4 ms·

AllWinner - I remember that their software support is horrible. Support and documentation was non-existing last time I looked. Has this changed recently? Is t

AllWinner - I remember that their software support is horrible. Support and documentation was non-existing last time I looked. Has this changed recently? Is there mainline support for AllWinner now or is this still a copy/paste crapfest with branches and huge patchsets?

rwmj 6y ago
Basically yes it's as you describe, but I want to add that the https://linux-sunxi.org/ https://linux-sunxi.org/ project has been doing brilliant work for AllWinner's ARM chips.
- PragmaticPulp 6y ago
  AllWinner parts are not bad if, and only if, the features you need are already clearly supported. Don’t invest in an AllWinner-based design expecting to implement key SoC features later. If it doesn’t work right now, there’s no guarantee it will ever be supported. That said, upstream support for AllWinner parts has come a long way and continues to improve. I wouldn’t mind using them in certain projects. However, anyone who absolutely needs good documentation and SoC support needs to stick with a vendor that emphasizes openness and good documentation. NXP i.MX is the safe choice.
- wojciii 6y ago
  Yes, the project is great and very useful. I wish the HW companies either document their devices or pay someone who understands software to work on it instead just releasing nearly working prototypes and then continuing to another project abandoning HW with old kernels. I got burned by AllWinner once and will not buy devices using them unless I have a very good reason. :)
davidlt 6y ago
IIRC Allwinner has already sent some patches related to RISC-V to kernel and also suggestions to SBI specification. So far the beginning is good. Remember that they are using IP from Alibaba. Alibaba might as well work on upstreaming, etc. efforts for this (speculation).
userbinator 6y ago
Support and documentation was non-existing last time I looked. Still better than Broadcom... at least you can find the (very long) datasheets for a lot of their SoCs.
- PragmaticPulp 6y ago
  With the exception of Raspberry Pi, you can’t really purchase Broadcom SoCs for your own products anyway. Not unless you are a large vendor with high quantities, in which case they’d be happy to support your project. Never build a product around chips you can’t access anyway. Using the Broadcom Raspberry Pi modules is a great option if, and only if, the features you need are already well supported and documented.
  - joezydeco 6y ago
    Not unless you are a large vendor with high quantities, in which case they’d be happy to support your project. Have to chuckle at this one. I worked for a large company that actually got support from Broadcom for a newer part family (StrataGX). The support was dismal. You'd ask an FAE questions, they'd shrug, if you pressed hard enough (and got your executive team in the loop) you'd get an "answer" from the factory which was usually a pile of badly commented Verilog excerpts under NDA. Thanks but no thanks. Oh and that one time we did get sample code it was a dump of someone's development directory, including project files for another company (you're probably have one of their machines in your office right now). That was fun.
    - ferdek 6y ago
      I have the same bad experience with Broadcom's technical support. I worked on a project based around StrataXGS Tomahawk and some other chip I can't remember right now. One of those chipsets would randomly lock itself and stop switching traffic somewhere about 5-6 minutes after rebooting. It took us ONE WHOLE FREAKING YEAR of debugging on our side and nagging them to make them figure out that they forgot to tell us that some specific PCI-E clock settings must be set in THEIR OWN DRIVER. It was paid support. Imagine the horrors of dev team whose product gets delayed one year and now imagine their faces after Broadcom provided the solution. Also, their requests to plug in "logic analyzer" on the PCI-E bus between host CPU and their chipset in finished product where everything was using BGA soldered parts - yeah... I believe the only reason everything they share with you is under NDA so you don't go and publicly tell how bad they really are. They are like Boeing to me, but I yet have to see their MAX-like mistake.
madushan1000 6y ago
Aren't pine64 people primarily use allwinner stuff? AFAIK most of pine devices run mainline kernel.
- tpxl 6y ago
  The pinephone uses a 5 year old chip. This is because it takes ages for open source heroes to write all the software.
snvzz 6y ago
To me this being AllWinner, because of linux-sunxi, looked like Good News. They're not going to be unnecessarily reinventing wheels, which should mean we're already half there in these new chips being well-supported by mainline kernel[0]. [0]: https://linux-sunxi.org/Linux_mainlining_effort https://linux-sunxi.org/Linux_mainlining_effort

rwmj 6y ago

Basically yes it's as you describe, but I want to add that the https://linux-sunxi.org/ https://linux-sunxi.org/ project has been doing brilliant work for AllWinner's ARM chips.

