@posteo.de> <8760ccbblx.fsf@whist.hands.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Philip Hands wrote: > Most of the time, what you're calling hardware is liable to just be > software running on a different processor, perhaps in a box that has > been glued shut such that it's less convenient for bugs to be found, > fixed and patched. glued shut, electric fences added which electrocute the user, or run the instruction "HCF" [Halt and Catch Fire. mythical iinstruction which was supposed to be in the 68000 or perhaps the 8086, but was actually down to running a loop of instructions that flipped IO and internal logic so hard that the processor overheated). :) the latest freescale has an on-board Cortex M0 i think it is, which is ultra-low-power enough to run permanently on battery, so you can do tamper-detection. you'll like this: when i was working for NC3A i was asked to help with a little ethernet network box that transferred data from a low-security environment to a high-security one. the rule was simple: absolutely no physical connection, and absolutely no data must travel - ever from the high security level to the low security one. that *includes* ICMP packet responses which are normally used to acknowledge and set up even a *UDP* connection. so somebody wrote a *modified* TCP stack which took out the need for ICMP traffic... but it went way waaay further than that. the metal box was implemented as an ultra-low power receiver / transmitter pair, with a metal firebreak and a tiny hole between for the radio signal to get through on a Coax cable (so that there was no data leakage by emitted radio waves). power was SEPARATELY provided on both sides of the box. then.... when it was confirmed 100% working, the ENTIRE BOX WAS FLOODED WITH RESIN. bit of a heat problem, that.... baiscally what i'm saying, with this story is: the tricky part will not be the software at all: the tricky bit will be getting a processor into a tamper-resistant, tamper-detecting box. l. From marqueteur at fineartmarquetry.com Thu Sep 21 16:06:30 2017 From: marqueteur at fineartmarquetry.com (Tor, the Marqueteur) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 05:06:30 -1000 Subject: [Arm-netbook] hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license In-Reply-To: References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> <00acee01-ff57-dd5d-992b-199954e4cd70@posteo.de> <8760ccbblx.fsf@whist.hands.com> Message-ID: On 09/21/2017 01:10 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: ...snip... > baiscally what i'm saying, with this story is: the tricky part will > not be the software at all: the tricky bit will be getting a processor > into a tamper-resistant, tamper-detecting box. > I can't vouch for them, but ISTR a project on Crowd Supply to produce a USB password storage device. Been too long to recall how well it meets the criteria for real security. OT: I've recently gotten back to reading the list after all the list emails got sent to spam for a while. Tor -- Tor Chantara http://www.fineartmarquetry.com/ 808-828-1107 GPG Key: 2BE1 426E 34EA D253 D583 9DE4 B866 0375 134B 48FB *Be wary of unsigned emails* From maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me Thu Sep 21 16:48:52 2017 From: maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me (Alexander Ross) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 16:48:52 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Signet (hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license) In-Reply-To: <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> Message-ID: <42349602-303b-fd19-ee66-2ea7999f4fb4@aross.me> talking of crypto usb sticks, theres a new one crowdfunding: https://www.crowdsupply.com/nth-dimension/signet the dev has been helpful/responsive to my questions too. the bootloader thing is non-free but that is only used in the factory and for updates it uses its own upgrade software in the firmware. "There is no proprietary software whatsoever. The only technical exception would be the factory bootloader used to initially flash the device. After initial firmware loading the firmware can be updated live through firmware update in the GPLv3 source base. " "The factory bootloader is still there but can only be activated by jumpering two to the microcontorller's pins together and rebooting. The signet firmware features an "updgrade firmware" command which is completely free software and does not use the factory bootloader. The best way to describe it is that I have superseded propritatry bootloader but I have not physically destroyed it. I hope that clarifies it. " just a encrypted database. no pgp cypto done on the device. but maybe possible as stretch goal or something. idea for just passwords and storing other keys and bits. RNG is a mix of: "When random data is needed it is gathered from three different sources in equal amounts, the host, the hardware RNG on the micro-controller, and clock noise measured between the RTC and processor clocks which have separate oscillators. Once the code has all the three noise values they are XOR'ed together. I think the hardware RNG does have trust issues but by using these sources together even if it has some engineered weaknesses I believe will get a higher quality random data by including it." had kinda forgotten about nitrokey, arr wondering what to do.... already made a pledge for signet... nitrokey is about same~ price but looks like it does more.... read some technical people reviews of nitrokey err left me feeling unsure about it... :/ From lkcl at lkcl.net Thu Sep 21 17:45:46 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 17:45:46 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Signet (hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license) In-Reply-To: <42349602-303b-fd19-ee66-2ea7999f4fb4@aross.me> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> <42349602-303b-fd19-ee66-2ea7999f4fb4@aross.me> Message-ID: https://www.crowdsupply.com/third-pin/pastilda same sort of thing. basically they use an STM32F4 (both of them). btw when you next speak to them, mention libopencm3 and the fact that i use the STM32F072... there is *absolutely no need* for proprietary firmware-flashing tools with the STM32F range *at all*. l. From maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me Thu Sep 21 17:50:46 2017 From: maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me (Alexander Ross) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 17:50:46 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Signet (hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license) In-Reply-To: <42349602-303b-fd19-ee66-2ea7999f4fb4@aross.me> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> <42349602-303b-fd19-ee66-2ea7999f4fb4@aross.me> Message-ID: <3b97d84f-8e6f-03c9-37dd-509fca2ef7d6@aross.me> heres there article about smartcards and nitrokey https://www.devever.net/~hl/smartcards thoughts? :/ From lkcl at lkcl.net Thu Sep 21 18:10:38 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 18:10:38 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Signet (hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license) In-Reply-To: <3b97d84f-8e6f-03c9-37dd-509fca2ef7d6@aross.me> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> <42349602-303b-fd19-ee66-2ea7999f4fb4@aross.me> <3b97d84f-8e6f-03c9-37dd-509fca2ef7d6@aross.me> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Alexander Ross wrote: > heres there article about smartcards and nitrokey > https://www.devever.net/~hl/smartcards > > thoughts? :/ pretty interesting. says it all... From maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me Thu Sep 21 18:19:19 2017 From: maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me (Alexander Ross) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 18:19:19 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Anelok (hardware encrypted flash drive idea with gpl3 license) In-Reply-To: <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> References: <20170918091502.tbgs5y2hg5keedwk@manillaroad.local.home.trueelena.org> <87k20tbxfx.fsf@whist.hands.com> <87fubhbd8a.fsf@whist.hands.com> <3e01b8a3-79d6-4f2c-f04f-526aab76a160@posteo.de> Message-ID: this guy is working on Anelok, a little passwords/keys/etc storage that has a little screen and few buttons: http://downloads.qi-hardware.com/people/werner/anelok/tmp/mk3-running/on-accounts.jpg mailing list for history of his work on it: Photos: http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/pipermail/discussion/2017-February/011048.html latest post: http://lists.en.qi-hardware.com/pipermail/discussion/2017-May/011077.html code: https://gitlab.com/anelok/anelok/ From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Fri Sep 22 08:51:19 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 01:51:19 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Richard Wilbur > wrote: > >>>> I'm interested to see what >>>> holes/voids and connections the power and ground planes have. >>> >>> there are *no* connections on the GND planes. the power plane (and >>> GND layers) interestingly have done a full surround on the HDMI vias. >>> remember i had to separate them by an unusual distance. >> >> What clearance to the fill do you have on the HDMI differential signal >> vias on layer 3, as opposed to 2, 4, and 5? I see it leaves a void on >> layer 3 but not on layer 4 (or presumably 2 or 5). > > yehyeh. to be honest: i don't know exactly. or, i worked it out a > long while ago, and can't remember precisely what it was. Isn't it in the keepout of the HDMI differential signal vias on layer 3? >> I'm not looking to provide any special connection to the power or >> ground pins. I just want to make sure we don't obstruct the return >> current path any more than necessary on its way from bottom reference >> ground plane (layer 5) to top reference ground plane (layer 2) to the >> power supply pins of the differential drivers: >> 1. ground plane (layer 2) via to SoC ground pin land (layer 1) >> 2. ground plane (layer 2) via to power supply decoupling capacitor >> ground land (layer 1), through decoupling capacitor to land on power >> supply trace (layer 1), through trace to SoC power supply pin land >> (layer 1). >> >> The goal is to avoid unnecessarily impeding this return current path. >> I'm trying to avoid making the path >~200mil and putting any major >> obstruction (like a huge layer void) in the way. > > ok - i think i understand. the distance from the first set of vias > to the nearest decoupling capacitors is 180mil. those are all at the > centre of the A20 processor. Sounds decent. >>>> I've read a little (not nearly as much as I'd like, but I lack time) >>>> about using a taper to match impedance differences while minimizing >>>> the reflection coefficient.[*] I'm thinking we can use it at both >>>> ends of this layout to great advantage. We taper from 5mil clearance >>>> around the A20 on layer 1 to 15mil clearance on layer 6. Later we >>>> taper from 15mil clearance to whatever the closest copper is at the >>>> ESD and connector lands. >>> >>> that's something that it would be helpful to have a rough diagram, >>> even if it's hand-drawn [but see below: i think i understand it] >> >> Once I figure out the frequency => characteristic taper length >> situation I'll try to send a drawing and/or image. In the meantime >> I've been looking at [*]. > > ooo wow fascinating. > > hmmm... a bit too much to implement though. PADS can't really > conveniently handle that kind of drawing (ok it can but it's a > complete fricking pain. you're limited to 45 degree angles, and the > mouse-drag is.. erratic in what it decides to allow you to move ). I know, the curve is beautiful, but I think we can still improve the situation with straight lines. They had more space and thus changed the trace width to effect the change in impedance. We on the other hand have an unwanted change in impedance due to unavoidable constriction of clearance. Since the obstacles are immovable and cause an abrupt change in impedance, we have the option of tapering the clearance in order to soften the abruptness--and thus the reflection coefficient. In other words, what you have done coincides with my idea of the best course of action. >>>> Is the closest copper on layer 1, around the A20, 5mil from the HDMI >>>> differential signals? >>> >>> yes. everything's 5 mil design rule. I agree that 5mil is the design rule. The question is, "How close did we actually get?" What I'm referring to as foreign copper is any trace, via, component land/pad, or fill that is not part of the differential pair under consideration. In other words, did we make it from A20 land to via without getting closer than 10mil? 7mil? We can adjust the proximity of ground fill with a manual keepout if we need more space so I'm not too worried about that. I'm more curious about distance to other traces, lands/pads, or vias. >>>> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the ESD lands? >>> >>> 5 mil Is that from the distance between ESD lands/pads or proximity of other traces or vias? >>>> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the >>>> connector lands? >>> >>> 5 mil Again, is that from the distance between connector lands/pads or proximity of other traces or vias? [...] > ah. ok. it's components. so, the EMI components, and the VIAs. > and if the hand-drawn keepout isn't quite the right distance. ah. > and IPSOUT (main power DC line) which i've just adjusted to be outside > the 15mil boundary. > > and... from the A20's pins: i put a GND trace round the back of the > VIAs because the next row up includes all the USB signals. i didn't > feel comfortable leaving that without a separation (again, 5mil > clearance). Both sound fine. We just want to establish at what point we can consider 15mil clearance a reasonable expectation and see whether we can make the transition smoother (less abrupt). And then, by the same token, at what point we are constrained to a smaller clearance so that we can again smooth the transition. >>>> What is the minimum frequency we will be running the HDMI at? (With >>>> version 1.4 the highest clock is 340MHz which implies 3.4GHz data rate >>>> on each data line. Thus I would expect good edges if we design for >>>> harmonics of 34GHz.;>) >>> >>> :) 1920x1080p60. honestly though if it works at 1280x720p60 i'll be happy. >> >> Again I wasn't clear enough with the question--I misled you by >> mentioning the highest clock frequency. To calculate the length >> characteristic for this taper, I need to figure out the lowest >> frequency (minimum) for which we want it to exhibit this impedance. > > ah: i missed "minimum" rather than "maximum". ok 640x480 at 30hz is the > lowest possible resolution that people would use... Is 1920x1080p60 is the maximum supported resolution under HDMI v1.4? If so then 340MHz clock likely coincides with 1920x1080p60. =>340MHz * 640/1920 * 480/1080 * 30/60 = 340MHz * 1/3 * 4/9 * 1/2 ~= 25MHz Well, that implies data rate of 250MHz and harmonics of 2.5GHz, and wavelength = velocity of propagation / frequency = 150um/ps / 2.5GHz = 6mm ~= 236mil So if we can determine the closest encroachments then we can try to adjust the keepouts to ease between clearances. From lkcl at lkcl.net Fri Sep 22 11:17:29 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 11:17:29 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Richard Wilbur wrote: > On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Richard Wilbur >> wrote: >> >>>>> I'm interested to see what >>>>> holes/voids and connections the power and ground planes have. >>>> >>>> there are *no* connections on the GND planes. the power plane (and >>>> GND layers) interestingly have done a full surround on the HDMI vias. >>>> remember i had to separate them by an unusual distance. >>> >>> What clearance to the fill do you have on the HDMI differential signal >>> vias on layer 3, as opposed to 2, 4, and 5? I see it leaves a void on >>> layer 3 but not on layer 4 (or presumably 2 or 5). >> >> yehyeh. to be honest: i don't know exactly. or, i worked it out a >> long while ago, and can't remember precisely what it was. > > Isn't it in the keepout of the HDMI differential signal vias on layer 3? i've not put in an HDMI keepout on layer 3 because there's no actual HDMI signals. there's some setting... somewhere... which makes a difference on GND copper pour / plane on layers 1, 3 and 6, where GND plane on 2 and 5 use a different clearance. i found it... *once*... about 2 years ago. if it really really matters i can look around but it'll be a pain to find. >>> The goal is to avoid unnecessarily impeding this return current path. >>> I'm trying to avoid making the path >~200mil and putting any major >>> obstruction (like a huge layer void) in the way. >> >> ok - i think i understand. the distance from the first set of vias >> to the nearest decoupling capacitors is 180mil. those are all at the >> centre of the A20 processor. > > Sounds decent. cool. >>>>> I've read a little (not nearly as much as I'd like, but I lack time) >>>>> about using a taper to match impedance differences while minimizing >>>>> the reflection coefficient.[*] I'm thinking we can use it at both >>>>> ends of this layout to great advantage. We taper from 5mil clearance >>>>> around the A20 on layer 1 to 15mil clearance on layer 6. Later we >>>>> taper from 15mil clearance to whatever the closest copper is at the >>>>> ESD and connector lands. >>>> >>>> that's something that it would be helpful to have a rough diagram, >>>> even if it's hand-drawn [but see below: i think i understand it] >>> >>> Once I figure out the frequency => characteristic taper length >>> situation I'll try to send a drawing and/or image. In the meantime >>> I've been looking at [*]. >> >> ooo wow fascinating. >> >> hmmm... a bit too much to implement though. PADS can't really >> conveniently handle that kind of drawing (ok it can but it's a >> complete fricking pain. you're limited to 45 degree angles, and the >> mouse-drag is.. erratic in what it decides to allow you to move ). > > I know, the curve is beautiful, but I think we can still improve the > situation with straight lines. They had more space and thus changed > the trace width to effect the change in impedance. We on the other > hand have an unwanted change in impedance due to unavoidable > constriction of clearance. Since the obstacles are immovable and > cause an abrupt change in impedance, we have the option of tapering > the clearance in order to soften the abruptness--and thus the > reflection coefficient. > > In other words, what you have done coincides with my idea of the best > course of action. oh! :) >>>>> Is the closest copper on layer 1, around the A20, 5mil from the HDMI >>>>> differential signals? >>>> >>>> yes. everything's 5 mil design rule. > > I agree that 5mil is the design rule. The question is, "How close did > we actually get?" What I'm referring to as foreign copper is any > trace, via, component land/pad, or fill that is not part of the > differential pair under consideration. In other words, did we make it > from A20 land to via without getting closer than 10mil? 7mil? We can > adjust the proximity of ground fill with a manual keepout if we need > more space so I'm not too worried about that. I'm more curious about > distance to other traces, lands/pads, or vias. ok - let me re-run the flood fill and do a quick review, starting from the A20. so. layer 1. surrounded, all 5mil. tracks are only 60mil or so to the VIAs. didn't do a keepout. all 5mil. layer 3 (the VIAs) - some sort of curve on the flood-fill, it's 5mil but there's a void in the middle. layer 6, starts @ 5mil, expands out to 15mil (mostly). exceptions: distance to TX2 "long wiggle" is 7mil, distance from bottom VIAs along board edge (to TXC), 11.2mil, distance to track *between* the VIAs 15mil. distance to GND vias ABOVE the hdmi tracks (TX2), 19mil. in theory then i could move the entire set of horizontal tracks up by... 4 mil... i reeaallly don't want to though as it means redoing the whole f*****g lot of wiggles.... argh :) at the other end all bets are off for distances after we get to the ESD pads. >>>>> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the ESD lands? >>>> >>>> 5 mil > > Is that from the distance between ESD lands/pads or proximity of other > traces or vias? there are no other traces other than GND. there are no other VIAs other than GND. the pad-to-pad clearance is about... 