3 ms·

The problem with FPGA's isn't the hardware... it's quite complete and capable. It's the software stack you're forced to access most of them via that makes them

by blihp 3y ago

The problem with FPGA's isn't the hardware... it's quite complete and capable. It's the software stack you're forced to access most of them via that makes them a non-starter for many/most hobbyists. (cost is a major issue, but hardly the only one) My guess is that as low cost producers who have embraced the existing open source FPGA software being developed start producing higher end parts (more recent process nodes, large LUT count etc), that's when you'll really start to see them take off in the hobbyist world. I think the OP isn't even talking about 2006-level capability but rather something akin to 3D printing for semis that approached even early (i.e. somewhere in the 1960's-1980's range) level fab capability for hobbyists. Obviously it doesn't exist currently, but that's the dream for some.

lizknope 3y ago
I get paid to do this professionally so I don't follow the hobbyist side but I've heard of people using this for FPGAs. I have no idea how it compares to commercial tools. https://github.com/YosysHQ/oss-cad-suite-build https://github.com/YosysHQ/oss-cad-suite-build OSS CAD Suite is a binary software distribution for a number of open source software used in digital logic design. You will find tools for RTL synthesis, formal hardware verification, place & route, FPGA programming, and testing with support for HDLs like Verilog, Migen and Amaranth.
UncleOxidant 3y ago
Cost of the FPGA design tools isn't really the biggest barrier. The big barrier is that the FPGA design tools from the FPGA companies are full of bugs that you spend an inordinate amount of time trying to work around. Some open source tools like Yosys have emerged. So far they're limited to the ICE-40 FPGAs from Lattice and a few older Xilinx parts. I've used them with the ICE-40 and they do work well. Hopefully FPGA companies will come to realize the value of opening up so that 3rd party tools can be developed for them.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  > The big barrier is that the FPGA design tools from the FPGA companies are full of bugs that you spend an inordinate amount of time trying to work around. Do they not have older, more stable, releases?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - UncleOxidant 3y ago
    No.
  - mathisfun123 3y ago
    you cannot fathom how bad eg Xilinx's FPGA tool suite is. like beyond the fact it's like some kind of frankenstein monster because they bought up a bunch of smaller tools and glued them together with fucking tcl, any individual piece is worse than your worst open source compiler/ide/whatever tool you use to build software. and yet people say that it's 10x better than the competitors' offerings. hell on earth is being an FPGA dev without a direct line to Xilinx employee for help debugging (which is how things really work professionally). just lend some credence to myself here - vitis, their supposed hls offering that turns C++ into RL by magic and genius and oracles, today embeds LLVM 7.0 (released in 19 Sep 2018). gee i wonder how many perf and etc improvements have landed in LLVM since 7 since today LLVM is approach 17. i could tell you more but it would just spike my blood pressure after 6 months of not having to deal with that mess.
    - jes 3y ago
      I'll second this, but for Intel / Altera. I started working with a Stratix 10 GX dev kit last year, and the Intel Quartus Prime Pro software. It's been a nightmare. 1. Unless you have a direct line to an experienced support engineer inside Intel, technical support amounts to pleading with new-hire support engineers who can't do more than try to look something up and regurgitate it back to you. 2. Sample designs don't work with the tools you have. A design might be for version 18 of Quartus and you have version 23. You can try to auto-upgrade the IP, and maybe 3/4 of the time it works. The other 1/4 of the time it's some obscure error you can't track down, so you're back on the "Community Site" begging for help. 3. Doing something like programming your design into flash on the S10 board involves lots and lots of research, including watching Intel produced YouTube videos. I could go on, but the whole process is like running in wet cement.

by blihp 3y ago

lizknope 3y ago

I get paid to do this professionally so I don't follow the hobbyist side but I've heard of people using this for FPGAs. I have no idea how it compares to commercial tools. https://github.com/YosysHQ/oss-cad-suite-build https://github.com/YosysHQ/oss-cad-suite-build OSS CAD Suite is a binary software distribution for a number of open source software used in digital logic design. You will find tools for RTL synthesis, formal hardware verification, place & route, FPGA programming, and testing with support for HDLs like Verilog, Migen and Amaranth.

UncleOxidant 3y ago

Cost of the FPGA design tools isn't really the biggest barrier. The big barrier is that the FPGA design tools from the FPGA companies are full of bugs that you spend an inordinate amount of time trying to work around. Some open source tools like Yosys have emerged. So far they're limited to the ICE-40 FPGAs from Lattice and a few older Xilinx parts. I've used them with the ICE-40 and they do work well. Hopefully FPGA companies will come to realize the value of opening up so that 3rd party tools can be developed for them.

MichaelZuo 3y ago
> The big barrier is that the FPGA design tools from the FPGA companies are full of bugs that you spend an inordinate amount of time trying to work around. Do they not have older, more stable, releases?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- UncleOxidant 3y ago
  No.
- mathisfun123 3y ago
  you cannot fathom how bad eg Xilinx's FPGA tool suite is. like beyond the fact it's like some kind of frankenstein monster because they bought up a bunch of smaller tools and glued them together with fucking tcl, any individual piece is worse than your worst open source compiler/ide/whatever tool you use to build software. and yet people say that it's 10x better than the competitors' offerings. hell on earth is being an FPGA dev without a direct line to Xilinx employee for help debugging (which is how things really work professionally). just lend some credence to myself here - vitis, their supposed hls offering that turns C++ into RL by magic and genius and oracles, today embeds LLVM 7.0 (released in 19 Sep 2018). gee i wonder how many perf and etc improvements have landed in LLVM since 7 since today LLVM is approach 17. i could tell you more but it would just spike my blood pressure after 6 months of not having to deal with that mess.
  - jes 3y ago
    I'll second this, but for Intel / Altera. I started working with a Stratix 10 GX dev kit last year, and the Intel Quartus Prime Pro software. It's been a nightmare. 1. Unless you have a direct line to an experienced support engineer inside Intel, technical support amounts to pleading with new-hire support engineers who can't do more than try to look something up and regurgitate it back to you. 2. Sample designs don't work with the tools you have. A design might be for version 18 of Quartus and you have version 23. You can try to auto-upgrade the IP, and maybe 3/4 of the time it works. The other 1/4 of the time it's some obscure error you can't track down, so you're back on the "Community Site" begging for help. 3. Doing something like programming your design into flash on the S10 board involves lots and lots of research, including watching Intel produced YouTube videos. I could go on, but the whole process is like running in wet cement.