[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] User experience with E1x0 boards

From: Philip Balister
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] User experience with E1x0 boards
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 09:05:43 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110307 Fedora/3.1.9-0.39.b3pre.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.9

On 04/22/2011 07:05 PM, Almohanad Fayez wrote:

I've always wondered about the design difference between the E100 and the work 
you did with Chris Anderson's board ... now I know.  BTW where do you have your 
driver code posted for the E100 and any documentation, if it exists yet :) ? I 
found slides that you presented on April 13th.

Those slides are a recent as it gets. There may be video of that talk in a few months.

Driver code is here:



I want to get acquainted with what you did in hopes that I can get hold of an 
E100 this summer.

al fayez

-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Balister<address@hidden>
To: GNURadio Discussion List<address@hidden>
Sent: Fri, Apr 22, 2011 6:29 pm
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] User experience with E1x0 boards

On 04/22/2011 06:00 PM, Almohanad Fayez wrote:

  I haven't worked with the E100 per se but I've worked with the Beagleboard +
SRP1 which is the same thing except the E100 uses SPI to communicate with the
rocessor versus USB.  So I've done work on integrating the OMAP3530 DSP with
he GPP within GNU Radio.  I feel that the use of the DSP is a MUST to make the
ost out of the E100 and with my Beagleboard + USRP setup I was able to run some
M flowgraphs but one of my bottlenecks was the USB USRP interface which the
100 would definitely fix.
Al points are good, except the E100 uses the GPMC bus to communicate
ith the FPGA. 16 bit wide data bus instead of 1 :)

  Basically with the E100 I feel that you need to get your hands "dirty" where
ou might need to rewrite some GNU Radio components to make use of the NEOS
oprocessor, which Philip Balister has done some good work in that respect, and
ou would also need to make use of the C64x+ DSP which I can point you to the
ource code I've developed.

  The E100 has a lot of untapped potential at the moment and I hope to see more
omentum in working with the NEOS and DSP which is what I'm focusing on and
illing to help people to get started on.

  al fayez

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Colby Boyer<address@hidden>
  To: GNU Radio Discussion<address@hidden>
  Sent: Fri, Apr 22, 2011 5:43 pm
  Subject: [Discuss-gnuradio] User experience with E1x0 boards

  Hi All,
  My lab is interested in purchasing some USRPs. It is pretty settled
  hat some of the boards will be the N2x0 series, but I am interested
  o hear from people who have used the E1x0 boards. From what I can
  ell, the E1x0 board should have better latency performance than the
  2x0 and should have a better interface with the FPGA (GPIO pins);
  lso, it has an onboard DSP. It seems that the latency would be the
  ain motivation for the product, from an experimental point of view.
  Has anyone tried integrating processing on the FPGA and DSP to get
  etter latency results? Your thoughts on the board versus the N2x0?
  If you want to take the discussion off list, feel free to.
  iscuss-gnuradio mailing list

  Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
iscuss-gnuradio mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]