7mil. actually because of the keepout the flood-fill stays away... sooOo... some of the VIAs are 5mil, the rest are maybe... 7mil. >>>>> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the >>>>> connector lands? >>>> >>>> 5 mil > > Again, is that from the distance between connector lands/pads or > proximity of other traces or vias? ok it's the taper i put into the keepout. there are no other traces, there is only GND vias. the taper in the keepout is the only point where the GND flood-fill gets to within 5mil. i'll redo some pictures. > [...] >> ah. ok. it's components. so, the EMI components, and the VIAs. >> and if the hand-drawn keepout isn't quite the right distance. ah. >> and IPSOUT (main power DC line) which i've just adjusted to be outside >> the 15mil boundary. >> >> and... from the A20's pins: i put a GND trace round the back of the >> VIAs because the next row up includes all the USB signals. i didn't >> feel comfortable leaving that without a separation (again, 5mil >> clearance). > > Both sound fine. We just want to establish at what point we can > consider 15mil clearance a reasonable expectation and see whether we > can make the transition smoother (less abrupt). And then, by the same > token, at what point we are constrained to a smaller clearance so that > we can again smooth the transition. yehhh there are so many GND vias at the ESD end i'd question its effectiveness... the VIAs can't be moved, it's the only way they can get in on the DC3 connector. >>>>> What is the minimum frequency we will be running the HDMI at? (With >>>>> version 1.4 the highest clock is 340MHz which implies 3.4GHz data rate >>>>> on each data line. Thus I would expect good edges if we design for >>>>> harmonics of 34GHz.;>) >>>> >>>> :) 1920x1080p60. honestly though if it works at 1280x720p60 i'll be happy. >>> >>> Again I wasn't clear enough with the question--I misled you by >>> mentioning the highest clock frequency. To calculate the length >>> characteristic for this taper, I need to figure out the lowest >>> frequency (minimum) for which we want it to exhibit this impedance. >> >> ah: i missed "minimum" rather than "maximum". ok 640x480 at 30hz is the >> lowest possible resolution that people would use... > > Is 1920x1080p60 is the maximum supported resolution under HDMI v1.4? yehyeh. > If so then 340MHz clock likely coincides with 1920x1080p60. > =>340MHz * 640/1920 * 480/1080 * 30/60 = > 340MHz * 1/3 * 4/9 * 1/2 ~= 25MHz yehyeh. > Well, that implies data rate of 250MHz and harmonics of 2.5GHz, and > wavelength = velocity of propagation / frequency > = 150um/ps / 2.5GHz = 6mm ~= 236mil > > So if we can determine the closest encroachments then we can try to > adjust the keepouts to ease between clearances. cool. From doark at mail.com Fri Sep 22 05:19:06 2017 From: doark at mail.com (doark at mail.com) Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 00:19:06 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] DIY laptop part 3: Where can I get an EDP connector? Message-ID: <20170801145910.6f6e5520@ulgy_thing> As for my question, well, I've read a lot, bought, and lost, I now own a cable labelled as 30-pin EDP to 30-pin EDP but actually 30-pin EDP to 30-pin something else right angle connector. Anyone know a good store? Thanks, David From doark at mail.com Fri Sep 22 05:10:48 2017 From: doark at mail.com (David Niklas) Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 00:10:48 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Flash Debian and U-Boot to a PocketChip? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20170922001041.4fa56385@ulgy_thing> On Tue, 22 Aug 2017 03:16:46 -0400 Gpast_panama via arm-netbook wrote: > Perhaps this is better suited to a reply than a new topic, but I'm not > aware of how to do that with messages in digest mode so... > Simple! (BTW: I'm using claws-mail) 1. Hi-lite the entire email you want to reply to. 2. Hit reply, the list address should automagicaly be selected and the text quoted in the body. 3. Edit the text in the body window replacing the time stamp and deleting the headers except for the Subject line which you must copy and paste into the Subject header field. Your welcome, David From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Sat Sep 23 08:26:06 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 01:26:06 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> On Sep 22, 2017, at 04:17, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Richard Wilbur > wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton >> wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:27 PM, Richard Wilbur >>> wrote: […] > i've not put in an HDMI keepout on layer 3 because there's no actual > HDMI signals. there's some setting... somewhere... which makes a > difference on GND copper pour / plane on layers 1, 3 and 6, where GND > plane on 2 and 5 use a different clearance. i found it... *once*... > about 2 years ago. > > if it really really matters i can look around but it'll be a pain to find. After spending a couple minutes studying layers 3 and 4, here's what I see: 1. It looks like there may be a difference in the signal via antipads on layers 3 and 4 and that would be a way for us to give just that handful of vias special properties--if need be--although in this case it interestingly looks like the antipads are larger on layer 4 than layer 3. (optical illusion?) 2. The (minimum?) polygon size or line width of the fill looks larger on layer 3 than layer 4. I think the second point, or something along those lines, likely explains the void on layer 3 and lack of void on layer 4. It looks like if we were to find and adjust that fill parameter on layer 3, some of your explicit guard traces might become redundant. (I can see why you added them because the ground fill wasn't working as expected.) It would be nice to change layer 3 to make the signal path more uniform on the way through the vias but it's not the end of the world if we can't, as long as layers 2 and 5 resemble layer 4 in the vicinity of the HDMI differential signal vias adjacent to the A20. >> I know, the curve is beautiful, but I think we can still improve the >> situation with straight lines. They had more space and thus changed >> the trace width to effect the change in impedance. We on the other >> hand have an unwanted change in impedance due to unavoidable >> constriction of clearance. Since the obstacles are immovable and >> cause an abrupt change in impedance, we have the option of tapering >> the clearance in order to soften the abruptness--and thus the >> reflection coefficient. >> >> In other words, what you have done coincides with my idea of the best >> course of action. > > oh! :) The remaining questions are where do we impose 5mil clearance (by bringing in the fill), where do we start tapering, and what does the taper look like? Likewise, but in reverse order, at the other end. >>>>>> Is the closest copper on layer 1, around the A20, 5mil from the HDMI >>>>>> differential signals? >>>>> >>>>> yes. everything's 5 mil design rule. >> >> I agree that 5mil is the design rule. The question is, "How close did >> we actually get?" What I'm referring to as foreign copper is any >> trace, via, component land/pad, or fill that is not part of the >> differential pair under consideration. In other words, did we make it >> from A20 land to via without getting closer than 10mil? 7mil? We can >> adjust the proximity of ground fill with a manual keepout if we need >> more space so I'm not too worried about that. I'm more curious about >> distance to other traces, lands/pads, or vias. > > ok - let me re-run the flood fill and do a quick review, starting from the A20. > > so. layer 1. surrounded, all 5mil. tracks are only 60mil or so to > the VIAs. didn't do a keepout. all 5mil. > > layer 3 (the VIAs) - some sort of curve on the flood-fill, it's 5mil > but there's a void in the middle. Are layers 2, 4, and 5 also 5mil away from the differential signal at the vias? > layer 6, starts @ 5mil, expands out to 15mil (mostly). exceptions: > distance to TX2 "long wiggle" is 7mil, distance from bottom VIAs > along board edge (to TXC), 11.2mil, distance to track *between* the > VIAs 15mil. distance to GND vias ABOVE the hdmi tracks (TX2), 19mil. > > in theory then i could move the entire set of horizontal tracks up > by... 4 mil... i reeaallly don't want to though as it means redoing > the whole f*****g lot of wiggles.... argh :) Can't select and move? That does stink! Evening out the clearance does help lower the difference in impedance seen by the traces in the TXC pair (one had 15mil to foreign signal, the other 11.2mil) and the TX2 pair (one had 15mil to foreign signal, the other 19mil). Impedance imbalance between the traces of a differential pair moves energy from differential mode to single-ended mode (between trace and reference) which will try harder to radiate (EMI). Since it is such a long section it would be beneficial to move the traces. If we were to redraw the wiggles I would suggest we take care to separate parallel sections of the same trace by at least 4 times the trace width (4*5mil=20mil)--especially for TX2.[Toradex, p. 17] This is because at these frequencies, if the same trace is too close and parallel, the signal will hop straight across. So if we bring in the keepout at 5mil on layer 6 and taper it slowly to 7mil by the point we get to the TX2 wiggle which exhibits 7mil clearance. To make this work we have to start the pairs off around 5mil inter-pair spacing and then spread them as we taper the keepout. I realize this is more complicated than what I first described. > at the other end all bets are off for distances after we get to the ESD pads. > >>>>>> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the ESD lands? >>>>> >>>>> 5 mil >> >> Is that from the distance between ESD lands/pads or proximity of other >> traces or vias? > > there are no other traces other than GND. there are no other VIAs > other than GND. the pad-to-pad clearance is about... 7mil. actually > because of the keepout the flood-fill stays away... sooOo... some of > the VIAs are 5mil, the rest are maybe... 7mil. > > >>>>>> What is the distance to the closest copper to the HDMI signals at the >>>>>> connector lands? >>>>> >>>>> 5 mil >> >> Again, is that from the distance between connector lands/pads or >> proximity of other traces or vias? > > ok it's the taper i put into the keepout. there are no other traces, > there is only GND vias. the taper in the keepout is the only point > where the GND flood-fill gets to within 5mil. > > i'll redo some pictures. > >> [...] >>> ah. ok. it's components. so, the EMI components, and the VIAs. >>> and if the hand-drawn keepout isn't quite the right distance. ah. >>> and IPSOUT (main power DC line) which i've just adjusted to be outside >>> the 15mil boundary. >>> >>> and... from the A20's pins: i put a GND trace round the back of the >>> VIAs because the next row up includes all the USB signals. i didn't >>> feel comfortable leaving that without a separation (again, 5mil >>> clearance). >> >> Both sound fine. We just want to establish at what point we can >> consider 15mil clearance a reasonable expectation and see whether we >> can make the transition smoother (less abrupt). And then, by the same >> token, at what point we are constrained to a smaller clearance so that >> we can again smooth the transition. > > yehhh there are so many GND vias at the ESD end i'd question its > effectiveness... You'd question the effectiveness of what? The ESD component? The taper? > the VIAs can't be moved, it's the only way they can > get in on the DC3 connector. > >>>>>> What is the minimum frequency we will be running the HDMI at? (With >>>>>> version 1.4 the highest clock is 340MHz which implies 3.4GHz data rate >>>>>> on each data line. Thus I would expect good edges if we design for >>>>>> harmonics of 34GHz.;>) >>>>> >>>>> :) 1920x1080p60. honestly though if it works at 1280x720p60 i'll be happy. >>>> >>>> Again I wasn't clear enough with the question--I misled you by >>>> mentioning the highest clock frequency. To calculate the length >>>> characteristic for this taper, I need to figure out the lowest >>>> frequency (minimum) for which we want it to exhibit this impedance. >>> >>> ah: i missed "minimum" rather than "maximum". ok 640x480 at 30hz is the >>> lowest possible resolution that people would use... >> >> Is 1920x1080p60 is the maximum supported resolution under HDMI v1.4? > > yehyeh. > >> If so then 340MHz clock likely coincides with 1920x1080p60. >> =>340MHz * 640/1920 * 480/1080 * 30/60 = >> 340MHz * 1/3 * 4/9 * 1/2 ~= 25MHz > > yehyeh. > >> Well, that implies data rate of 250MHz and harmonics of 2.5GHz, and >> wavelength = velocity of propagation / frequency >> = 150um/ps / 2.5GHz = 6mm ~= 236mil >> >> So if we can determine the closest encroachments then we can try to >> adjust the keepouts to ease between clearances. > > cool. From lkcl at lkcl.net Sat Sep 23 10:47:11 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 10:47:11 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 8:26 AM, Richard Wilbur wrote: > After spending a couple minutes studying layers 3 and 4, here's what I see: > 1. It looks like there may be a difference in the signal via antipads on layers 3 and 4 and that would be a way for us to give just that handful of vias special properties--if need be--although in this case it interestingly looks like the antipads are larger on layer 4 than layer 3. (optical illusion?) > 2. The (minimum?) polygon size or line width of the fill looks larger on layer 3 than layer 4. layer 4 HDMI vias are actually covered by VCC 3v3 flood-filled plane. it's a 5mil clearance to that. i decided i didn't like that, so i made a cut-back in the 3V3 plane so that GND covers it instead. it's *still* 5mil even on that flood fill. so it's just something weird about the flood-fill on layer 3, possibly due to it being a copper pour not a "plane area". don't know. if absolutely necessary i can put in some tracks that split the pairs. > I think the second point, or something along those lines, likely explains the void on layer 3 and lack of void on layer 4. It looks like if we were to find and adjust that fill parameter on layer 3, some of your explicit guard traces might become redundant. (I can see why you added them because the ground fill wasn't working as expected.) > > It would be nice to change layer 3 to make the signal path more uniform on the way through the vias but it's not the end of the world if we can't, as long as layers 2 and 5 resemble layer 4 in the vicinity of the HDMI differential signal vias adjacent to the A20. i have to use it as a signal layer, so there's tracks running round the back of some of the diff-pair VIAs. > The remaining questions are where do we impose 5mil clearance (by bringing in the fill), where do we start tapering, and what does the taper look like? Likewise, but in reverse order, at the other end. yehyeh >>>>>>> Is the closest copper on layer 1, around the A20, 5mil from the HDMI >>>>>>> differential signals? >>>>>> >>>>>> yes. everything's 5 mil design rule. >>> >>> I agree that 5mil is the design rule. The question is, "How close did >>> we actually get?" What I'm referring to as foreign copper is any >>> trace, via, component land/pad, or fill that is not part of the >>> differential pair under consideration. In other words, did we make it >>> from A20 land to via without getting closer than 10mil? 7mil? We can >>> adjust the proximity of ground fill with a manual keepout if we need >>> more space so I'm not too worried about that. I'm more curious about >>> distance to other traces, lands/pads, or vias. >> >> ok - let me re-run the flood fill and do a quick review, starting from the A20. >> >> so. layer 1. surrounded, all 5mil. tracks are only 60mil or so to >> the VIAs. didn't do a keepout. all 5mil. >> >> layer 3 (the VIAs) - some sort of curve on the flood-fill, it's 5mil >> but there's a void in the middle. > > Are layers 2, 4, and 5 also 5mil away from the differential signal at the vias? yes. layer 3 is the only exception. >> layer 6, starts @ 5mil, expands out to 15mil (mostly). exceptions: >> distance to TX2 "long wiggle" is 7mil, distance from bottom VIAs >> along board edge (to TXC), 11.2mil, distance to track *between* the >> VIAs 15mil. distance to GND vias ABOVE the hdmi tracks (TX2), 19mil. >> >> in theory then i could move the entire set of horizontal tracks up >> by... 4 mil... i reeaallly don't want to though as it means redoing >> the whole f*****g lot of wiggles.... argh :) > > Can't select and move? you can... but there are special rules which ensure that 45 degree angles on two adjacent segments are "respected". it gets extremely weird and extremely frustrating. > Since it is such a long section it would be beneficial to move the traces. argh. i kinda reached that conclusion :) what i can do to some degree is manually enter values (adding 4mil up and 4 mil left/right) so that there's less to redo by hand. > So if we bring in the keepout at 5mil on layer 6 and taper it slowly to 7mil by the point we get to the TX2 wiggle which exhibits 7mil clearance. To make this work we have to start the pairs off around 5mil inter-pair spacing and then spread them as we taper the keepout. I realize this is more complicated than what I first described. it's too much. i can just about manage adding 4mil manually to every single one of those long straights, moving them up from the 11mil clearance to the bottom board-line VIAs to 15mil, thus taking 4mil off that 19mil clearance and resulting in 15mil there as well. we don't have *room* for 7 mil inter-pair spacing. if i've misunderstood, do let me know. >> yehhh there are so many GND vias at the ESD end i'd question its >> effectiveness... > > You'd question the effectiveness of what? The ESD component? The taper? putting in a taper at the end is significantly disrupted by the presence of non-removable VIAs. you can *add* a taper... but then the VIAs (which cannot be moved) are *already* within about 5mil or 7mil of the tracks. what *would* work is bringing the taper in *BEFORE* the ESD components. it also coincides with the double 45-degree bending of the group of tracks, so is still a bit... dodgy. see this picture for reference: http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/eoma68-a20-275-layer6-hdmi.jpg basically there's no point in tapering *after* the ESD components because the GND vias are already closer than the taper would bring GND in. l. From maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me Sat Sep 23 17:19:13 2017 From: maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me (Alexander Ross) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 17:19:13 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? Message-ID: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> https://puri.sm/shop/librem-5/ thoughts? feeling distrust with past intel foo far... they call them shelf an manufacturer yet it also sounds like they hire a company to actually make/design the phone (?). hence its not open hardware as they don’t own the designs. imx6 SOC so i faster then neo900 i think? (got the learn about the web of TI SOCs and familys) neo900/gta0* i think do a bit more, like modem antenna hard disconnect as well has mosfet disconnect of power to modem. wifi/bt looks like it will have non-free firmware. Is it really not possible for them to use atk free firmware wifi IC? i guess/hope at least it will have free gps firmware :) unlike every other mainstream smartphone. like that doing the VOIP for calls and the seamless connection to a mobile phone number. something ive been thinking about for my self :) but there service sounds easier :). From singpolyma at singpolyma.net Sat Sep 23 17:38:11 2017 From: singpolyma at singpolyma.net (Stephen Paul Weber) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 11:38:11 -0500 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> Message-ID: <20170923163811.6119510.88847.70360@singpolyma.net> Will it be RYF? Probably not. Will it be better than anything we have now? Absolutely. Will it be better than Pyra‎ or Neo900? Depends on your use case. Pyra will probably ship sooner. From maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me Sat