6 ms·

I think you are missing broadcom on that list. But for real, why is Broadcom so bad?

mschuster91 6y ago
Broadcom is notorious for hiding everything behind very restrictive NDAs. You want a CPU from them? Don't bother contacting them unless you plan buying six figures, is the common sentiment on HN. On the other hand, there aren't many competitors that are better in terms of accessibility. Sigh. Implementing embedded devices with any sorts of "smarts" beyond some Atmel uC from scratch is a pain - one has to go with ready-made modules (ESPxx, Raspberry Pi compute module, COMexpress) to not go insane. And it's not just the data sheets where you will run into issues (at least, usually you can find them somewhere pirated to get started). Design guides, layouting rules and certifications are a way bigger pain point... looking at you Thunderbolt. And when you finally have your first PCB version ready, you'll soon find out that any components more intelligent than a couple transistors have sometimes ridiculous minimum order quantities. Let's take a SI2494 56k modem chip... 45$ apiece at a MOQ of 43 - which means if you want one or two you'll have to shell out about 2k $! And to add insult to injury, it's apparently still profitable to sell them for under 9$ at high quantities. This fucking rip-off is the reason why many hobbyist electronic projects are restricted to using dumbass components. edit: I totally forgot about the software side with embedded SoCs. Basically, to boot Linux or anything else on a SoC you need firmware blobs (e.g. for the GPU or wireless radio parts) and lots of custom code (e.g. to bootstrap clocks, memory, IO). Usually the SoC vendors have an ancient fork of a Linux kernel and u-boot in which over each new chipset there gets ever more custom cruft and (often shoddily) backported stuff from newer kernels. This conglomerate is called "board support package" or BSP - and is, despite consisting of open source code, often guarded as heavily by NDAs as the data sheets. Sometimes, especially for Mediatek stuff, these BSPs get leaked on Github... and it's always a wild ride looking into them. It's no surprise that upstream Linux doesn't have the support for whatever specific CPU... because the quality of the code is more often than not so hardcore rotten that it's a wonder you don't hear every day about some compromised IoT device.
- leipert 6y ago
  Thanks for the detailed answer. That is indeed meh. I suppose when RPi started and the quantity they ordered it still made sense. Hope that more open hardware will come out over time.
  - prox 6y ago
    We need something to drive that change though.
    - mschuster91 6y ago
      The ways to change this is either regulation or market pressure. Regulation is out of any question, both in the US and the EU. While there may be some hard-won progress in the "right to repair" fights recently, the needs of hobbyist electronics people aren't on any politician's radar and I doubt that will change soon (even if easier access to high quality electronics could unleash so much potential for innovation!). Market pressure is out of the question too, simply because the volumes that us hobbyists order are too small. For what it's worth I'd pay a couple hundred bucks for an 1:1 q&a/consulting session with an expert from a semiconductor or other company for my hobby projects and I'd also accept a reasonable "small volume handling/shipping fee" for getting my hands on ten chips... but I'm the utter minority of hobbyists who can actually afford that for a project that won't bring any profit. Corporate entities however who are going to sell thousands or orders of magnitude more units of some random gizmo can afford putting up six figures upfront anyway... so they have no incentive either to pressure vendors into providing better service.
      - prox 6y ago
        Is in-house CPU printing a (future) possibility? I don’t know a lot about manufacturing, but is a an etching machine a possibility to make custom boards or chips? Even if it’s not up to today’s tech.
        mschuster91 6y ago
Narann 6y ago
For first year(s?), Broadcom RPi components (GPU) were closed source (opaque binary blob) and need RE work. For a hardware supposed to be "open to hack", it was considered a non-sense. I suspect things have changed regarding RPi situation.
- beagle3 6y ago
  Is there an "open" SBC by your definition? Intel has ME/AMT, and requires an opaque, PK-signed-and-only-intel-and-NSA-have-the-key blob. AMD is the same with PSP. I'm not up to date, there might be a RISC-V core available today that is blob free, but in 2012 when RasPi was introduced I wasn't aware of anything blobless.
  - HotVector 6y ago
    RISC-V is the best example of open hardware, but it also has a lot to do with the software. Take the GPU space, for example - NVIDIA has closed source blobs, but AMD has open source drivers which makes it easier to tinker with.
  - dmitrygr 6y ago
    Freescale's i.MX SoCs are full open. No blobs at all. Check them out. They are sweet. Boards exist.
    - beagle3 6y ago
      That's definitely better. But why do you trust that the silicon doesn't have any backdoors more than you trust the blob? We know for a fact that Intel puts one into the silicon, and that it takes significant reverse engineering to turn most of it off (it's not clear if all of it can be turned off at all) see e.g. https://hackaday.com/2020/06/16/disable-intels-backdoor-on-modern-hardware/ https://hackaday.com/2020/06/16/disable-intels-backdoor-on-m...
    - monocasa 6y ago
      i.MX8 requires blobs for HDMI. The controller will only load an NXP signed blob. No blob, no HDMI (or displayport). https://forums.puri.sm/t/the-i-mx8-cannot-be-deblobbed-nxp-signed-hdmi-firmware/6081 https://forums.puri.sm/t/the-i-mx8-cannot-be-deblobbed-nxp-s...

