[hpsdr] Hermes_Protocol_2_v10.4 initial Gbps firmware available to try - beta test version

Tue May 2 08:26:14 PDT 2017

Hi Joe,

I want to make sure that you and the other developers know that we ALL
are extremely appreciative for the incredible, superb, and extremely
time-consuming GIFTS that you and Phil and Bill and Warren have given us
again and again and again!

My response to folks who have something that they want done in HPSDR and
who whine when they don't see it is to suggest that they get off their
duffs, learn, and do it themselves, rather than whining and asking the
developers to do it.

HPSDR stands for  High Performance Software Defined Radio.  It does not
and should not stand for Hangers-on Pressuring Superior Developers
Routinely!

The reason for the existence of this group is for all of us to learn and
do.  It has not been a place inhabited by appliance operators who only
want to use the fruits of others' labors and not contribute.  Rather, up
until now the group has been composed of members who DO want to learn
and contribute.  I hope that the group remains as it has been in this
regard.

Thanks again to All of the Developers for all that you do for all of us!

73,

Roger Rehr
W3SZ

On 5/2/2017 10:52 AM, Joe Martin wrote:
> ***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****
>
> Hi Isaac, 
>
> As I have posted previously on this reflector,  I personally do not have specific plans for developing additional code for Atlas-based systems, for two principal reasons: 
>
> 1) In my personal view, the Atlas-based systems no longer fall into the category of “high performance” because we already have reached the maximum data rate limits for the Altlas bus design and those limits are significantly lower in performance than any of the single board transceiver alternative options we now have available.  Indeed, the last change I implemented for the Atlas-based systems was to enable it to run at 384ksps and to do so it was necessary to pass the I and Q values from the Mercury board over two separate bus lines (one line for I and one line for Q from a single Mercury board) to Metis in order to remain below the maximum data rate limitation for the bus lines.  While this approach works it is hardly an appropriate scheme to use generally I think and by doing so we have used all the bus lines so we have effectively reached the performance limit (in terms of useable data rates) for that platform as it currently exists, in my opinion.  
>
> 2) The FPGAs used in the Atlas-based systems are elderly Cyclone II (Penny/PennyLane) and Cyclone III (Mercury/Metis), neither of which are supported any longer in current Quartus versions, so to work on them it is necessary to use early verisions of Quartus which do not have the advances that have been employed in current Quartus versions.  
>
> While the two situations mentioned above do not preclude developing 100BaseT Protocol 2 code for the Atlas-based system it is not something that I personally am very interested in spending time doing.  Other developers may wish to do it though; that’s just fine and I hope someone does it for you, but your question was directed to me personally; this is my personal response.  The answer to your question to me is then, no, I have no specific plans to do that development work personally but perhaps someone else in the group does have such plans of which I am unaware.
>
> I recall that Phil mentioned at one time, before his day job and personal committments recently increased to further limit his time available for HPSDR development issues, that he intended to examine the possibilities of developing Protocol 2 code for Atlas-based systems, even though it would necessarily need to be restricted to 100T data rates of course, but it is conceivable that he may have changed his mind about that, I don’t know.  Neither he nor anyone else has mentioned anything further along those lines to me personally nor publicly that I know.  
>
> The statements above reflect my personal view and do not reflect any official position for the HPSDR group, of course.  If you intended the query to be a general question to all developers then you should direct the question accordingly, I think, not simply directed to me.  
>
> 73, Joe K5SO
>
>> Isaac, don't forget our great developers are volunteers. In my eyes your
>> chosen articulation is rather rude! Moreover I believe it's probably
>> difficult or impossible to apply 1Gbit/s on the given Atlas bus.
>>
>> Helmut, DC6NY
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Hpsdr [mailto:hpsdr-bounces at lists.openhpsdr.org] Im Auftrag von Isaac
>> Weksler
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. Mai 2017 11:22
>> An: 'Joe Martin'; 'hpsdr'
>> Betreff: Re: [hpsdr] Hermes_Protocol_2_v10.4 initial Gbps firmware available
>> to try - beta test version
>>
>> ***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****
>>
>> Joe,
>>
>> Just to remind you that we're still waiting for protocol 2 for
>> Mercury/Penny/Metis. Any plans for that?
>>
>> Isaac 4Z1AO
>>
> _______________________________________________
> HPSDR Discussion List
> To post msg: hpsdr at openhpsdr.org
> Subscription help: http://lists.openhpsdr.org/listinfo.cgi/hpsdr-openhpsdr.org
> HPSDR web page: http://openhpsdr.org
> Archives: http://lists.openhpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-openhpsdr.org/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openhpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-openhpsdr.org/attachments/20170502/cdca3cf8/attachment.htm>