Sep 23 18:10:45 2017 From: maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me (Alexander Ross) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 18:10:45 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <20170923163811.6119510.88847.70360@singpolyma.net> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170923163811.6119510.88847.70360@singpolyma.net> Message-ID: <4fe99bca-5899-1e60-96b3-e445d1d600c4@aross.me> On 23/09/17 17:38, Stephen Paul Weber wrote: > Will it be RYF? Probably not. Will it be better than anything we have now? Absolutely. yep > > Will it be better than Pyra‎ or Neo900? Depends on your use case. Pyra will probably ship sooner mmh yea. some of the same neo900 devs are working on pyra so when prya is finished i guess neo900 will get more attention :) been wondering about a gpd pocket lately. non-free bios, wifi but 8GB ram laptop for £340 from china is quite tempting. a higher power laptop would be useful... plus i can "dock"/connect the gpd poket into my eoma68 laptop via breakout card if i want to work on a larger screen,KB,touchpad. Snag is yucky intel bios :( and crappy wifi ant design. Battery I guess will require a hack around for a replacement as i imagine it won’t be easy to get a same size one. On the bright side there are good sized battery test points so one can by the looks of it, solder wires and stick a 18650/lipo battery pack on the outside of the case :) Pyra looks like smaller keyboard? Far less powerful but better battery life/efficiency. Bit more ££ but is libre hardaware with again non-free but better designed wifi. pyra with 4g + bluetooth headset + if really good power saving is implemented, could then be a kind of phone? From hendrik at topoi.pooq.com Sat Sep 23 18:54:47 2017 From: hendrik at topoi.pooq.com (Hendrik Boom) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 13:54:47 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> Message-ID: <20170923175447.GA18817@topoi.pooq.com> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 05:19:13PM +0100, Alexander Ross wrote: > https://puri.sm/shop/librem-5/ > > thoughts? > > feeling distrust with past intel foo far... > > they call them shelf an manufacturer yet it also sounds like they hire a > company to actually make/design the phone (?). hence its not open > hardware as they don’t own the designs. That can very well depend on the details of the contract. If it is work for hire they *will* ow the designs. -- hendrik From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Sat Sep 23 18:56:52 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 13:56:52 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <4fe99bca-5899-1e60-96b3-e445d1d600c4@aross.me> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170923163811.6119510.88847.70360@singpolyma.net> <4fe99bca-5899-1e60-96b3-e445d1d600c4@aross.me> Message-ID: That pocket thing looks kind of cute. Light-years outside of my price range for anything (let alone my little tinkerin' budget) -- but cute. I hadn't heard about that one before... I like it, even if I can't afford it... (silly me, I like tiny computers of basically all sorts) Shameless (and long-winded, sorry) plug... I'm developing a mostly-open-source (not libre, sorry) laptop called the AnyTop. ("Mostly" because it runs Windows, because I /really/ don't want to have to tutor people in Linux with this thing... sorry, everybody, but the vast majority of this world runs on The Redmond Monstrosity. It just does.) The idea is that anyone in the world who isn't blind and can use a knife can follow the instructions and build their own laptop from said instructions. The only tool you need is a smallish, non-serrated sharp blade of some sort. For the record, I'm not planning on distributing anything /other/ than instructions, and (a) printing them requires color capability on the printer side and (b) the requirement of being language independent means that those instructions wind up looking a bit like something you'd see on the back of a cereal box, and for most "first world" people they're likely to be a bit inscrutable at first glance. Numbers are represented as hands with fingers held up, for example, and sizes are expressed in common objects and parts thereof (such as a sheet of paper or a CD), rather than customary units (inches, cm, etc)... Full disclosure: there's this blog called Hackaday ("hack" as in "hacking together a fix" not as in "l0lzerz I'm hacking your comp00ter box") that has a 'projects' sub-site and a yearly contest for grand ideas and the like -- I have entered the AnyTop in that contest, and am keeping a log on the 'projects' side of the place as part of that -- although I don't expect to win... I rarely win anything, pretty much period, and especially not contests... Direct-image link to a concept illustration of a final, constructed AnyTop, complete with cheesy logo --> https://i.imgur.com/iDygSE0.jpg If there's meaningful interest here, and if Luke says it's on-topic (or at least mostly so), I'll link to the instructions, once they're done, in a post on this list. I'm also willing to mail a copy to anyone who wants one, although international mail will be First-Class (not tracked, no delivery guarantee, and slow as heck) unless the recipient wants to pay for it, and in all cases I can only mail to places the US Gov't will allow me to... From singpolyma at singpolyma.net Sat Sep 23 18:57:20 2017 From: singpolyma at singpolyma.net (Stephen Paul Weber) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 12:57:20 -0500 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <4fe99bca-5899-1e60-96b3-e445d1d600c4@aross.me> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170923163811.6119510.88847.70360@singpolyma.net> <4fe99bca-5899-1e60-96b3-e445d1d600c4@aross.me> Message-ID: <20170923175720.6119510.4056.70365@singpolyma.net> > pyra with 4g + bluetooth headset + if really good power saving is implemented, could then be a kind of phone? That's my plan. Pyra for me for "phone", Librem5 for my wife. From lkcl at lkcl.net Sat Sep 23 19:49:13 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 19:49:13 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> Message-ID: WHAT CPU WILL BE USED I.MX6 OR I.MX8? We are using the i.MX6, unless/until we know we can use i.MX8. ?? power-hungry Cortex A9?? worra?? WILL YOU BE SEEKING FSF RYF ENDORSEMENT? We will constantly keep FSF up-to-date on the hardware and software, our current understanding is any non-free kernel firmware needed for RF chips will not meet the RYF qualifications today that's right boyzngirlz, it don't. so... why are you calling your company "purism", again? *sigh*.... From calmstorm at posteo.de Sun Sep 24 00:03:46 2017 From: calmstorm at posteo.de (zap) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 19:03:46 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> Message-ID: <6e22c2a8-a7b9-3d74-c8e9-3284f220d46b@posteo.de> On 09/23/2017 02:49 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > WHAT CPU WILL BE USED I.MX6 OR I.MX8? > We are using the i.MX6, unless/until we know we can use i.MX8. > > ?? power-hungry Cortex A9?? worra?? > > WILL YOU BE SEEKING FSF RYF ENDORSEMENT? > We will constantly keep FSF up-to-date on the hardware and software, > our current understanding is any non-free kernel firmware needed for > RF chips will not meet the RYF qualifications today > > that's right boyzngirlz, it don't. so... why are you calling your > company "purism", again? > > *sigh*.... they seem to think we believe their fairy dust will just magically take all the non-free blobs/firmware off. How amusing... but also annoying at the same time. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk From lkcl at lkcl.net Sun Sep 24 00:06:50 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2017 00:06:50 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <6e22c2a8-a7b9-3d74-c8e9-3284f220d46b@posteo.de> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <6e22c2a8-a7b9-3d74-c8e9-3284f220d46b@posteo.de> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 12:03 AM, zap wrote: >> WILL YOU BE SEEKING FSF RYF ENDORSEMENT? >> We will constantly keep FSF up-to-date on the hardware and software, >> our current understanding is any non-free kernel firmware needed for >> RF chips will not meet the RYF qualifications today >> >> that's right boyzngirlz, it don't. so... why are you calling your >> company "purism", again? >> >> *sigh*.... > they seem to think we believe their fairy dust will just magically take > all the non-free blobs/firmware off. > > How amusing... but also annoying at the same time. they'll manage to convince a lot of people. what particularly pisses me off is that they could actually sell a variant *without* WIFI and BT - at all - and get RYF Certification as a result - and the people who then really wanted it could use the OTG port in Host Mode and plug in an RYF-Certified ThinkPenguin TP150N (AR9271). nggggggh! From calmstorm at posteo.de Sun Sep 24 00:19:15 2017 From: calmstorm at posteo.de (zap) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 19:19:15 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <6e22c2a8-a7b9-3d74-c8e9-3284f220d46b@posteo.de> Message-ID: On 09/23/2017 07:06 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 12:03 AM, zap wrote: > >>> WILL YOU BE SEEKING FSF RYF ENDORSEMENT? >>> We will constantly keep FSF up-to-date on the hardware and software, >>> our current understanding is any non-free kernel firmware needed for >>> RF chips will not meet the RYF qualifications today >>> >>> that's right boyzngirlz, it don't. so... why are you calling your >>> company "purism", again? >>> >>> *sigh*.... >> they seem to think we believe their fairy dust will just magically take >> all the non-free blobs/firmware off. >> >> How amusing... but also annoying at the same time. > they'll manage to convince a lot of people. what particularly pisses > me off is that they could actually sell a variant *without* WIFI and > BT - at all - and get RYF Certification as a result - and the people > who then really wanted it could use the OTG port in Host Mode and plug > in an RYF-Certified ThinkPenguin TP150N (AR9271). > > nggggggh! I see your point. How are people that stupid... :looks at the 2016 election then vomits into a bag: > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Sun Sep 24 00:44:46 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 19:44:46 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <6e22c2a8-a7b9-3d74-c8e9-3284f220d46b@posteo.de> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 7:19 PM, zap wrote: > > :looks at the 2016 election then vomits into a bag: While I'm not much of one for conspiracy theories, even I'm forced to admit that there's growing evidence that those of us here in the USA *ahem* had a little help with that one... I will state that I voted for the intelligent and articulate but wonky* candidate, and not the obnoxious and incompetent hot-air balloon that we wound up with... As an aside -- Luke, in my earlier windbag post in this thread, I asked your permission about something, albeit a little indirectly (I'm not going to repeat myself here, so as to avoid spamming)... I've not seen a reply yet, which might be me, or it might not. Did you miss my request, or did I miss your reply...? *For the international crowd: in American slang, labeling someone as a wonk is the political science equivalent of the tech community referring to someone as a geek or nerd. From hendrik at topoi.pooq.com Sun Sep 24 02:32:51 2017 From: hendrik at topoi.pooq.com (Hendrik Boom) Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 21:32:51 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <6e22c2a8-a7b9-3d74-c8e9-3284f220d46b@posteo.de> Message-ID: <20170924013251.GA3609@topoi.pooq.com> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 07:19:15PM -0400, zap wrote: > > > On 09/23/2017 07:06 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 12:03 AM, zap wrote: > >> How amusing... but also annoying at the same time. > > they'll manage to convince a lot of people. what particularly pisses > > me off is that they could actually sell a variant *without* WIFI and > > BT - at all - and get RYF Certification as a result - and the people > > who then really wanted it could use the OTG port in Host Mode and plug > > in an RYF-Certified ThinkPenguin TP150N (AR9271). > > > > nggggggh! > I see your point. How are people that stupid... Let them know. maybe they'll build that TP150N (whatever it is) in instead of whatever they are planning now. -- hendrik From lkcl at lkcl.net Sun Sep 24 03:39:52 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2017 03:39:52 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <20170924013251.GA3609@topoi.pooq.com> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <6e22c2a8-a7b9-3d74-c8e9-3284f220d46b@posteo.de> <20170924013251.GA3609@topoi.pooq.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 2:32 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote: > On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 07:19:15PM -0400, zap wrote: > Let them know. maybe they'll build that TP150N (whatever it is) in > instead of whatever they are planning now. it's a standard 802.11n USB WIFI IC that's based on ath9k. the idiot team at qualcomm (qualcomm bought atheros then fired all the management and engineers) is *terminating* that chip... and because it's a standard USB WIFI IC it's simply not designed for mobile use. i.e. as far as standard "mobile" users are concerned it would represent a *massive* drop in perceived value due it absolutely eating battery life. plus, you tend to get a feel quite quickly for companies that are... well... self-promoting and out for sensationalism, and which ones are... genuine and up-front. basically i don't _want_ to have a conversation with them. l. From lkcl at lkcl.net Mon Sep 25 07:26:50 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 07:26:50 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> Message-ID: http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/eoma68-a20-hdmi-275-new-keepout-taper.jpg hiya richard ok this is what i meant about doing the taper prior to the ESD protection because the VIAs are *already* close and can't be moved. i just realised i missed out HXT1 so i'll alter that... done... thoughts? l. From tzafrir at cohens.org.il Mon Sep 25 12:47:48 2017 From: tzafrir at cohens.org.il (Tzafrir Cohen) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:47:48 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> Message-ID: <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 07:49:13PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > WHAT CPU WILL BE USED I.MX6 OR I.MX8? > We are using the i.MX6, unless/until we know we can use i.MX8. > > ?? power-hungry Cortex A9?? worra?? > > WILL YOU BE SEEKING FSF RYF ENDORSEMENT? > We will constantly keep FSF up-to-date on the hardware and software, > our current understanding is any non-free kernel firmware needed for > RF chips will not meet the RYF qualifications today > > that's right boyzngirlz, it don't. so... why are you calling your > company "purism", again? > > *sigh*.... For every purest of the purists there is someone even more purist. -- Tzafrir Cohen | tzafrir at jabber.org | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's tzafrir at cohens.org.il | | best tzafrir at debian.org | | friend From lkcl at lkcl.net Mon Sep 25 13:05:17 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:05:17 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > For every purest of the purists there is someone even more purist. ohmmmmmmmmmm.... but seriously: ethical decision-making is an on-off thing. it's either black - you made an ethical decision - or it's white - you made an UNethical decision. you chose CONVENIENCE over making a stand, and saying "no further. the line is HERE". the problem is... people *really* don't like it when you point that out... because people don't normally think in hard black-and-white. which is why you get people going completely off-the-fucking-wall NUTS during question-time at dr stallman's talks. they accuse him of hypocrisy, shout and almost scream at him... just so that they can mentally dismiss everything he said for the past 105 minutes and be able to walk out in a huff. in a way, software libre - the whole FSF thing - is basically the modern-day equivalent of the black rights, slavery freedom / rights, women's rights, and any civil liberties movement you care to name. it's just completely unappreciated as such. l. From mike.valk at gmail.com Mon Sep 25 15:28:26 2017 From: mike.valk at gmail.com (mike.valk at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 16:28:26 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: 2017-09-25 13:47 GMT+02:00 Tzafrir Cohen : > On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 07:49:13PM +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >> WHAT CPU WILL BE USED I.MX6 OR I.MX8? >> We are using the i.MX6, unless/until we know we can use i.MX8. >> >> ?? power-hungry Cortex A9?? worra?? >> >> WILL YOU BE SEEKING FSF RYF ENDORSEMENT? >> We will constantly keep FSF up-to-date on the hardware and software, >> our current understanding is any non-free kernel firmware needed for >> RF chips will not meet the RYF qualifications today >> >> that's right boyzngirlz, it don't. so... why are you calling your >> company "purism", again? >> >> *sigh*.... > > For every purest of the purists there is someone even more purist. In this case it's about being honest. Just because it's less bad does not make it good. If every one is doing the bad thing, that doesn't make it right. That way of thinking brought on the whole banking crisis. And many wars etc. I'm not saying that this will start a crisis or a war. But it's wrong nonetheless. They sell this as an good "open" product. If they believe they are doing the right thing they are just totally wrong. And probably deaf. The'res no shame in saying: Is the phone BLOB free no! Is it more open than the average smartphone yes. It's much better than the rest. And if we're successful we might generate enough money the do even better next time. Support us! What you do get. - Better privacy. The telco does not have access to your memory! Why? The GSM module is separate from CPU. - Opensource drivers. You can swap OS and keep upgrading until it falls apart. - Open schematics. Hack away it's your as you please. What not - Open firmware How's that for purism marketing! From vkontogpls at gmail.com Mon Sep 25 17:32:55 2017 From: vkontogpls at gmail.com (Bill Kontos) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:32:55 +0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > but seriously: ethical decision-making is an on-off thing. it's > either black - you made an ethical decision - or it's white - you made > an UNethical decision. you chose CONVENIENCE over making a stand, and > saying "no further. the line is HERE". No it's not. People need upgraded computers and the x200 libreboot supply will eventually run out. This is not convenience, at some point something becomes slow enough that you can't effectively get your job done. Purism laptops represent a decent offering for security etc and afaik there is no other laptop that cuts power to the camera like they do. For 99% of the users the only argument for libreboot and free firmware is security. Purism is trying to tacle that requirement and has been fairly sucessful so far. I would expect the same to happen with the phones. Afaik the only blob existing there will be for the baseband which will be burned into rom on a separate chip with no access to main memory and a killswitch. So it's pretty much as good as it gets given existing regulations and I don't see why having a phone that can do all this stuff is a bad idea. Heck having a phone with backdoors that can run a regular gnu stack is better than what we have right now. Purists that will tell you to just not use a phone because we are required by regulations to run those few kb of closed rom code have no place in this discussion honestly because they offer nothing to the table for a solution. People need phones and having a phone with some blobs allows for much more practical freedoms than having no phone at all. > > the problem is... people *really* don't like it when you point that > out... because