[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [microblaze-uclinux] Performance microblaze vs. VirtexIIPro
Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
> Ensuring realtime synchrony is a top priority for embedded devices.
I agree. At the very least, we need to fix this major clock drift
problem. As I said, I just haven't looked into it, but people need to
know it's there! :)
> I/O, including TCP/IP, as well as the realtime clock itself, could be
> "factored out" of the MB/uCL sequential kernel, and replaced with TCP/IP
> & RTC device gate arrays operating in parallel with the rest of the
> MB/uCL system. The kernel would call software hooks into those devices
> instead of sequentially executing the original kernel instructions. That
> would be a major win for the MB/uCL architecture over ASIC/uC
> architectures, and point the way for other factored parallelism.
Absolutely, that's what it's all about. See my other reply to Emanuel
about comparing benchmarks, and how the FPGA+full OS solution gives us
room to maneouvre in the trade-off space of execution time, logic area
and design complexity.
microblaze-uclinux mailing list
Project Home Page : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~jwilliams/mblaze-uclinux
Mailing List Archive : http://www.itee.uq.edu.au/~listarch/microblaze-uclinux/