Broadcom is notorious for hiding everything behind very restrictive NDAs. You want a CPU from them? Don't bother contacting them unless you plan buying six figures, is the common sentiment on HN. On the other hand, there aren't many competitors that are better in terms of accessibility. Sigh. Implementing embedded devices with any sorts of "smarts" beyond some Atmel uC from scratch is a pain - one has to go with ready-made modules (ESPxx, Raspberry Pi compute module, COMexpress) to not go insane. And it's not just the data sheets where you will run into issues (at least, usually you can find them somewhere pirated to get started). Design guides, layouting rules and certifications are a way bigger pain point... looking at you Thunderbolt. And when you finally have your first PCB version ready, you'll soon find out that any components more intelligent than a couple transistors have sometimes ridiculous minimum order quantities. Let's take a SI2494 56k modem chip... 45$ apiece at a MOQ of 43 - which means if you want one or two you'll have to shell out about 2k $! And to add insult to injury, it's apparently still profitable to sell them for under 9$ at high quantities. This fucking rip-off is the reason why many hobbyist electronic projects are restricted to using dumbass components. edit: I totally forgot about the software side with embedded SoCs. Basically, to boot Linux or anything else on a SoC you need firmware blobs (e.g. for the GPU or wireless radio parts) and lots of custom code (e.g. to bootstrap clocks, memory, IO). Usually the SoC vendors have an ancient fork of a Linux kernel and u-boot in which over each new chipset there gets ever more custom cruft and (often shoddily) backported stuff from newer kernels. This conglomerate is called "board support package" or BSP - and is, despite consisting of open source code, often guarded as heavily by NDAs as the data sheets. Sometimes, especially for Mediatek stuff, these BSPs get leaked on Github... and it's always a wild ride looking into them. It's no surprise that upstream Linux doesn't have the support for whatever specific CPU... because the quality of the code is more often than not so hardcore rotten that it's a wonder you don't hear every day about some compromised IoT device.

leipert 6y ago
Thanks for the detailed answer. That is indeed meh. I suppose when RPi started and the quantity they ordered it still made sense. Hope that more open hardware will come out over time.
- prox 6y ago
  We need something to drive that change though.
  - mschuster91 6y ago
    The ways to change this is either regulation or market pressure. Regulation is out of any question, both in the US and the EU. While there may be some hard-won progress in the "right to repair" fights recently, the needs of hobbyist electronics people aren't on any politician's radar and I doubt that will change soon (even if easier access to high quality electronics could unleash so much potential for innovation!). Market pressure is out of the question too, simply because the volumes that us hobbyists order are too small. For what it's worth I'd pay a couple hundred bucks for an 1:1 q&a/consulting session with an expert from a semiconductor or other company for my hobby projects and I'd also accept a reasonable "small volume handling/shipping fee" for getting my hands on ten chips... but I'm the utter minority of hobbyists who can actually afford that for a project that won't bring any profit. Corporate entities however who are going to sell thousands or orders of magnitude more units of some random gizmo can afford putting up six figures upfront anyway... so they have no incentive either to pressure vendors into providing better service.
    - prox 6y ago
      Is in-house CPU printing a (future) possibility? I don’t know a lot about manufacturing, but is a an etching machine a possibility to make custom boards or chips? Even if it’s not up to today’s tech.
      - mschuster91 6y ago

Narann 6y ago

For first year(s?), Broadcom RPi components (GPU) were closed source (opaque binary blob) and need RE work. For a hardware supposed to be "open to hack", it was considered a non-sense. I suspect things have changed regarding RPi situation.

beagle3 6y ago
Is there an "open" SBC by your definition? Intel has ME/AMT, and requires an opaque, PK-signed-and-only-intel-and-NSA-have-the-key blob. AMD is the same with PSP. I'm not up to date, there might be a RISC-V core available today that is blob free, but in 2012 when RasPi was introduced I wasn't aware of anything blobless.
- HotVector 6y ago
  RISC-V is the best example of open hardware, but it also has a lot to do with the software. Take the GPU space, for example - NVIDIA has closed source blobs, but AMD has open source drivers which makes it easier to tinker with.
- dmitrygr 6y ago
  Freescale's i.MX SoCs are full open. No blobs at all. Check them out. They are sweet. Boards exist.
  - beagle3 6y ago
    That's definitely better. But why do you trust that the silicon doesn't have any backdoors more than you trust the blob? We know for a fact that Intel puts one into the silicon, and that it takes significant reverse engineering to turn most of it off (it's not clear if all of it can be turned off at all) see e.g. https://hackaday.com/2020/06/16/disable-intels-backdoor-on-modern-hardware/ https://hackaday.com/2020/06/16/disable-intels-backdoor-on-m...
  - monocasa 6y ago
    i.MX8 requires blobs for HDMI. The controller will only load an NXP signed blob. No blob, no HDMI (or displayport). https://forums.puri.sm/t/the-i-mx8-cannot-be-deblobbed-nxp-signed-hdmi-firmware/6081 https://forums.puri.sm/t/the-i-mx8-cannot-be-deblobbed-nxp-s...