people don't normally think in hard black-and-white. And they shouldn't. Thinking in black and white has been the sole reason for many many attrocities and racism in human history. I am really dissapointed to read this coming from you. > which is why you get people going completely off-the-fucking-wall NUTS > during question-time at dr stallman's talks. they accuse him of > hypocrisy, shout and almost scream at him... just so that they can > mentally dismiss everything he said for the past 105 minutes and be > able to walk out in a huff. > rms should seriously work on his presentation. You don't change someone's world view in one fell swoop, you do it 1% at a time. I felt exactly the same when I first read about rms and I was so repelled by him that I almost just wipped my fresh first time ubuntu installation. The only reason I persisted was for reasons of my own character. Unfortunately we don't have the technical means he has with an entire organisation supporting him technically and a lot of us have hardware requirements that mandate blobs. This is why projects like this, riscv and the talos project are so important. The free culture is still too left on the overton window for the average joe. So it is my personal opinion that the FSF should find a different speaker that can understand his/her audience better than rms does. Let alone the fact that pretty much all his talks are to the wrong audience. Think about it, you have to already be into FOSS to learn of rms, those that need to learn about it are the ones that are not into it. In adition to this I don't have time to figure out every stupid way microsoft breaks compatibility with .docx and .odt, if it doesn't work on libreoffice I upload it on google docs and download the converted form. I just don't have time for this and the end result is all that matters. > in a way, software libre - the whole FSF thing - is basically the > modern-day equivalent of the black rights, slavery freedom / rights, > women's rights, and any civil liberties movement you care to name. > it's just completely unappreciated as such. As I said, the free culture movement is still too left on the overton window, but people are getting more and more fed up with the current situation( i.e. drm, copyright on various fan-made content from series etc), so it might improve in the near future. We just got our first FOSS game engine with enough patreon money for a developer to work full time on it. CC is a also a big deal with good high quality content published with it. Countries are willing to host websites that directly violate copyright laws because there is practical demand for it. The EU can try as hard as they want to hide the fact that piracy does not affect revenue streams but the reality is the only reasons publishers push against piracy with the petty argument of "paying the creator" is so free culture does not get the chance to become a more mainstream acceptable idea. So things are changing and the change is accelerating. People want better treatment on their software and you can see it by the marketshare changes, and with time it will improve. But it is BY NO MEANS a black or white scenario. It would also help if rms would realise his position at the fsf as a public entity and did not advocate pedophilia without any compelling scientific arguments on his personal website. From silverskullpsu at gmail.com Mon Sep 25 18:53:16 2017 From: silverskullpsu at gmail.com (Jonathan Frederickson) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:53:16 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 8:05 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > but seriously: ethical decision-making is an on-off thing. it's > either black - you made an ethical decision - or it's white - you made > an UNethical decision. you chose CONVENIENCE over making a stand, and > saying "no further. the line is HERE". Let's assume that everyone agrees on what makes a decision ethical or unethical for a moment - this is not the case, but it's a huge topic on its own, so let's sidestep that. I disagree. For any single decision regarding which component to pick, this may be true. But as a whole, it's more grey than that. As a hypothetical, let's say you're trying to make a phone that's as free as possible. You're able to include components with free firmware and free drivers right up until you hit the GPU, at which point the only available chip that fits within your budget has proprietary firmware. Every other phone on the market also has proprietary firmware for their GPUs, and the rest of it is more proprietary than your new device. Does the fact that your device also requires nonfree firmware for that component make it unethical to produce this device as a whole? I would argue that it does not. Producing this device, while it doesn't take you the whole way there, still gives users the ability to choose a device that's more free than what they're currently able to choose. If the creators of this device took the hard-line stance that every component must be free despite not being able to procure free versions of the components they require, the phone simply wouldn't be made, and users would be worse off for it. > in a way, software libre - the whole FSF thing - is basically the > modern-day equivalent of the black rights, slavery freedom / rights, > women's rights, and any civil liberties movement you care to name. > it's just completely unappreciated as such. To run with your analogy here: the Emancipation Proclamation took effect in 1863, the 13th Amendment was passed in 1865, but racial discrimination was legally permitted in the US until the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Had the country taken a hard-line stance that all slaves must be freed *and* treated equally at the same time, there likely would have been more opposition to the idea than there was to the single step of freeing the slaves. Both are important, but it's easier to convince people to change one step at a time, and the world is still made a better place each time. Not perfect, no, but better. From lkcl at lkcl.net Mon Sep 25 19:26:20 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:26:20 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: bill, john, i am fascinated by the insights both of you have, also no i don't thnk in black or white - i used to, up until i was around... 22 or 23. it was a very... strange time. i'll re-read what both of you wrote later and reply after some thought ok? l. From isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info Mon Sep 25 19:49:57 2017 From: isacdaavid at isacdaavid.info (Isaac David) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 13:49:57 -0500 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> Bill Kontos wrote : > Purists that will tell you to just not use a phone because > we are required by regulations to run those few kb of closed rom code > have no place in this discussion honestly because they offer nothing > to the table for a solution. this bit here struck a chord with me. they are offering you one of the best possible solutions available; if not the best (until one of us finds a couple trillion dollars to revamp telephony protocols and devices around the world): cutting through telco/OEM profits until they understand they will only make money by respecting our privacy and freedom. it's like consumerism long made us forgot that delaying a bad deal is also an option, most of the time. life saving procedures can't wait a decade or two, but mobile communications?, hell yeah. you don't get to call boycotters on a lack of solutions, when it's the refusal to join them precisely what undermines the effectiveness of their solution. as a cellphone non-user and die-hard libre software acolyte, i don't see the Purism people as enemies. they only need to reword their marketing to be a bit less disingenuous. they speak the language of the purists; this is how we know they _are_ aware that their products will fall short of something like a RYF cert. > And they shouldn't. Thinking in black and white has been the sole > reason for many many attrocities[...] maybe that wasn't the best example, but dichotomies are still a thing. not everything is a gradient, and we should be more judicious in finding the right model for the situation. ironically, by ruling out the possibility of a dichotomy you have fallen victim of bad black-and-white thinking. black-and-nothing-else thinking, in fact. > You don't change someone's world view in one fell swoop, you do it 1% > at a time. [...] So it is my personal opinion that the FSF should > find a different speaker that can understand his/her audience better > than rms does. well, there are some. have you listened to John Sullivan's talks? they are geared towards attracting the general FLOSS audience to the libre side of things. perhaps what we need is more people willing to educate the public with the strategy of their choice. different strokes for different folks. i would have never jumped on board with 1% increases. the whole enterprise would have struck me as vague and poorly thought. moreover, it wouldn't matter how out from the overton window free software is. we would still need RMS' clear referent to not lose sight of what the end goal is. RMS can't possibly adopt different strategies without being berated for inconsistency. and from a purely practical perspective, he probably knows that he will never speak to the same audience twice, which means that results will be maximum when those few all-or-nothing daredevils are targeted. -- Isaac David GPG: 38D33EF29A7691134357648733466E12EC7BA943 Tox: 0C730E0156E96E6193A1445D413557FF5F277BA969A4EA20AC9352889D3B390E77651E816F0C From calmstorm at posteo.de Mon Sep 25 20:03:50 2017 From: calmstorm at posteo.de (zap) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 15:03:50 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: >> the problem is... people *really* don't like it when you point that >> out... because people don't normally think in hard black-and-white. > And they shouldn't. Thinking in black and white has been the sole > reason for many many attrocities and racism in human history. I am > really dissapointed to read this coming from you. I suppose there is some truth to that, but I guess, there is white, black and gray (not talking about races) the most we have in life is shades of gray. Not talking about that dumb movie. What is key is that we move towards the lighter gray not the darker or even worse black... > >> which is why you get people going completely off-the-fucking-wall NUTS >> during question-time at dr stallman's talks. they accuse him of >> hypocrisy, shout and almost scream at him... just so that they can >> mentally dismiss everything he said for the past 105 minutes and be >> able to walk out in a huff. >> > rms should seriously work on his presentation. You don't change > someone's world view in one fell swoop, you do it 1% at a time. I felt > exactly the same when I first read about rms and I was so repelled by > him that I almost just wipped my fresh first time ubuntu installation. > The only reason I persisted was for reasons of my own character. > Unfortunately we don't have the technical means he has with an entire > organisation supporting him technically and a lot of us have hardware > requirements that mandate blobs. This is why projects like this, riscv > and the talos project are so important. The free culture is still too > left on the overton window for the average joe. So it is my personal > opinion that the FSF should find a different speaker that can > understand his/her audience better than rms does. Let alone the fact > that pretty much all his talks are to the wrong audience. Think about > it, you have to already be into FOSS to learn of rms, those that need > to learn about it are the ones that are not into it. In adition to > this I don't have time to figure out every stupid way microsoft breaks > compatibility with .docx and .odt, if it doesn't work on libreoffice I > upload it on google docs and download the converted form. I just don't > have time for this and the end result is all that matters. No... RMS means well, if people don't want to understand him its their fault.  Don't get me wrong, I disagree with him on faith...  (notice I didn't say religion because that falls into a category of doing what is impossible for mankind alone.) My belief of religion is trying to follow any type of faith perfectly which is impossible.  And that Christianity is a type of faith that cannot be used religiously.  I have come to that conclusion due to several things, including the 2016 election. I will stop that part for now though... But I really do not think Stallman is wrong about libre/free software.  People need to stop acting like capitalism is from God or something like that and socialism is from hell. In reality, I think both have their purposes in this life but, capitalism right now is like 85% of my country. when it should be only 40% of the country.  Anyways though, I will get to the point now, captialism says make money at any cost even if it means invading people's privacy and screwing with people's lives and bribing the government. That's my personal view by the way. Socialism I believe gives too much freedom though.  A balance is needed clearly... >> in a way, software libre - the whole FSF thing - is basically the >> modern-day equivalent of the black rights, slavery freedom / rights, >> women's rights, and any civil liberties movement you care to name. >> it's just completely unappreciated as such. > As I said, the free culture movement is still too left on the overton > window, but people are getting more and more fed up with the current > situation( i.e. drm, copyright on various fan-made content from series > etc), so it might improve in the near future. We just got our first > FOSS game engine with enough patreon money for a developer to work > full time on it. CC is a also a big deal with good high quality > content published with it. Countries are willing to host websites that > directly violate copyright laws because there is practical demand for > it. The EU can try as hard as they want to hide the fact that piracy > does not affect revenue streams but the reality is the only reasons > publishers push against piracy with the petty argument of "paying the > creator" is so free culture does not get the chance to become a more > mainstream acceptable idea. So things are changing and the change is > accelerating. People want better treatment on their software and you > can see it by the marketshare changes, and with time it will improve. > But it is BY NO MEANS a black or white scenario. > > It would also help if rms would realise his position at the fsf as a > public entity and did not advocate pedophilia without any compelling > scientific arguments on his personal website. Another thing to consider, piracy REALLY DOESN'T exist... Sharing works copyrighted or not, is not piracy. Pirates stole everything not just a copy of the author's work and sold it.  They also killed people and raped people to death. My point is that piracy is a horrible way to describe people who share copyrighted works. This has been an interesting conversation though. Thank you. ps, socialism should be 50% of all governments, 40% captialism. and 10% everything else That's my opinion anyways. > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Mon Sep 25 20:24:01 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 15:24:01 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: Throwing my voice in the ring... *On topic --* I agree with the 'shades of grey' view of things. Life is not simple, and (with exactly one single exception, AFAIK) anyone who says otherwise is deluding themselves and possibly others. There are just varying kinds of complexity. The sole exception I can find is blissful ignorance, and I for one want nothing of that. *Not-entirely-on-topic-but-we're-talking-about-it-so-whatever --* "socialism" got its bad rap because of a different but similar system called "communism". Someone somewhere got the bright idea (not!) to conflate the two, and away we went. Actual, real, true socialism (Marxist or otherwise) has, as far as I'm aware, never been actually tested as a means of governance. Communism has, but that's different, in a way that (as usual) is nuanced and can't be really reduced to a sound bite quite nearly as easily as "socialism is bad ya'll". For those who do not study political science enough to know the difference -- in a nutshell, socialism relies on the people to overthrow their existing government and replace it with socialism. Communism is a revolution from within the government, in that the people are not to be trusted to pull it all off correctly and so the government must do it for them. This demonstrably leads to paranoia in governance and a totalitarian state. *Nota Bene -- *mind you, while I consider myself a socialist, I am NOT NOT NOT FLAMING NOT a Marxist. Marx's original idea called, as the end product, for a "non-state" (for lack of a better term) -- what amounted to a sort of cooperative anarchy wherein a government didn't exist because it was to be superfluous. I do not have anywhere near enough faith in humanity (or anything else) to imagine that such an organization (again, for lack of a better term) would last one hot minute. The first yahoo born who realizes how easy it is to game that system is going to bring the whole thing crashing down -- and, given how crafty we all are as it is, that's going to happen in a time frame best measured in fractional heartbeats. What I would like to see, would look a little more like the way many Nordic countries operate -- what they call "social democracy". I personally think there are ways to improve even those systems, but that's the model I'd primarily start with if I were given the order to reinvent civilization from the ground up... (please don't ever give me that order, though, as I will freely volunteer that I am in no way qualified for the job. I'm just another armchair emperor, so to speak...) From tomasn at posteo.net Mon Sep 25 21:10:22 2017 From: tomasn at posteo.net (Tomas Nordin) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 22:10:22 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: <87o9pytu8h.fsf@fliptop> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes: > bill, john, i am fascinated by the insights both of you have, also no > i don't thnk in black or white - i used to, up until i was around... > 22 or 23. it was a very... strange time. i'll re-read what both of > you wrote later and reply after some thought ok? We can stick with thinking in terms of black and white when it comes to whether some software is free or not. It is either free or it isn't. The four freedoms make that easy. Then it can be hard on people to call them lazy by not making sure their machines are 100 % RYF because of convenience. But escaping ms office is not hard, there is not much convenience to gain there in place of freedom, only lock-in. On the machine side I would guess political activism is what is required. > > l. