Very Computer

 I'm a hardware guy and if the trends that I see continue I see some
very interesting things happening soon. For example: As 32-bit micros
get more and more embedded memory, it will eventually become practial
to ship them with an OS on chip.
 As an example take the last 32-bit design that I did. It was a 5272
coldfire with 8MB of FLASH, 8MB of SDRAM, and an ethnet PHY on a
72-pin SO-DIMM. Motorola recently released the 5282 with 512KB FLASH,
and 64KB DRAM. This isn't enough memory for Linux, but extrapolate the
trend out to the next chip cycle and it might be.
 Is anyone here working on this or looking at the same trend? We've
probably all heard the SOC hype, but IMHO it won't be real until the
hardware comes with software.

says...

Quote:

> I'm a hardware guy and if the trends that I see continue I see some
>very interesting things happening soon. For example: As 32-bit micros
>get more and more embedded memory, it will eventually become practial
>to ship them with an OS on chip.
> As an example take the last 32-bit design that I did. It was a 5272
>coldfire with 8MB of FLASH, 8MB of SDRAM, and an ethnet PHY on a
>72-pin SO-DIMM. Motorola recently released the 5282 with 512KB FLASH,
>and 64KB DRAM. This isn't enough memory for Linux, but extrapolate the
>trend out to the next chip cycle and it might be.
> Is anyone here working on this or looking at the same trend? We've
>probably all heard the SOC hype, but IMHO it won't be real until the
>hardware comes with software.

Have a  look at the AXIS MCM at http://developer.axis.com/products/mcm/

Zoran

Quote:

>Have a  look at the AXIS MCM at http://developer.axis.com/products/mcm/

32Bit Risc Core ? Any known ? MIPS,ARM,ARC ???

Price ?

---
42Bastian

Quote:

> >Have a  look at the AXIS MCM at http://developer.axis.com/products/mcm/

> 32Bit Risc Core ? Any known ? MIPS,ARM,ARC ???

AXIS own core ??? I don't know exactly, but I'm working with this product
line for 3 years and it's perfect to set-up a decent embedded system...

Quote:

> Price ?

Ask them, they are fast and efficient...

Quote:>  I'm a hardware guy and if the trends that I see continue I see some
> very interesting things happening soon.

I agree <g>.

Quote:> For example: As 32-bit micros
> get more and more embedded memory, it will eventually become practial
> to ship them with an OS on chip.

I don't agree. As flash is a very different process than logic and RAM
and as flash cells are huge, on-chip RAM costs a lot of space and money.
So I suppose we'll see lots of internal RAM bit no big internal flash on
future high-performance processors. Take a look at www.ubicom.com. They
designed a new series of embedded 32 Bit RISK processors (IP3K). Same
have internal 32 Bit program ram and internal dual ported 32 Bit data
ram. On one of their white papers they elaborate on their design
decisions.

They provide a GNU based SDK that includes a (kind of) multitasking OS
but they don't seem to consider a Linux port.

-Michael

Quote:> very interesting things happening soon. For example: As 32-bit micros
> get more and more embedded memory, it will eventually become practial
> to ship them with an OS on chip.

We're already at the point where it is possible. The question is
whether it makes any sense. The primary purpose of an OS is to provide
a standardized set of functionality, usually across different
hardware. If there is value in obscuring the underlying hardware (e.g.
for DRM reasons) then it makes sense to ship a chip with an OS
preloaded and tell the developer to treat it as a black box.

But for almost any other set of circumstances, it makes far better
sense to allow the developer to customize the OS for his own design
priorities, or to choose a different OS if needs be; in which case,
there is no point pre-flashing anything onto the chip.

Quote:>> very interesting things happening soon. For example: As 32-bit micros
>> get more and more embedded memory, it will eventually become practial
>> to ship them with an OS on chip.

>We're already at the point where it is possible. The question is
>whether it makes any sense. The primary purpose of an OS is to provide
>a standardized set of functionality, usually across different
>hardware. If there is value in obscuring the underlying hardware (e.g.
>for DRM reasons) then it makes sense to ship a chip with an OS
>preloaded and tell the developer to treat it as a black box.

>But for almost any other set of circumstances, it makes far better
>sense to allow the developer to customize the OS for his own design
>priorities, or to choose a different OS if needs be; in which case,
>there is no point pre-flashing anything onto the chip.

 You don't nessesarily want to hide the underlying hardware, you just
want to make it easy to use. In small run embedded designs the time
and expense of porting or designing the system (especially the
software) is the major expense. The virtualization also frees you from
the ball-and-chain of hardware dependency that plagues most embedded
designes as well. Yes?