PragmaticPulp 6y ago
AllWinner parts are not bad if, and only if, the features you need are already clearly supported. Don’t invest in an AllWinner-based design expecting to implement key SoC features later. If it doesn’t work right now, there’s no guarantee it will ever be supported. That said, upstream support for AllWinner parts has come a long way and continues to improve. I wouldn’t mind using them in certain projects. However, anyone who absolutely needs good documentation and SoC support needs to stick with a vendor that emphasizes openness and good documentation. NXP i.MX is the safe choice.
wojciii 6y ago
Yes, the project is great and very useful. I wish the HW companies either document their devices or pay someone who understands software to work on it instead just releasing nearly working prototypes and then continuing to another project abandoning HW with old kernels. I got burned by AllWinner once and will not buy devices using them unless I have a very good reason. :)

davidlt 6y ago

IIRC Allwinner has already sent some patches related to RISC-V to kernel and also suggestions to SBI specification. So far the beginning is good. Remember that they are using IP from Alibaba. Alibaba might as well work on upstreaming, etc. efforts for this (speculation).

userbinator 6y ago

Support and documentation was non-existing last time I looked. Still better than Broadcom... at least you can find the (very long) datasheets for a lot of their SoCs.

PragmaticPulp 6y ago
With the exception of Raspberry Pi, you can’t really purchase Broadcom SoCs for your own products anyway. Not unless you are a large vendor with high quantities, in which case they’d be happy to support your project. Never build a product around chips you can’t access anyway. Using the Broadcom Raspberry Pi modules is a great option if, and only if, the features you need are already well supported and documented.
- joezydeco 6y ago
  Not unless you are a large vendor with high quantities, in which case they’d be happy to support your project. Have to chuckle at this one. I worked for a large company that actually got support from Broadcom for a newer part family (StrataGX). The support was dismal. You'd ask an FAE questions, they'd shrug, if you pressed hard enough (and got your executive team in the loop) you'd get an "answer" from the factory which was usually a pile of badly commented Verilog excerpts under NDA. Thanks but no thanks. Oh and that one time we did get sample code it was a dump of someone's development directory, including project files for another company (you're probably have one of their machines in your office right now). That was fun.
  - ferdek 6y ago
    I have the same bad experience with Broadcom's technical support. I worked on a project based around StrataXGS Tomahawk and some other chip I can't remember right now. One of those chipsets would randomly lock itself and stop switching traffic somewhere about 5-6 minutes after rebooting. It took us ONE WHOLE FREAKING YEAR of debugging on our side and nagging them to make them figure out that they forgot to tell us that some specific PCI-E clock settings must be set in THEIR OWN DRIVER. It was paid support. Imagine the horrors of dev team whose product gets delayed one year and now imagine their faces after Broadcom provided the solution. Also, their requests to plug in "logic analyzer" on the PCI-E bus between host CPU and their chipset in finished product where everything was using BGA soldered parts - yeah... I believe the only reason everything they share with you is under NDA so you don't go and publicly tell how bad they really are. They are like Boeing to me, but I yet have to see their MAX-like mistake.

madushan1000 6y ago

Aren't pine64 people primarily use allwinner stuff? AFAIK most of pine devices run mainline kernel.

tpxl 6y ago
The pinephone uses a 5 year old chip. This is because it takes ages for open source heroes to write all the software.

snvzz 6y ago

To me this being AllWinner, because of linux-sunxi, looked like Good News. They're not going to be unnecessarily reinventing wheels, which should mean we're already half there in these new chips being well-supported by mainline kernel[0]. [0]: https://linux-sunxi.org/Linux_mainlining_effort https://linux-sunxi.org/Linux_mainlining_effort