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk From vkontogpls at gmail.com Mon Sep 25 21:20:19 2017 From: vkontogpls at gmail.com (Bill Kontos) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 23:20:19 +0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Isaac David wrote: > Bill Kontos wrote : >> >> Purists that will tell you to just not use a phone because >> we are required by regulations to run those few kb of closed rom code >> have no place in this discussion honestly because they offer nothing >> to the table for a solution. > > > this bit here struck a chord with me. > Noo, I'm talking about the free software purists not purism. Luke, when rms was asked wether he prefered gamers to play proprietary games on windows or linux he didn't answer "don't play proprietary games". He chose linux with the rationale that it's better to to run a proprietary application on an open platform so the users can experience software freedom at least to so extend in order to understand the benefits of it. Because as I said the entire argument for the ethical point is to be pro user, pro decentralization and against massive power interests. The same happened when they ported the GNU userland to closed platforms in the 90s. On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:03 PM, zap wrote: > No... RMS means well, if people don't want to understand him its their > fault. Don't get me wrong, I disagree with him on faith... (notice I > didn't say religion because that falls into a category of doing what is > impossible for mankind alone.) My belief of religion is trying to follow > any type of faith perfectly which is impossible. And that Christianity > is a type of faith that cannot be used religiously. I have come to that > conclusion due to several things, including the 2016 election. I will > stop that part for now though... I know rms means good and that is the reason why I always advocate for his work. I don't want to go into religion and politics as we are opening too many discussions. But as I said what a lot of technical people don't understand is that our worldview is an integral part of our character. Challenging that automatically puts the person into defense mode. It's not something we can do about, it's an instict. You have to be very careful to not make a big attack so logic can prevail over the instict. This is a tradoff that I come up with all the time in my line of work: how to initiate a change on the state of mind fast enough but not too fast that it fails. > > But I really do not think Stallman is wrong about libre/free software. > People need to stop acting like capitalism is from God or something like > that and socialism is from hell. In reality, I think both have their > purposes in this life but, capitalism right now is like 85% of my > country. when it should be only 40% of the country. > Stallman is absolutely right. If you heart is in the right place you will imediately understand the benefits of the free culture movement for everyone. The fact that we are not there yet is due to actions from big interests that want to keep sharing limited to the old model and due to the fact that society hasn't really caught up with it yet. But we are getting there. The fact that we can now make infinite copies of a piece of art/software and freely share them but we are artificially shutting the door to it just blows my mind... > Another thing to consider, piracy REALLY DOESN'T exist... Well, the modern version of piracy. I think everyone understands that and doesn't confuse it with the historical version of it. Besides the fact that we have a site called piratebay doesn't help. From vkontogpls at gmail.com Mon Sep 25 21:35:31 2017 From: vkontogpls at gmail.com (Bill Kontos) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 23:35:31 +0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Isaac David wrote: > as a cellphone non-user and die-hard libre software acolyte, i don't > see the Purism people as enemies. they only need to reword their > marketing to be a bit less disingenuous. they speak the language of > the purists; this is how we know they _are_ aware that their products > will fall short of something like a RYF cert. > First of all congratulations for not using a cellphone. I literally can't do that. People expect to find me on the phone. I have to follow facebook teams for announcements and stuff. And yes their marketing pisses me off a lot. I wish it was more honest but at the same time they are not spewing lies right and left. They do have a timeline on what they want to do, they just don't know how fast they will get there. As it stands right now, purism laptops are the only laptops that now come with coreboot preinstalled, automatically making them the second most free platform after the libreboot x200s. Think about that. >> And they shouldn't. Thinking in black and white has been the sole >> reason for many many attrocities[...] > > > maybe that wasn't the best example, but dichotomies are still a > thing. not everything is a gradient, and we should be more judicious > in finding the right model for the situation. ironically, by ruling > out the possibility of a dichotomy you have fallen victim of bad > black-and-white thinking. black-and-nothing-else thinking, in fact. > Yes indeed dichotomies can exist in certain things. But on a hardware piece... nah >> You don't change someone's world view in one fell swoop, you do it 1% >> at a time. [...] So it is my personal opinion that the FSF should >> find a different speaker that can understand his/her audience better >> than rms does. > > > well, there are some. have you listened to John Sullivan's talks? they > are geared towards attracting the general FLOSS audience to the libre > side of things. perhaps what we need is more people willing to educate > the public with the strategy of their choice. > > different strokes for different folks. i would have never jumped on > board with 1% increases. the whole enterprise would have struck me as > vague and poorly thought. moreover, it wouldn't matter how out from > the overton window free software is. we would still need RMS' clear > referent to not lose sight of what the end goal is. > > RMS can't possibly adopt different strategies without being berated > for inconsistency. and from a purely practical perspective, he > probably knows that he will never speak to the same audience twice, > which means that results will be maximum when those few all-or-nothing > daredevils are targeted. > I haven't watched any FSF talks about their philosophy for a while. I understand their train of thought although rms was a rough introduction on it. I will check John Sullivan. And yes rms is a very important figure. He is on a tricky situation as he is probably under constant fire so he has to remain rigid. But it is a good thing that ubuntu exists and ships with wifi and gpu blobs. Without them I would have just reinstalled windows on my first try and never go any further. As it stands right now fsf endorsed distros can only run on a very limited number of hardware( such as the purism and the minifree laptops). So without ubuntu and fedora( which I'm currently using) I would have never been able to even learn about free software. And there is no way I would have bought a new laptop, no matter how cheap to try that weird thing called linux if it didn't work on my existing one( well half of my hardware was broken at the beginning but still... it could boot). From marqueteur at fineartmarquetry.com Mon Sep 25 21:51:30 2017 From: marqueteur at fineartmarquetry.com (Tor, the Marqueteur) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:51:30 -1000 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <87o9pytu8h.fsf@fliptop> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <87o9pytu8h.fsf@fliptop> Message-ID: <0da8c599-6693-b850-e45b-dd5837ea3013@fineartmarquetry.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 09/25/2017 10:10 AM, Tomas Nordin wrote: > We can stick with thinking in terms of black and white when it > comes to whether some software is free or not. It is either free or > it isn't. The four freedoms make that easy. > > Then it can be hard on people to call them lazy by not making sure > their machines are 100 % RYF because of convenience. But escaping > ms office is not hard, there is not much convenience to gain there > in place of freedom, only lock-in. On the machine side I would > guess political activism is what is required. > In some ways I agree, and in others I disagree here. No, it isn't always laziness to not have an RYF machine to work on. Whether anything, be it software, machine, or component of a machine is free or not is a black and white issue. A whole machine, however, or a whole distro, also has shades of grey. One way to think of it to pull from the software side because there exists a better spectrum to reference, is to imagine all the OS/OS distros lined up along an 8-bit greyscale colour bar, grading by how much of the OS is free. If what you care about is fully free, then you're going to apply a threshold to that colour bar to find which ones are a suitable option. Nevertheless, someone running Debian or even Ubuntu, is, when you look at the greyscale version, obviously much closer to running free software than someone running Windows. The same is true of machines. As pointed out, right now there isn't much of anything in modern-day technology for full-fledged desktop/laptop (I believe that's actually nothing) that is fully free, and the same for phones. It isn't everyone who has a viable option to use long-outdated hardware or do without a "smart" phone. Further, the chasm is in many cases too wide to bridge in a single leap. Where I see the problem with Purism is that their advertising seems to try to sound further along than they really are in supplying RYF-grade hardware. ThinkPenguin, on the other hand, (from whom I bought my current laptop) appears to be providing hardware relatively similarly far from RYF, but because they make very clear what they do and don't have to offer, they have never to my knowledge, taken much heat for it. Paradoxically, if I've heard correctly, Purism has managed to free at least one relatively recent processor from Intel's ME, quite possibly due to the very controversy they have stirred up with their marketing. As for how to get more free HW, I think efforts like Talos, EOMA, and even Purism and ThinkPenguin are the best way forward. I wish the FSF would do a bit more to promote upcoming hardware that can at least be expected to be a step beyond what is currently available. It is Talos in particular I'm thinking of here. When I wrote them after the close of the Talos campaign on Crowd Supply, they indicated that the FSF hadn't seemed very interested in working with them, and more interested in a legislative approach. I think this is a shame, because that kind of approach, if successful, is only going to get a lot of people mad at them. Figure out how to promote open hardware so that it ends up taking the market, and people will soon almost forget that the world used to be different. These are my thoughts right now, and may be worth no more than you paid for them. Tor - -- Tor Chantara http://www.fineartmarquetry.com/ 808-828-1107 GPG Key: 2BE1 426E 34EA D253 D583 9DE4 B866 0375 134B 48FB *Be wary of unsigned emails* -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iH4EARECAD4WIQQr4UJuNOrSU9WDneS4ZgN1E0tI+wUCWclsSiAcbWFycXVldGV1 ckBmaW5lYXJ0bWFycXVldHJ5LmNvbQAKCRC4ZgN1E0tI+xN0AKCkiYbMhujL1FeL YuaUGJA9Be/ckACcCeGWW2X2WFa+BXi/urPve5re1lU= =MLLI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From penyuanhsing at gmail.com Mon Sep 25 22:33:40 2017 From: penyuanhsing at gmail.com (Pen-Yuan Hsing) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 22:33:40 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> Message-ID: <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> On 25/09/17 21:35, Bill Kontos wrote: > On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 9:49 PM, Isaac David wrote: > >> as a cellphone non-user and die-hard libre software acolyte, i don't >> see the Purism people as enemies. they only need to reword their >> marketing to be a bit less disingenuous. they speak the language of >> the purists; this is how we know they _are_ aware that their products >> will fall short of something like a RYF cert. >> > First of all congratulations for not using a cellphone. I literally > can't do that. People expect to find me on the phone. I have to follow > facebook teams for announcements and stuff. And yes their marketing > pisses me off a lot. I wish it was more honest but at the same time > they are not spewing lies right and left. They do have a timeline on > what they want to do, they just don't know how fast they will get > there. As it stands right now, purism laptops are the only laptops > that now come with coreboot preinstalled, automatically making them > the second most free platform after the libreboot x200s. Think about > that. This has been such a fascinating discussion I can't help but chip in. :) > congratulations for not using a cellphone I envy you for being able to live without a cell phone (which are sadly all not-100%-libre atm). A common refrain of free software advocates is that if a product is non-free, just don't use it. This way you don't lose your freedoms and you also protest the lack of it in said product. However, I've been reflecting on this and I think the unfortunate truth is that software freedom is currently a *privilege*. Of course it should be a right, but right now it isn't. Digital technology is so intertwined with our lives that so many of our livelihoods depend on it. So many people would literally not be able to do their jobs if they refused to use every single piece of technology that's not 100% free as in freedom. I think this is where the likes of Purism can come in. Like mike.valk said, "It's much better than the rest. And if we're successful we might generate enough money the do even better next time." If we don't support - or even villify - attempts at *improving* and *getting closer to* freedom, they we are not moving at all! And like what Jonathan said with the slavery and civil rights examples, in some cases it is simply more realistic to take it one step at a time (or, I guess in software's case, removing one blob at a time). We can talk about the huge leaps needed to reach 100% software freedom everywhere, but we need a realistic way of doing that in one step. If we don't know how to make that huge leap yet, then taking many of those smaller steps (even if they don't take us all the way) **is** definitely better than waiting for the huge leap to happen! I admit I don't know all the details and intricacies of Purism's activities, but I know there was a lot of vitriol thrown its way for its laptops during development. But if absolutely no one supported their laptop campaigns, Purism might not have had the resource to come so close to freeing the Intel MEs that they are working on now. And isn't freeding the Intel ME something worth doing? If we think Purism's communications are not 100% accurate in saying their products are not 100% free, that's a fair criticism. But rather than vilifying them and saying they're terrible people, shouldn't we try our best to engage them and suggest a better way to communicate that? Again, I haven't been following Purism super closely so maybe I missed something, and definitely correct me if I'm wrong. But my bigger point is that sometimes even small steps are valuable and we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater! From tomasn at posteo.net Mon Sep 25 23:25:56 2017 From: tomasn at posteo.net (Tomas Nordin) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 00:25:56 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <0da8c599-6693-b850-e45b-dd5837ea3013@fineartmarquetry.com> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <87o9pytu8h.fsf@fliptop> <0da8c599-6693-b850-e45b-dd5837ea3013@fineartmarquetry.com> Message-ID: <87fubatnyj.fsf@fliptop> "Tor, the Marqueteur" writes: > As for how to get more free HW, I think efforts like Talos, EOMA, and > even Purism and ThinkPenguin are the best way forward. I wish the FSF > would do a bit more to promote upcoming hardware that can at least be > expected to be a step beyond what is currently available. It is Talos > in particular I'm thinking of here. When I wrote them after the close > of the Talos campaign on Crowd Supply, they indicated that the FSF > hadn't seemed very interested in working with them, and more > interested in a legislative approach. I think this is a shame, > because that kind of approach, if successful, is only going to get a > lot of people mad at them. Figure out how to promote open hardware so Is that really fair? Being mad at FSF for not engaging enough in hardware project details, they were all about software until recently. While I agree fully that those projects are one good and important [1] way to go, I doubt that they will be the final warranty for ethical hardware for all users. How would that come to be? Sooner or later you mean, there will one or more projects shipping such spiffy, shiny, low cost and fully ethichal devices so they will, by the law of supply and demand, take over the world. Let's hope your are right. For me, even the effort of giving out this RFY certificate is utterly impressing. I cannot even imagine the work it must take to do that, it is far beyond the engineering I am used to. It is a kind of auditing that would occupy large staff if I would estimate, all highly skilled in computer electronics and all things around it. But if there was proper legislation about this ethics, there will be a need for such auditing. See? FSF is already putting an example to it. [1] for technical development and proof of concepts From calmstorm at posteo.de Tue Sep 26 02:17:32 2017 From: calmstorm at posteo.de (zap) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 21:17:32 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> Message-ID: <26ec7928-7752-abbf-e634-ae6874ba62e4@posteo.de> > Stallman is absolutely right. If you heart is in the right place you > will imediately understand the benefits of the free culture movement > for everyone. The fact that we are not there yet is due to actions > from big interests that want to keep sharing limited to the old model > and due to the fact that society hasn't really caught up with it yet. > But we are getting there. The fact that we can now make infinite > copies of a piece of art/software and freely share them but we are > artificially shutting the door to it just blows my mind... > > Yep, it doesn't make too much sense. But also, piracy was a term coined  to make drm easier to implement without people freaking out against people in power/corporations. In all truth though, piracy is an extreme word to use for freely sharing software. I don't agree that it should be called piracy at all. Matter of fact, copyright is unenforceable when it comes to the people that it was trying to stop in the first place. copyright was *ORIGINALLY...* to stop people from selling their own copies of someone else's software and act like it is theirs but now they have expanded it so far that it is now okay to do that which is wrong... *INVADING PEOPLE's PRIVACY!!! *and you cannot remove that part unless you reverse engineer it. Which should be a non-issue. Screw *DRM.