1. Home
  2. Field-Programmable Gate Arrays
  3. comp.arch.reconfig

comp.arch.reconfig

I'd like to canvass opinion here. I'm sure opinions will vary greatly. The question is: Is is time to create a new group devoted entirely to general-purpose reconfigurable computing.

In the usenet space, comp.arch.fpga is the best location for discussions related to "reconfigurable computing". I am well aware that mostly any use of an FPGA could be termed "reconfigurable computing" but I use the term here to describe attempts to create general-purpose computers based around reconfigurable logic. I am aware that this was the original intention of the comp.arch.fpga group. Times have changed however, the majority of FPGAs are destined for uses such as DSP and not as reconfigurable computing processing units.

I'm quite sure that many people will state that there is room enough for both on this board and that the two aren't that far removed but I'm not so sure. Threads have a tendancy to migrate away from reconfigurable computing as I understand it.

The following post from 1997 seems relevant to this discussion:

formatting link

So, who here would be interested in creating a reconfigurable computing only group? Incidentally, one exists already at openfpga.org:

formatting link

It's been quiet so far but I think it just needs a push to get started. It may however be too far off the beaten track to ever see much action.

Thanks,

Robin

Reply to
Robin Bruce
Loading thread data ...

When this newsgroup is overloaded with postings regarding reconfigurable computing, such a new group might be indicated.

-- Mike Treseler

Reply to
Mike Treseler

Hi Robin, Interestingly enough, I believe this group started off with this charter:-

CHARTER

The unmoderated newsgroup comp.arch.fpga will be open to discussions on all topics related to the use of reconfigurable Field Programmable Gate Arrays (FPGAs) as computational engines.

see:-

formatting link

That's why it's in the comp. hierarchy.

Perhaps you should complain about all the non-computing folks spamming your newsgroup? :-)

Cheers, Syms.

Reply to
Symon

John Williams started a partial-reconfig-mailing list a few years back:

formatting link

You can find the list archives here:

formatting link

Traffic is moderate, but I believe most active "reconfigurators" read it and post there regularly. I think this list is "the place to be" when you're doing something with partial reconfig at the moment.

cu, Sean

Reply to
Sean Durkin

Actually, all the electrical engineering design questions, and FPGA product support questions here are probably off topic, as this forum was SUPPOSED to be about FPGA computing, not hardware design and FPGA VHDL/Verilog design support questions.

Maybe what needs to happen, is creating an FPGA hardware design forum some place else for the hardware designers and FPGA vendors product support discussions?

Reply to
fpga_toys

I suppose it would make sense to change the charter of this newsgroup to reflect usage. Joking aside, c.a.f pretty well reflects how the majority of FPGAs are actually used, so I wouldn't make the case that there's anything wrong with the group. I suppose I believe that there's more interest in reconfigurable computing than is being suggested by the volume of posts here. Maybe the best thing for me to do in the short run is to try and start up a few reconfigurable-computing posts here and see what happens.

Rob> Rob> > I'd like to canvass opinion here. I'm sure opinions will vary greatly.

Reply to
Robin Bruce

Sean,

thanks for your post. Partial Reconfiguration is something that is of interest to reconfigurable computing as I understand it, but it's not something that anyone is putting on their critical path. Xilinx FPGAs are not currently designed with commercially-viable partial reconfiguration and the toolchains, although developing, are still not there. Dynamic reconfiguration is probably about as far as it goes for most people.

The best example of "reconfigurable computing" as I understand it at present is embodied by SRC computers. Their SRC-6 and SRC-7 machines tightly couple microprocessors to FPGAs and provide a development environment that balances a high-level of abstraction from FPGA design with high performance. Check out the performance stats for the SRC-7:

formatting link

Cheers,

Robin

Reply to
Robin Bruce

That's probably true, but somehow seems to defeat the sense of order that the usenet folks setup to catorgize topics/groups. There are other places for electronics, engineering, and product support for those.

Comp.arch just isn't the place for VHDL/Verilog training and support, particularly for vendor specific issues. Nor is circuit level design, interfacing, etc really an computer architecture topic for custom hardware. Even partial reconfiguration for most hardware projects, isn't on topic, although a related technology for this group.

SoC, reconfigurable computing, and even hardware designs for building fpga computers would be on topic for a comp.arch rooted group.

Reply to
fpga_toys

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.