* that is all. From marqueteur at fineartmarquetry.com Tue Sep 26 02:30:08 2017 From: marqueteur at fineartmarquetry.com (Tor, the Marqueteur) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 15:30:08 -1000 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <26ec7928-7752-abbf-e634-ae6874ba62e4@posteo.de> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <26ec7928-7752-abbf-e634-ae6874ba62e4@posteo.de> Message-ID: <53a866e0-0b52-c1f1-4fd4-afb4f4eba0ff@fineartmarquetry.com> On 09/25/2017 03:17 PM, zap wrote: > But also, piracy was a term coined to make drm easier to implement > without people freaking out against people in power/corporations. >From my reading, pirates/piracy as relates to copyright was actually coined looong ago, well before software. It originally referred to publishers who found ways (often legal by means of other countries' laws) to reprint works and not pay the author. I'm pretty sure I once read that the Gilbert & Sullivan operetta The Pirates of Penzance was spurred at least in part by such copyright pirates. Tor -- Tor Chantara http://www.fineartmarquetry.com/ 808-828-1107 GPG Key: 2BE1 426E 34EA D253 D583 9DE4 B866 0375 134B 48FB *Be wary of unsigned emails* From calmstorm at posteo.de Tue Sep 26 02:41:35 2017 From: calmstorm at posteo.de (zap) Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 21:41:35 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <53a866e0-0b52-c1f1-4fd4-afb4f4eba0ff@fineartmarquetry.com> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <26ec7928-7752-abbf-e634-ae6874ba62e4@posteo.de> <53a866e0-0b52-c1f1-4fd4-afb4f4eba0ff@fineartmarquetry.com> Message-ID: <6a0b52c9-4811-3bdd-3699-ace1bfbce01c@posteo.de> On 09/25/2017 09:30 PM, Tor, the Marqueteur wrote: >> without people freaking out against people in power/corporations. > From my reading, pirates/piracy as relates to copyright was actually Okay, I thought it was something coined by corrupt arrogant specks from the 20th century... my bad. From jabjabs at fastmail.com.au Tue Sep 26 02:47:57 2017 From: jabjabs at fastmail.com.au (Michael Verrenkamp) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:47:57 +1000 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <6a0b52c9-4811-3bdd-3699-ace1bfbce01c@posteo.de> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <26ec7928-7752-abbf-e634-ae6874ba62e4@posteo.de> <53a866e0-0b52-c1f1-4fd4-afb4f4eba0ff@fineartmarquetry.com> <6a0b52c9-4811-3bdd-3699-ace1bfbce01c@posteo.de> Message-ID: <811bb7d7-a503-219d-5f21-333ed8eaee9d@fastmail.com.au> On 26/09/2017 11:41 AM, zap wrote: > > On 09/25/2017 09:30 PM, Tor, the Marqueteur wrote: >>> without people freaking out against people in power/corporations. >> From my reading, pirates/piracy as relates to copyright was actually > Okay, I thought it was something coined by corrupt arrogant specks from > the 20th century... > > my bad. > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk  Found this on Wiki - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#.22Piracy.22 "Article 12 of the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works uses the term "piracy" in relation to copyright infringement, stating "Pirated works may be seized on importation into those countries of the Union where the original work enjoys legal protection." Michael --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus From cand at gmx.com Tue Sep 26 06:41:10 2017 From: cand at gmx.com (Lauri Kasanen) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 08:41:10 +0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 22:33:40 +0100 Pen-Yuan Hsing wrote: > I admit I don't know all the details and intricacies of Purism's > activities, but I know there was a lot of vitriol thrown its way for its > laptops during development. But if absolutely no one supported their > laptop campaigns, Purism might not have had the resource to come so > close to freeing the Intel MEs that they are working on now. And isn't > freeding the Intel ME something worth doing? > > If we think Purism's communications are not 100% accurate in saying > their products are not 100% free, that's a fair criticism. But rather > than vilifying them and saying they're terrible people, shouldn't we try > our best to engage them and suggest a better way to communicate that? > > Again, I haven't been following Purism super closely so maybe I missed > something, and definitely correct me if I'm wrong. But my bigger point > is that sometimes even small steps are valuable and we shouldn't throw > the baby out with the bathwater! You make a decent argument, however all the issues were pointed out to them during the laptop campaigns again and again, and they did not learn; they repeated them with this phone. That's willfull ignorance if not outright malevolence. 1. They advertised the laptop as 100% free, when it could not be so due to ME. 2. They advertised it would ship with coreboot, when it did not until several months after release. Deceptive advertising, and they repeated the same thing with the phone. Even if we want somebody to succeed in a less-free device, do we want them to be the people who willfully deceive in order to do so? - Lauri From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Tue Sep 26 07:00:55 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 00:00:55 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> Message-ID: <544AD58E-3E36-411F-B75D-F49D08AD677B@gmail.com> On Sep 23, 2017, at 03:47, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 8:26 AM, Richard Wilbur > wrote: > […] > so it's just something weird about the flood-fill on layer 3, > possibly due to it being a copper pour not a "plane area". don't > know. if absolutely necessary i can put in some tracks that split the > pairs. I guess we don't have to worry about layer 3 if it's going to be that uncooperative and we don't gain that much by making the desired changes. >> It would be nice to change layer 3 to make the signal path more uniform on the way through the vias but it's not the end of the world if we can't, as long as layers 2 and 5 resemble layer 4 in the vicinity of the HDMI differential signal vias adjacent to the A20. > > i have to use it as a signal layer, so there's tracks running round > the back of some of the diff-pair VIAs. Not a big deal. >> The remaining questions are where do we impose 5mil clearance (by bringing in the fill), where do we start tapering, and what does the taper look like? Likewise, but in reverse order, at the other end. > > yehyeh -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image1.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 1679649 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- If we choose to have copper fill at both ends with 5mil clearance--which will go a long way towards keeping the fields symmetric where we are trying to sort things out and don't have the space to consistently maintain a larger clearance--then in order to keep the fields symmetric as we taper up to larger clearance we need to first bring the differential pairs alongside each other at 5mil inter-pair spacing (between pairs or pair-to-pair). This is so we have better control of spacing because the smallest copper we can insert is 5mil but the smallest space is much smaller. Then to taper up, we have two options: 1. spread in both directions from the inner 2 pairs, or 2. spread to one side or the other. If we spread from the middle then the inner two pairs end up shorter than the outer two whereas if we spread from one side the straight pairs will be shorter then those which tapered away. I'm going to suggest that when we spread we move to the left which would lengthen the CLK lines more than any other. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image2.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 68469 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- Also, the taper at the ESD end should fold in from the bottom (CLK side). At that end maybe we come from 15mil to 7mil before the ESD lands, if that's the best consistent clearance through the ESD lands, then taper to 5mil before the constraining copper and maintain 5mil to the connector. >>> so. layer 1. surrounded, all 5mil. tracks are only 60mil or so to >>> the VIAs. didn't do a keepout. all 5mil. >>> >>> layer 3 (the VIAs) - some sort of curve on the flood-fill, it's 5mil >>> but there's a void in the middle. >> >> Are layers 2, 4, and 5 also 5mil away from the differential signal at the vias? > > yes. layer 3 is the only exception. Good. Then for the HDMI high-frequency effort we can pretty much ignore it--especially if we can't fix the source of non-uniformity/asymmetry. >>> layer 6, starts @ 5mil, expands out to 15mil (mostly). exceptions: >>> distance to TX2 "long wiggle" is 7mil, distance from bottom VIAs >>> along board edge (to TXC), 11.2mil, distance to track *between* the >>> VIAs 15mil. distance to GND vias ABOVE the hdmi tracks (TX2), 19mil. >>> >>> in theory then i could move the entire set of horizontal tracks up >>> by... 4 mil... i reeaallly don't want to though as it means redoing >>> the whole f*****g lot of wiggles.... argh :) >> >> Can't select and move? > > you can... but there are special rules which ensure that 45 degree > angles on two adjacent segments are "respected". it gets extremely > weird and extremely frustrating. > >> Since it is such a long section it would be beneficial to move the traces. > > argh. i kinda reached that conclusion :) > > what i can do to some degree is manually enter values (adding 4mil up > and 4 mil left/right) so that there's less to redo by hand. > >> So if we bring in the keepout at 5mil on layer 6 and taper it slowly to 7mil by the point we get to the TX2 wiggle which exhibits 7mil clearance. To make this work we have to start the pairs off around 5mil inter-pair spacing and then spread them as we taper the keepout. I realize this is more complicated than what I first described. > > it's too much. i can just about manage adding 4mil manually to every > single one of those long straights, moving them up from the 11mil > clearance to the bottom board-line VIAs to 15mil, thus taking 4mil off > that 19mil clearance and resulting in 15mil there as well. > > we don't have *room* for 7 mil inter-pair spacing. > > if i've misunderstood, do let me know. I'm pretty sure you have misunderstood: We presently have 15mil inter-pair spacing (distance between adjacent pairs) over most of the length and 5mil intra-pair spacing (distance between traces within a pair). >>> yehhh there are so many GND vias at the ESD end i'd question its >>> effectiveness... >> >> You'd question the effectiveness of what? The ESD component? The taper? > > putting in a taper at the end is significantly disrupted by the > presence of non-removable VIAs. you can *add* a taper... but then the > VIAs (which cannot be moved) are *already* within about 5mil or 7mil > of the tracks. > > what *would* work is bringing the taper in *BEFORE* the ESD > components. it also coincides with the double 45-degree bending of > the group of tracks, so is still a bit... dodgy. > > see this picture for reference: > http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/eoma68-a20-275-layer6-hdmi.jpg > > basically there's no point in tapering *after* the ESD components > because the GND vias are already closer than the taper would bring GND > in. I agree. I was going to suggest tapering down the keepout along with the inter-pair spacing before we get to the ESD lands. Maybe even before we get to the vias. I realize this could interfere with the intra-pair skew compensation at the corners if we don't work out the logistics carefully. If we have to choose an end to work on, I'd pick the connector end as it's further from the signal source and thus more likely to cause signal integrity issues. From phil at hands.com Tue Sep 26 10:41:57 2017 From: phil at hands.com (Philip Hands) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:41:57 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <811bb7d7-a503-219d-5f21-333ed8eaee9d@fastmail.com.au> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <26ec7928-7752-abbf-e634-ae6874ba62e4@posteo.de> <53a866e0-0b52-c1f1-4fd4-afb4f4eba0ff@fineartmarquetry.com> <6a0b52c9-4811-3bdd-3699-ace1bfbce01c@posteo.de> <811bb7d7-a503-219d-5f21-333ed8eaee9d@fastmail.com.au> Message-ID: <87r2ut94pm.fsf@whist.hands.com> Michael Verrenkamp writes: > On 26/09/2017 11:41 AM, zap wrote: >> >> On 09/25/2017 09:30 PM, Tor, the Marqueteur wrote: >>>> without people freaking out against people in power/corporations. >>> From my reading, pirates/piracy as relates to copyright was actually >> Okay, I thought it was something coined by corrupt arrogant specks from >> the 20th century... >> >> my bad. >> _______________________________________________ >> arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk >> http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook >> Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk >  Found this on Wiki - > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#.22Piracy.22 > > "Article 12 of the 1886 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary > and Artistic Works > > uses the term "piracy" in relation to copyright infringement, stating > "Pirated works may be seized on importation into those countries of the > Union where the original work enjoys legal protection." Wow! I really wasn't expecting this thread to produce anything useful. Thanks. I like it when I learn something new. ;-) FWIW I as a Debian Developer of 20+ years standing am pretty committed to Free Software, and have subscribed to things like the OpenMoko and the neo900, disappointingly without it resulting in a phone I can use to date. There was a lot of heat, but not very much light in this thread. Meanwhile I've signed up for one of these phones. I don't have any great expectation that they'll succeed, since I've seen previous attempts fail, but if I end up with a (mostly) Free Software based phone, running a mainstream kernel/distro that is likely to survive the demise of the project, I'll be pretty happy about it. I doubt the chances of that happening will be improved one iota by attempting to make them do things to satisfy people who, when it comes down to it, don't actually want a phone in their pocket, but rather a "100% libre" thing that looks like a phone, but cannot make phone calls unless you plug it into an external dongle (or some such). If you can show me a better project, then I might invest in that too, but in the absence of that I'm willing to put up with the level of non-freeness that is pretty-much inherent in making such a device. The neo900 folk seem to be aiming a little higher, but they also seem to have effectively failed at this point, because they have taken so long that they've lost their opportunity -- there is probably not going to be a vibrant developer community coalescing around a phone that is so far behind the curve and expensive. Also, even if it did become popular somehow, the parts are probably not available for a second run. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY From lkcl at lkcl.net Tue Sep 26 08:16:56 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 08:16:56 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: <544AD58E-3E36-411F-B75D-F49D08AD677B@gmail.com> References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> <544AD58E-3E36-411F-B75D-F49D08AD677B@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 7:00 AM, Richard Wilbur wrote: > On Sep 23, 2017, at 03:47, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >> >> On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 8:26 AM, Richard Wilbur >> wrote: >> […] >> so it's just something weird about the flood-fill on layer 3, >> possibly due to it being a copper pour not a "plane area". don't >> know. if absolutely necessary i can put in some tracks that split the >> pairs. > > I guess we don't have to worry about layer 3 if it's going to be that uncooperative and we don't gain that much by making the desired changes. wheww :) > Then to taper up, we have two options: > 1. spread in both directions from the inner 2 pairs, > or > 2. spread to one side or the other. > If we spread from the middle then the inner two pairs end up shorter than > the outer two whereas if we spread from one side the straight pairs will > be shorter then those which tapered away. I'm going to suggest that when > we spread we move to the left which would lengthen the CLK lines more than any other. ok the two diagrams are great, they explain clearly what you're suggesting. and still after misunderstanding it i think i finally get it... that you need to do the tapers simultaneously on *all* pairs... and i don't believe it's possible. ... bear in mind i really don't want to modify these tracks... :) i took out those GND spacings i was using to maintain separation... basically, it's down to the GND vias in between which are right where we want to do the tapering. up until you get past the GND vias - which are there to protect the diff-pair VIAs - all clearances are 5mil. it's the only way to have gotten the 5mil tracks in between the A20 BGA pads, for example, it's the only way to squeeze between the GND vias and still maintain straight (vertical) tracks of identical length and so on. in order to have the taper just before, it would be necessary to *close* the pairs together to a 5mil intra-pair spacing *after* the VIAs... and *then* re-open them back up again! and that's right where we want to do the wiggles... which would then have to be delayed... which they can't be because there's not enough room to put them on the straightaway.... or if they weren't they delayed then the reduced space starts interfering with how the wiggles are created.... basically it's massively complicated, and is far more than i would like to attempt at this late stage. > Also, the taper at the ESD end should fold in from the bottom (CLK side). At that end maybe we come from 15mil to 7mil before the ESD lands, if that's the best consistent clearance through the ESD lands, then taper to 5mil before the constraining copper and maintain 5mil to the connector. again: the GND vias prevent that from being possible, but in this case there is also the 45-degree length-correction wiggles to consider. now, what *might* work is putting in a very thin triangular wedge coming off (and on) each GND via, but in doing so i remember there are problems with having sharp points. in short i don't believe it's possible, and it's getting late in the day to try experimenting. > I agree. I was going to suggest tapering down the keepout along with the inter-pair spacing before we get to the ESD lands. Maybe even before we get to the vias. there's been some cross-over, i've done an update to the images on the website since. l. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Untitled1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 46258 bytes Desc: not available URL: From vkontogpls at gmail.com Tue Sep 26 13:48:24 2017 From: vkontogpls at gmail.com (Bill Kontos) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 15:48:24 +0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Lauri Kasanen wrote: > You make a decent argument, however all the issues were pointed out to > them during the laptop campaigns again and again, and they did not > learn; they repeated them with this phone. That's willfull ignorance if > not outright malevolence. > > 1. They advertised the laptop as 100% free, when it could not be so due > to ME. > 2. They advertised it would ship with coreboot, when it did not until > several months after release. > > Deceptive advertising, and they repeated the same thing with the phone. > Even if we want somebody to succeed in a less-free device, do we want > them to be the people who willfully deceive in order to do so? Honestly I don't really care. I look at the end result. Their advertisement pisses me off to no end, but at least they got something done. As it stands right now they are the no.2 most free and secure laptop manufacturer out there. If our community is so twisted that we need someone to decieve us to get people reverse engineering the intel ME just to "show them" or whatever happened, then I say well deserved. So unless some engineer comes out libv-style with proof that "I spent x amount of my time for purism to take advantage of it and I got nothing in return" my purchase decision will not change. So far all that they lied about was the timeframe at which they would ship the features, but not the features themselves. So no biggie for me. Also in regards to RYF certification I remember rms saying he wished amd would burn their firmware blobs for their gpus to rom so they could grand RYF to their cards. Sounds a bit of a foolish way to grand RYF, but if purism follows the same idea( which according to the campaign page they intend to) they might actually get it. From lkcl at lkcl.net Tue Sep 26 14:06:14 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:06:14 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Bill Kontos wrote: > nothing in return" my purchase decision will not change. So far all > that they lied about was the timeframe at which they would ship the > features, nooo, they lied - in a deceptive way - about the consequences of that quotes tiny little bit right at the beginning of the boot process quotes. they made it look like, because everything else was libre, there was really absolutely no harm done by having the ME firmware, you really had nothing to be concerned about, you could buy one of their machines and have a totally secure system. we know this to be absolute horseshit in an extremely significant way libreboot.org/faq/#intelme now, it *just so happens* that someone recently discovered that the NSA has clearly had their fingers into intel processors... because they requested a DISABLE function of the ME back-door co-processor. without such a disable function there would be absolutely no way that the NSA could authorise Intel processors for use either on their own premises or for any government usage.... because the exact same feature they demanded could be used to spy ON THEM. fucking ironic. now. is ANY of this mentioned on purism's main sales web page? if the answer is yes, i apologise deeply. l. From vkontogpls at gmail.com Tue Sep 26 14:28:05 2017 From: vkontogpls at gmail.com (Bill Kontos) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 16:28:05 +0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > they made it look like, because everything else was libre, there was > really absolutely no harm done by having the ME firmware, you really > had nothing to be concerned about, you could buy one of their machines > and have a totally secure system. > I don't recall that to be honest. From what I understand they said the laptop would ship 100% libre from the beginning while they ended up shiping a traditional laptop with killswitches and the ability to run coreboot in the future, something that they achieved now. And they have a decent number of articles about their work on disabling the intel ME. > we know this to be absolute horseshit in an extremely significant way > libreboot.org/faq/#intelme > > now, it *just so happens* that someone recently discovered that the > NSA has clearly had their fingers into intel processors... because > they requested a DISABLE function of the ME back-door co-processor. > > without such a disable function there would be absolutely no way that > the NSA could authorise Intel processors for use either on their own > premises or for any government usage.... because the exact same > feature they demanded could be used to spy ON THEM. > > fucking ironic. > > now. > > is ANY of this mentioned on purism's main sales web page? I don't think it is and that switch was only a very recent discovery. It's ironic, the moment intel moved the AMT to x86 everyone got into breaking it. And there is a scheduled talk on how to run unsigned code on any intel ME system for a conference in the next couple weeks. From lkcl at lkcl.net Tue Sep 26 15:46:34 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 15:46:34 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Bill Kontos wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton > wrote: > >> they made it look like, because everything else was libre, there was >> really absolutely no harm done by having the ME firmware, you really >> had nothing to be concerned about, you could buy one of their machines >> and have a totally secure system. >> > > I don't recall that to be honest. yes. primarily it's by omission. > From what I understand they said the > laptop would ship 100% libre from the beginning while they ended up > shiping a traditional laptop with killswitches and the ability to run > coreboot in the future, something that they achieved now. And they > have a decent number of articles about their work on disabling the > intel ME. their _requests to intel_ to disable the ME back-door co-processor... specifically requested (or, well... if the NSA "asks" you can't exactly say "No"... not if you want to stay in business...) that it be added in the first place. which do you think intel will take seriously: the threats the NSA made against them (along with the nice bribes).. or a company that makes up 0.00001% of their global business sales? > I don't think it is and that switch was only a very recent discovery. yehyeh. > It's ironic, the moment intel moved the AMT to x86 everyone got into > breaking it. And there is a scheduled talk on how to run unsigned code > on any intel ME system for a conference in the next couple weeks. at laaaast. that's extremely good news. maybe i can do an intel eoma68 card some day after all. l. From marqueteur at fineartmarquetry.com Tue Sep 26 16:18:13 2017 From: marqueteur at fineartmarquetry.com (Tor, the Marqueteur) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 05:18:13 -1000 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> Message-ID: <47f26d60-30ca-23ff-f7ab-fd14c830b202@fineartmarquetry.com> On 09/26/2017 04:46 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Bill Kontos wrote: >> It's ironic, the moment intel moved the AMT to x86 everyone got into >> breaking it. And there is a scheduled talk on how to run unsigned code >> on any intel ME system for a conference in the next couple weeks. > > at laaaast. that's extremely good news. maybe i can do an intel > eoma68 card some day after all. That opens up an interesting possibility. If that unsigned code exploit might be able to be executed remotely and it breaks the trusted security, then we could see in businesses that have to care about such things a flight to AMD and... Talos. The latter might do very nicely to put open hardware and, by extension, free software into the prime-time limelight. Of course, that depends on Intel not being able to fix it, though they'd probably be forevermore tainted by it. Tor -- Tor Chantara http://www.fineartmarquetry.com/ 808-828-1107 GPG Key: 2BE1 426E 34EA D253 D583 9DE4 B866 0375 134B 48FB *Be wary of unsigned emails* From penyuanhsing at gmail.com Tue Sep 26 19:29:46 2017 From: penyuanhsing at gmail.com (Pen-Yuan Hsing) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 19:29:46 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> Message-ID: <461afb41-c2a9-2830-abd2-55e49719ab37@gmail.com> (before I respond below, just full disclosure again: I didn't follow the Purism campaigns super closely so please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on the *facts*!) On 26/09/17 13:48, Bill Kontos wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Lauri Kasanen wrote: >> You make a decent argument, however all the issues were pointed out to >> them during the laptop campaigns again and again, and they did not >> learn; they repeated them with this phone. That's willfull ignorance if >> not outright malevolence. >> >> 1. They advertised the laptop as 100% free, when it could not be so due >> to ME. >> 2. They advertised it would ship with coreboot, when it did not until >> several months after release. >> >> Deceptive advertising, and they repeated the same thing with the phone. >> Even if we want somebody to succeed in a less-free device, do we want >> them to be the people who willfully deceive in order to do so? I certainly agree that people shouldn't "willfully deceive"! That said, there is a high bar for demonstrating **wilful** lying. This high bar is certainly true in many legal jurisdictions, and I think it's a good idea in general. As far as I remember (and atm I really don't have time to check archive.org), when the Librem laptop campaigns first began, they already had that table in their campaign description saying the BIOS and Intel ME have not yet been freed, but everything else is. At the time it looked fairly clear to me that Purism wanted to make a 100%-libre laptop but there were still a few bits missing. It also seemed clear to me that they are working on freeing those bits. One could certainly argue that Purism didn't *emphasise* the non-free bits, but to me there was no clear *wilful* lying because all the facts were on the campaign page. Another important point is that this was a crowdfunding campaign, not a traditional sales page. And like other crowdfunding campaigns, Purism laid out what they wanted to achieve. And just like other crowdfunding campaigns, there is by default no 100% guarantee that everything the project sets out to do will be 100% achieved 100% on time. Maybe I'm strange for this, but when I pledge money for a crowdfunding campaign I know I am supporting the project to move towards a goal while conscious that sometimes not all the goals are 100% achieved. And let's look at what Purism *has* achieved: They are now much closer to freeing the Intel ME on their laptops, certainly much closer than before their campaign started. This benefits everyone not just Purism, and I don't think this achievement is possible if no one supported their initial crowdfunding. I agree Purism is likely far from perfect, but during the same period of time has anyone else achieved what Purism did? (honest question) I'm a backer of the EOMA68 project and am super excited about what's being done here, but it's a different set of achievements from what Purism is working on. But whatever Purism's real intentions, my main point isn't to defend them. > Honestly I don't really care. I look at the end result. Their > advertisement pisses me off to no end, but at least they got something > done. As it stands right now they are the no.2 most free and secure > laptop manufacturer out there. If our community is so twisted that we > need someone to decieve us to get people reverse engineering the intel > ME just to "show them" or whatever happened, then I say well deserved. > So unless some engineer comes out libv-style with proof that "I spent > x amount of my time for purism to take advantage of it and I got > nothing in return" my purchase decision will not change. So far all > that they lied about was the timeframe at which they would ship the > features, but not the features themselves. So no biggie for me. Also > in regards to RYF certification I remember rms saying he wished amd > would burn their firmware blobs for their gpus to rom so they could > grand RYF to their cards. Sounds a bit of a foolish way to grand RYF, > but if purism follows the same idea( which according to the campaign > page they intend to) they might actually get it. I partly agree with Bill here. To be clear: My point isn't to *specifically* defend Purism, though they have demonstrable achievements for software freedom. My main point is that I feel the free software community *in general* is very hostile towards small steps that don't take us to 100% software freedom. If a laptop that's, say, 95%-libre is made by someone (doesn't have to be Purism), it is real progress and objectively better than a laptop that's 50% or even 0% libre. I think our response to projects that make 95%-ish-libre (or even 75%) products shouldn't be "you are a terrible person!", it should be "great job for taking us a bit closer to software freedom, how do we work together to make it even better?" This is what I think, and if you disagree on this main point (not specific to Purism) I'd honestly love to hear your opinion! From maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me Tue Sep 26 23:56:40 2017 From: maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me (Alexander Ross) Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 23:56:40 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Standardized Battery Pack Sizes? Message-ID: <64088c37-7bd2-0e01-c1b9-c5cb1304de53@aross.me> One of the things ive been doing lately is diy battery boxes to power my gear (sound systems and lights). I see there’s a lack of cheap standard dimensioned battery packs. theres only popular proprietary ones. Sony camera/lighting li-ion 2S packs or drill packs, RC lipo packs but not in a hard case. this all end up being quite expensive compared to raw li-ion cells + BMS. With gadgets there seams to also be a problem. handheld computers like prya,zipit,eoma68 laptop[1],gpd pocket,etc use custom lipo cells which are very difficult to get replacements of because there not common but custom sizes. [1] luke, the eoma68 laptop li-ion cell is a non typical right? i know its a ebike battery cell but i assume theres no typical ebike li-ion cell dimensions? Why can’t we start cheap standard dimensions battery packs? I guess mass produced of the shelf is needed but what current company is going to start that? We have standard dimensions lithium cell sizes like the classic 18650 but devices want flat slim lipos :/. For large packs they need to be carefully balanced cells particularly when in parallel. So having mass produced battery boxes that users replace the cells in when the old cells die, i guess is not much good due to the unknowns in how much the cells match each other? Are there other solutions? Could we have enthusiast packs that are just in series with just 18650s in series for more Wh? upto hmm 6S? and for larger mah switch to more expensive 26650? would this be a in our power solution? would just diy people adapt it? or could products adapt it too? oww there is AA sized lithium cells too: 14500 maybe they could fit into designs of our little gadgets instead of flat lipo cells? if we really need small flat lipo cells, what would it take for a set of standard dimensions? What about large say 5Ah-20Ah sized cells and getting standardized battery packs? for all those large portable speakers or portable solar pods/battery power supply box products and ebikes,etc. Currently some use lead acid retro fit lithium packs but with balancing done internally by the bms, but how acceptingly is that? From jbn at forestfield.org Wed Sep 27 08:10:56 2017 From: jbn at forestfield.org (J.B. Nicholson) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 02:10:56 -0500 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> Message-ID: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > now, it *just so happens* that someone recently discovered that the > NSA has clearly had their fingers into intel processors... because > they requested a DISABLE function of the ME back-door co-processor. > > without such a disable function there would be absolutely no way that > the NSA could authorise Intel processors for use either on their own > premises or for any government usage.... because the exact same > feature they demanded could be used to spy ON THEM. > > fucking ironic. Quite; does this disable function fully and completely disable all attempts at using any ME functionality such that nothing can re-enable the ME, or is this disablement somehow impermanent or more limited in some way? I ask because I vaguely recall that someone (Purism, perhaps?) had remote ME accesses disabled but still allowed local accesses. This struck me as nearly useless because such an arrangement would allow running a program to relay ME requests and responses over a network connection (an ME proxy, basically). From phil at hands.com Wed Sep 27 09:58:56 2017 From: phil at hands.com (Philip Hands) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 10:58:56 +0200 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> Message-ID: <87fub88qlr.fsf@whist.hands.com> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes: > --- > crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 > > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:48 PM, Bill Kontos wrote: > >> nothing in return" my purchase decision will not change. So far all >> that they lied about was the timeframe at which they would ship the >> features, > > nooo, they lied - in a deceptive way Lying in a deceptive way? Surely not! ;-) I think that it's fairly normal practice to omit inconvenient facts in one's publicity, which is what appears to be the case, although it's really hard to tell since I didn't see the material in question, and no citations seem to have been given throughout this discussion, so the whole thing seems rather like a lot of mumbled rumour. I suspect that the EOMA crowdfunding, if subjected to the same level of scrutiny, might also be found wanting. Did it for instance mention your qualifications (or lack thereof) in the field of mechanical engineering, which might be considered a relevant fact when considering funding you to build a laptop from scratch? Is that omission a case of lying, be that in a deceptive way or otherwise? Looking at the publicity for the phone, I note that I know several of people involved with this (unless they are using people's photos without permission, and making up quotes -- which I can always check if that's what people are trying to say). Assuming the endorsements are genuine, then I know these people well enough to know that they'd only endorse something that they genuinely thought to be a good thing, as I'm pretty sure they all know how easy it is to tarnish one's reputation. If there really is something wrong with this project, then point me at actual evidence (rather than a lot of unsubstantiated assertions), and I'll pass that on so that those people can withdraw their support before the crowdfunding succeeds, which should limit the overall damage. If it all just boils down to making the perfect the enemy of the good, then I suggest that you stop shouting "Splitters!" at them for using the word Free when you think they meant Libre, or vice versa, or whatever. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/ http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg, GERMANY From vkontogpls at gmail.com Wed Sep 27 11:59:46 2017 From: vkontogpls at gmail.com (Bill Kontos) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 13:59:46 +0300 Subject: [Arm-netbook] OT: Librem 5? In-Reply-To: References: <84998fb9-2a12-44f6-cbcf-9f5451f34b86@aross.me> <20170925114747.n5qyyqk5u27h44bm@lemon.cohens.org.il> <1506365397.2924.0@plebeian.isacdaavid.info> <6b3b332e-2792-feb0-fb2e-c56ee6994722@gmail.com> <20170926084110.b9e1e5a3de25072cbd470d5f@gmx.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 10:10 AM, J.B. Nicholson wrote: > > > Quite; does this disable function fully and completely disable all attempts > at using any ME functionality such that nothing can re-enable the ME, or is > this disablement somehow impermanent or more limited in some way? > AFAIK the ME will start booting, see the switch, disable the watchdog that would shut the machine down in 30 minutes normally and turn itself off. > I ask because I vaguely recall that someone (Purism, perhaps?) had remote ME > accesses disabled but still allowed local accesses. This struck me as nearly > useless because such an arrangement would allow running a program to relay > ME requests and responses over a network connection (an ME proxy, > basically). > No Purism has effectively disabled the ME completely at this point. I say effectively because they have disabled everything but the BUP module. So no it doesn't have remote access and it can't run anny 3d party code. It seems like they have put this on hold and switched to porting Coreboot. But even assuming they had only disabled remote access wouldn't that mean that an attacker would need physical access to the machine instead of doing a remote attack? https://puri.sm/posts/neutralizing-intel-management-engine-on-librem-laptops/ > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk From lkcl at lkcl.net Wed Sep 27 10:05:35 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 10:05:35 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Standardized Battery Pack Sizes? In-Reply-To: <64088c37-7bd2-0e01-c1b9-c5cb1304de53@aross.me> References: <64088c37-7bd2-0e01-c1b9-c5cb1304de53@aross.me> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Alexander Ross wrote: > [1] luke, the eoma68 laptop li-ion cell is a non typical right? that's incorrect. it's a lithium polymer battery. it's therefore chemically stable. l. From maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me Wed Sep 27 14:42:11 2017 From: maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me (Alexander Ross) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 14:42:11 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Standardized Battery Pack Sizes? In-Reply-To: References: <64088c37-7bd2-0e01-c1b9-c5cb1304de53@aross.me> Message-ID: <5f69ce20-2f6b-7b6f-2678-c5dcd2f3f0b4@aross.me> On 27/09/17 10:05, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Alexander Ross > wrote: > >> [1] luke, the eoma68 laptop li-ion cell is a non typical right? > > that's incorrect. it's a lithium polymer battery. it's therefore > chemically stable. yea sorry. I know its a polymer plastic pouch style. Apologises for using incorrect name at the time. I didn’t say anything about chemically stable, of course it is. I thought li-ion was same thing as li-po chemically but with plastic in between. I was referring to the dimensions. which i suspect may happen to be what the ebike lipo manufacturer is making? Not questing you decision. Trying to learn about and question the status quo of lipo dimensions :) Apologies for the long thread post btw, guess i could have simplified it some what heh. Thanks again. From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Wed Sep 27 14:58:17 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 09:58:17 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Standardized Battery Pack Sizes? In-Reply-To: <5f69ce20-2f6b-7b6f-2678-c5dcd2f3f0b4@aross.me> References: <64088c37-7bd2-0e01-c1b9-c5cb1304de53@aross.me> <5f69ce20-2f6b-7b6f-2678-c5dcd2f3f0b4@aross.me> Message-ID: Typing on phone, please excuse top post. Lithium ion cells are somewhat sedate, but cannot release as much current at once as lithium polymer cells can. Lithium iron phosphate cells are similarly sedare, but have capacities and discharge abilities more like those of lithium polymer cells. Lithium polymer cells are the ones on YouTube that catch fire (or worse) at slight provocation. They tend to (pick one) melt, catch fire, or explode during recharge, if the parameters are at all even slightly off. Most phones also use lithium polymer cells, though - usually a single flatpack in a case. These flatpacks need room to expand, whether in a case or "non-removeable" inside the phone. What happened with the infamous Galaxy Note 7 was that the designers did not pay attention to this requirement. The batteries tried to expand, couldn't, and shorted out internally as a result. Boom. On Sep 27, 2017 9:42 AM, "Alexander Ross" wrote: > On 27/09/17 10:05, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Alexander Ross > > wrote: > > > >> [1] luke, the eoma68 laptop li-ion cell is a non typical right? > > > > that's incorrect. it's a lithium polymer battery. it's therefore > > chemically stable. > > yea sorry. I know its a polymer plastic pouch style. Apologises for > using incorrect name at the time. I didn’t say anything about chemically > stable, of course it is. I thought li-ion was same thing as li-po > chemically but with plastic in between. > > I was referring to the dimensions. which i suspect may happen to be what > the ebike lipo manufacturer is making? Not questing you decision. Trying > to learn about and question the status quo of lipo dimensions :) > > Apologies for the long thread post btw, guess i could have simplified it > some what heh. > > Thanks again. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk From maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me Wed Sep 27 15:42:04 2017 From: maillist_arm-netbook at aross.me (Alexander Ross) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 15:42:04 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Standardized Battery Pack Sizes? In-Reply-To: References: <64088c37-7bd2-0e01-c1b9-c5cb1304de53@aross.me> <5f69ce20-2f6b-7b6f-2678-c5dcd2f3f0b4@aross.me> Message-ID: <982993a1-74fb-25a3-7070-fac1d2dc49f0@aross.me> On 27/09/17 14:58, Christopher Havel wrote: > Typing on phone, please excuse top post. > > Lithium ion cells are somewhat sedate, but cannot release as much current > at once as lithium polymer cells can. Lithium iron phosphate cells are > similarly sedare, but have capacities and discharge abilities more like > those of lithium polymer cells. arr didnt know about the quick and high current discharge of li-po vs li-ion. oh and thx for lifepo vs lipo too. thought lifepo could do high dischage but didnt know it was simular to lipo. oow i learnt some more :) thanks > > Lithium polymer cells are the ones on YouTube that catch fire (or worse) at > slight provocation. They tend to (pick one) melt, catch fire, or explode > during recharge, if the parameters are at all even slightly off. > > Most phones also use lithium polymer cells, though - usually a single > flatpack in a case. These flatpacks need room to expand, whether in a case > or "non-removeable" inside the phone. What happened with the infamous > Galaxy Note 7 was that the designers did not pay attention to this > requirement. The batteries tried to expand, couldn't, and shorted out > internally as a result. Boom. Yea tried to leave/naturally left a little bit of room in my wooden battery box. hmm guess 1,2or3mm total for front and back and 1cm or so along one side with foam to pad/fill the gap. hmm didnt do any calculations for how much space to leave. kinda assumed that i had enough/ wasn’t trying to make it a tight fit but overall compact. using the bits of wood i had for a compact, strong box. its a 4S 20AH pack... http://hobbyking.co.uk/hobbyking/store/uh_viewitem.asp?idproduct=80904 you’ve got me reassessing my decisions... hope its ok... got a temperature alarm with sensor along the side. plus 2x cell voltage monitors/alarms. From laserhawk64 at gmail.com Wed Sep 27 15:43:55 2017 From: laserhawk64 at gmail.com (Christopher Havel) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 10:43:55 -0400 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Standardized Battery Pack Sizes? In-Reply-To: <982993a1-74fb-25a3-7070-fac1d2dc49f0@aross.me> References: <64088c37-7bd2-0e01-c1b9-c5cb1304de53@aross.me> <5f69ce20-2f6b-7b6f-2678-c5dcd2f3f0b4@aross.me> <982993a1-74fb-25a3-7070-fac1d2dc49f0@aross.me> Message-ID: Phone again, sorry again... 10% of battery height is your minimum space. On Sep 27, 2017 10:42 AM, "Alexander Ross" wrote: > On 27/09/17 14:58, Christopher Havel wrote: > > Typing on phone, please excuse top post. > > > > Lithium ion cells are somewhat sedate, but cannot release as much current > > at once as lithium polymer cells can. Lithium iron phosphate cells are > > similarly sedare, but have capacities and discharge abilities more like > > those of lithium polymer cells. > arr didnt know about the quick and high current discharge of li-po vs > li-ion. oh and thx for lifepo vs lipo too. thought lifepo could do high > dischage but didnt know it was simular to lipo. oow i learnt some more > :) thanks > > > > > Lithium polymer cells are the ones on YouTube that catch fire (or worse) > at > > slight provocation. They tend to (pick one) melt, catch fire, or explode > > during recharge, if the parameters are at all even slightly off. > > > > Most phones also use lithium polymer cells, though - usually a single > > flatpack in a case. These flatpacks need room to expand, whether in a > case > > or "non-removeable" inside the phone. What happened with the infamous > > Galaxy Note 7 was that the designers did not pay attention to this > > requirement. The batteries tried to expand, couldn't, and shorted out > > internally as a result. Boom. > > Yea tried to leave/naturally left a little bit of room in my wooden > battery box. hmm guess 1,2or3mm total for front and back and 1cm or so > along one side with foam to pad/fill the gap. hmm didnt do any > calculations for how much space to leave. kinda assumed that i had > enough/ wasn’t trying to make it a tight fit but overall compact. using > the bits of wood i had for a compact, strong box. its a 4S 20AH pack... > http://hobbyking.co.uk/hobbyking/store/uh_viewitem.asp?idproduct=80904 > > you’ve got me reassessing my decisions... hope its ok... got a > temperature alarm with sensor along the side. plus 2x cell voltage > monitors/alarms. > > _______________________________________________ > arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook at lists.phcomp.co.uk > http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook > Send large attachments to arm-netbook at files.phcomp.co.uk From lkcl at lkcl.net Wed Sep 27 16:04:35 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 16:04:35 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Standardized Battery Pack Sizes? In-Reply-To: <5f69ce20-2f6b-7b6f-2678-c5dcd2f3f0b4@aross.me> References: <64088c37-7bd2-0e01-c1b9-c5cb1304de53@aross.me> <5f69ce20-2f6b-7b6f-2678-c5dcd2f3f0b4@aross.me> Message-ID: --- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Alexander Ross wrote: > On 27/09/17 10:05, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Alexander Ross >> wrote: >> >>> [1] luke, the eoma68 laptop li-ion cell is a non typical right? >> >> that's incorrect. it's a lithium polymer battery. it's therefore >> chemically stable. > > yea sorry. I know its a polymer plastic pouch style. Apologises for > using incorrect name at the time. I didn’t say anything about chemically > stable, of course it is. I thought li-ion was same thing as li-po > chemically but with plastic in between. > > I was referring to the dimensions. which i suspect may happen to be what > the ebike lipo manufacturer is making? correct. http://hands.com/~lkcl/eoma/laptop_15in/EV%20GPNCM62135160%2010Ah%20NiCoMn%20battery%20cell.pdf datasheet. From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Wed Sep 27 19:03:00 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 12:03:00 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> <544AD58E-3E36-411F-B75D-F49D08AD677B@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sep 26, 2017, at 01:16, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 7:00 AM, Richard Wilbur > wrote: >> Then to taper up, we have two options: >> 1. spread in both directions from the inner 2 pairs, >> or >> 2. spread to one side or the other. > >> If we spread from the middle then the inner two pairs end up shorter than >> the outer two whereas if we spread from one side the straight pairs will >> be shorter then those which tapered away. I'm going to suggest that when >> we spread we move to the left which would lengthen the CLK lines more than any other. > > ok the two diagrams are great, they explain clearly what you're > suggesting. and still after misunderstanding it i think i finally get > it... that you need to do the tapers simultaneously on *all* pairs... > and i don't believe it's possible. I understand it may not be possible to do the taper in the space we have available. I just wanted to note the minimum length in the signal propagation direction for the two geometries of the taper of the inter-pair clearance between 5 and 15mil: 1. spread/contract from/towards the middle: 15mil 2. spread/contract from/towards one side: 30mil > ... bear in mind i really don't want to modify these tracks... :) i > took out those GND spacings i was using to maintain separation... > > basically, it's down to the GND vias in between which are right where > we want to do the tapering. up until you get past the GND vias - > which are there to protect the diff-pair VIAs - all clearances are > 5mil. it's the only way to have gotten the 5mil tracks in between the > A20 BGA pads, for example, it's the only way to squeeze between the > GND vias and still maintain straight (vertical) tracks of identical > length and so on. > > in order to have the taper just before, it would be necessary to > *close* the pairs together to a 5mil intra-pair spacing *after* the > VIAs... and *then* re-open them back up again! and that's right > where we want to do the wiggles... which would then have to be > delayed... which they can't be because there's not enough room to put > them on the straightaway.... or if they weren't they delayed then the > reduced space starts interfering with how the wiggles are created.... > > basically it's massively complicated, and is far more than i would > like to attempt at this late stage. We certainly don't have to do any specific explicit taper. We're getting one for free at the connector end with the ESD and connector lands. I guess I'd be reticent to impose a taper that doesn't either maintain or improve the symmetry of clearances and impedances. I don't think we would necessarily call it progress if we reduced the reflection coefficient on a few traces and simultaneously increased the impedance imbalance between the traces of one or more differential pairs (shifting signal energy from differential to single-ended conduction, raising the spectre of EMI). >> Also, the taper at the ESD end should fold in from the bottom (CLK side). At that end maybe we come from 15mil to 7mil before the ESD lands, if that's the best consistent clearance through the ESD lands, then taper to 5mil before the constraining copper and maintain 5mil to the connector. > > again: the GND vias prevent that from being possible, but in this > case there is also the 45-degree length-correction wiggles to > consider. Problematic, I agree. > now, what *might* work is putting in a very thin triangular wedge > coming off (and on) each GND via, but in doing so i remember there are > problems with having sharp points. > > in short i don't believe it's possible, and it's getting late in the > day to try experimenting. That it is. By the way, I was reading Toradex, page 23 to review their recommendations regarding intra-pair skew compensation (the wiggles) and happened to notice that they actually said that turns within 15mm(millimeters not mils!!!) are close enough that, if complementary, can be considered to have cancelled out the intra-pair skew so that no compensation is needed. 15mm ~= 590mil! Oops, I misquoted that value as 15mil in my earlier recommendations! Sorry about the mistake, that value is actually a good deal more forgiving and generous than I made it sound. That could even obviate the need for all of our intra-pair skew compensation on the connector side of the long horizontal straight section! How far are the turns from each other? Just eyeballing it I'd say consecutive turns are no more than 150mil from each other on the ascending section (heading northeast). >> I agree. I was going to suggest tapering down the keepout along with the inter-pair spacing before we get to the ESD lands. Maybe even before we get to the vias. > > there's been some cross-over, i've done an update to the images on > the website since. Let's go with the layer 6 that doesn't have an explicit taper.[*] It's more symmetric for all the pairs and open like layer 1 at the connector end. I thank you for all the hard work you've put in on this effort--laying things out, re-laying things out, adjusting things, and pushing back on things that sound bad or don't make sense till either I see they don't make sense or you see that they do. Reference: [*] http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/eoma68-a20-275-layer6-hdmi.jpg From wookey at wookware.org Wed Sep 27 19:58:49 2017 From: wookey at wookware.org (Wookey) Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 19:58:49 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] Standardized Battery Pack Sizes? In-Reply-To: <982993a1-74fb-25a3-7070-fac1d2dc49f0@aross.me> References: <64088c37-7bd2-0e01-c1b9-c5cb1304de53@aross.me> <5f69ce20-2f6b-7b6f-2678-c5dcd2f3f0b4@aross.me> <982993a1-74fb-25a3-7070-fac1d2dc49f0@aross.me> Message-ID: <20170927185849.GT29127@mail.wookware.org> On 2017-09-27 15:42 +0100, Alexander Ross wrote: > On 27/09/17 14:58, Christopher Havel wrote: > > Typing on phone, please excuse top post. > > > > Lithium ion cells are somewhat sedate, but cannot release as much current > > at once as lithium polymer cells can. Lithium iron phosphate cells are > > similarly sedare, but have capacities and discharge abilities more like > > those of lithium polymer cells. > arr didnt know about the quick and high current discharge of li-po vs > li-ion. oh and thx for lifepo vs lipo too. thought lifepo could do high > dischage but didnt know it was simular to lipo. oow i learnt some more It's even more complicated than this. Li-ion can be almost as high-discharge as Lipo cells, but there is a current/capacity tradoff (more accurately a tradeoff between maximising capacity, or minimising internal resistance). So powertools use 18650 li-ion cells which can do 20 or 30A discharge, but these have 1.5Ah capacity, not 3Ah, which good lower-discharge cells will have. Compare the datasheets for LG INR18650-HB2 (high power 30A:, low capacity 1.5Ah) https://www.nkon.nl/lg-hb2-1500mah-30a.html and Samsung ICR18650-29E (low power: 8.3A, high capacity: 2.9Ah) https://www.nkon.nl/rechargeable/18650-size/samsung-icr18650-30a.html 'Lithium-ion' covers a multitude of slightly different battery chemistries with different pros and cons (and ages). lithium-manganese, lithium-cobalt (early 18650s), lithium iron phosphate ('LFP', or 'LiFePO'), (both with and without ytterbium) often in much larger-format cells, lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide: 'NMC', in many modern 18650s), and lithium nickel cobalt aluminium ('NCA'). Many are interchangeable, but sometimes the differences matter. LFP has significantly lower voltage (3.3 nominal vs 3.6) and thus energy density. LiPos normally come in pouch format and have a slightly higher charge voltage (4.2V vs 4.1V), both of which features improve energy density, but are really the same set of chemistries as Li-ion, but with a different electrolyte and format). LFP won't catch fire. Lithium cobalt can, and is highly exothermic if it does, which is one reason other chemsistries have become more popular (and cobalt is now very expensive). Lipo's like to burn too, but more modern chemistries (NMC, NCA) tend to be much safer. And new things are happening in this area all the time, with some exciting developments in glass combined electrolyte/separators. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_polymer_battery Wookey -- Principal hats: Linaro, Debian, Wookware, ARM http://wookware.org/ From lkcl at lkcl.net Thu Sep 28 10:36:18 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 10:36:18 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> <544AD58E-3E36-411F-B75D-F49D08AD677B@gmail.com> Message-ID: http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/eoma68-a20-hdmi-275-new-keepout-taper2.jpg ok that's the latest, a few tweaks still needed. yes saw about the 15mm not 15mil... whoops :) so all those little tweaks... gone. maybe shouldn't have removed the ones on the USB-OTG line but... oh well. anyway... moved the tracks up by 4 mil so they're now 15 mil from board-edge GND and 15 mil from the top line. sorted out the wiggles (aagain!!). taper... really not certain where to put it (starting point) - thoughts appreciated. end... just before the 45-degree bend into the VIAs and ESD. a few tweaks of VIAs along the way to ensure the GND flood-fill isn't broken. the image is hi-res enough so that GND VIAs (covered by flood-fill) can just be identified by the word "GND". l. From richard.wilbur at gmail.com Sat Sep 30 18:47:15 2017 From: richard.wilbur at gmail.com (Richard Wilbur) Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 11:47:15 -0600 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> <544AD58E-3E36-411F-B75D-F49D08AD677B@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sep 28, 2017, at 03:36, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > > http://rhombus-tech.net/allwinner_a10/news/eoma68-a20-hdmi-275-new-keepout-taper2.jpg > > ok that's the latest, a few tweaks still needed. yes saw about the > 15mm not 15mil... whoops :) so all those little tweaks... gone. > maybe shouldn't have removed the ones on the USB-OTG line but... oh > well. HDMI looks good without the little wiggles (which, it turns out, weren't essential) towards the connector side. I didn't notice the wiggles on the USB OTG lines. Were they in the pictures you released? > anyway... moved the tracks up by 4 mil so they're now 15 mil from > board-edge GND and 15 mil from the top line. Very nice! It looks cleaner and more symmetric. > sorted out the wiggles > (again!!). Courage, mate. Be careful in the wiggles if you make a high-frequency trace turn parallel to itself that those parallel sections are at least separated by a distance of 4*trace width=20mil. Otherwise the parallel sections look like antennae to the high-frequency signals which simply radiate straight across and bypass the intended delay path. I notice some of your wiggles have no parallel sections and some do. > taper... really not certain where to put it (starting point) - > thoughts appreciated. What type of taper? An approximation of Klopfenstein, or just a symmetric easing of the transition? > end... just before the 45-degree bend into the VIAs and ESD. That's a fine place to end it. Along the bottom margin there's a little corner in the fill that sticks out towards the trace where the keepout geometry crosses the 5mil clearance. Not to worry, it will disappear with my recommendations for the taper. Can I send a diagram this evening? > a few tweaks of VIAs along the way to ensure the GND flood-fill > isn't broken. the image is hi-res enough so that GND VIAs (covered by > flood-fill) can just be identified by the word "GND". Thanks. Looks good. From lkcl at lkcl.net Sat Sep 30 21:10:12 2017 From: lkcl at lkcl.net (Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton) Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 21:10:12 +0100 Subject: [Arm-netbook] HDMI High-Frequency Layout: Recommendations In-Reply-To: References: <04496B4C-7BB6-4619-804C-C0296761F558@gmail.com> <0620D014-55E0-41C1-9CBF-B671898D7187@gmail.com> <110EC969-7221-42CE-9B54-F6D658E8BC90@gmail.com> <61C5A163-9A5C-4BD4-8DE6-65A418082907@gmail.com> <8A03534C-A3F6-4689-98FA-C4DD6CF465E2@gmail.com> <4E311CA5-D091-4E6B-8CD7-82F8DC7ECBD1@gmail.com> <544AD58E-3E36-411F-B75D-F49D08AD677B@gmail.com> Message-ID: hiya richard, getting there, thx for this - will reply tomorrow. yes of course, send diagram. l.