Live data from Hacker News

New Raspberry Pi Model B+

raspberrypi.org

91–100 of 220 posts

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#91
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the internal receiver buffer is full, you drop the frames. Basically any protocol out there has some way of dealing with dropped packets (including UDP's "don't care") DHCP requests are usually repeated several times for this reason, the first one can get lost (this can and will happen even on a clean and underloaded gigabit homenetwork)

Well if it dropped the frames and it kept getting hammered then multiple repeats would still not have any real chance of getting through (like 5 repeats over 5 seconds would be completely swamped by the literally million of frames it could get at the same time) Traffic shaping on higher layers usually lets some packages deemed important through while dropping bulk traffic, tcp which is usually used for bulk transfers…

>Well if it dropped the frames and it kept getting hammered then multiple repeats would still not have any real chance of getting through (like 5 repeats over 5 seconds would be completely swamped by the literally million of frames it could get at the same time)

Not if, it does. The repeats are usually good enough to get into the receiving buffer. If there is constant noise on the interface that it even interferes with basic protocol operation you're probably running something that doesn't know how to throttle the connection properly. Those things are usually best retrofitted with some form of ratelimiting in the kernel.

But yes, in this case you wouldn't be able to do DHCP or ARP. This is also true for any further hops on the network. If the receive buffer is full there isn't much you can do about it other than try again later. And "try again later" is purely a protocol decision.

On an internal network the fix is usually to have a Switch that can ratelimit a peer. Otherwise, there is no protection and you can easily replicate the effect by taking an old switch and patching up a loop. The resulting packet storm can easily shut down larger networks.

On the larger internet, the telco's and ISPs are largely responsible for making sure their receive buffer doesn't get full.

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#92
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm aware of the fact, it was just strange how they announced it in the video [0], as if it was a new feature. PoE has been possible on previous versions with a PoE hat aswell, so nothing really new. 0: https://youtu.be/i62xdD4QKtA?t=44

Weren't previous PoE hats just ethernet splitters that also had a 5V output to the Pi rails, but still required another Ethernet cable to connect to the Pi's actual Ethernet port?

Funny thing is you don't even need a HAT, there are passthrough extractors and they're cheap (30 bucks for a pack of 4): https://www.amazon.com/ANVISION-Splitter-Adapter-Compliant-R...

Let's see how much the official PoE HAT is, but it better be cheap or I know what I'll be buying (more of)

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#93
post #22
post #16

PXE booting is sweet. I develop an OS (Crankshaft) for the Pi, and a lot of times it just has been waiting to write a new OS to the SD card, waiting, plugging it in, realizing I forgot to do something, so I had to repeat. Each time it was 15 minutes of waiting. Pulling the card out and putting it back in, especially with the ribbon cable on the way (and a case too) has been really painful. PXE boot is going to solve…

Or you can use the u-boot bootloader[1], and boot a kernel and root filesystem from TFTP, right? [1] http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot

That's generally how it's done on non-Pi boards (some of which even have onboard SPI flash that's large enough to hold u-boot). This has the advantage that the PXE code can be upgraded in the field, which is kind of important given how complex and buggy it is.

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#94
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is interesting, I didn't even know that was a feature that was capped on the RPi. I can see that being made into very compact 3D Scanners very quickly after launch if that was added as a feature.

To clarify, the "3D video feature" is nothing more than being able to record simultaneously from two cameras and merge the video inputs into side-by-side H264 stream. Combined with hardware H264 encoding with delay of ~100 ms, this is very useful for certain applications (in my case, live 3D video broadcasting from UAV). I'm not aware of any other "tinkerer-friendly" board capable of that.

The hardware accelleration for H264 sounds interesting. Although 100ms is not as ideal as I want but it's reasonable. Is it actually possible to use this feature in practice? Are proprietary drivers an issue?

Also is it possible to browse the web and e.g. watch videos on youtube with adequate performance on an RPi? (different topic)

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#95

2GB of RAM would've been more important to me than all the listed changes.

For this(and other) reason, the Asus Tinker Board looks like the superior choice, for very little more money than the Pi3:

https://www.asus.com/uk/Single-Board-Computer/Tinker-Board/

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#96
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is VideoCore, as the Broadcom firmware and closed libraries are 32bit only. You can very easily† pop in an ArchLinux ARM AArch64[0] in there and notice that you only get a very basic framebuffer, sound is just not working at all, and the bootloader is quite incomplete. So ARMv7 it is for me, even with ArchLinux ARM and in spite of my wish for better FOSS support from Broadcom or in Linux mainline. † I fin…

Man, I hate how ARM OEMs are screwing up the whole platform as a viable PC-replacement platform, and I really wish they would reconsider some of the money-grubbing choices they made. Having a standardised platform such as the x86(-64) PC platform is fantastic for tinkering and long term support and reusability of your machines; things such as binary only drivers with just 2 year support (coff coff Qualcomm) are an ab…

There is also the fact that UEFI is rather suboptimal. They are adopting UEFI on the server chips because they've failed to develop a new standard. They've missed a chance to improve upon UEFI. Now they are stuck inheriting UEFI's problems because otherwise there would be no standard at all.

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#97
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weren't previous PoE hats just ethernet splitters that also had a 5V output to the Pi rails, but still required another Ethernet cable to connect to the Pi's actual Ethernet port?

Funny thing is you don't even need a HAT, there are passthrough extractors and they're cheap (30 bucks for a pack of 4): https://www.amazon.com/ANVISION-Splitter-Adapter-Compliant-R... Let's see how much the official PoE HAT is, but it better be cheap or I know what I'll be buying (more of)

This is definitely not PoE, just a hack on top of normal ethernet infrastructure. If you use one of these with a normal PoE switch you will fry whatever is connected on the other side, as it won't step down the voltage from 48V to 5V. Both sides need to be using this, but then real PoE is guaranteed to work even on 100m long cables, with this your 5V will end up being <4V with a 100m long cable and potentially useless.

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#98
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing dishonest about their announcement: they are explicit that speed is limited by the USB bus: > While the USB 2.0 connection to the application processor limits the available bandwidth, we still see roughly a threefold increase in throughput compared to Raspberry Pi 3B. Followed by a table showing 315Mb/s bandwidth, three times that of the 3B but a third that of full-speed Gigabit. And this isn't tucke…

The article yes, not the technical specification chart that is probably what most people see before buying it.

The product page, which is probably what most people see before buying it, simply says 'faster Ethernet':

> 1.4GHz 64-bit quad-core processor, dual-band wireless LAN, Bluetooth 4.2/BLE, faster Ethernet, and Power-over-Ethernet support (with separate PoE HAT)

I'm a bit cross because of the casual assumption of bad faith, when it seems to me they've gone to some effort to do the opposite: make the limitations clear instead of relying on a buzzword.

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wish it was easier to find movies in other languages to help learning. I've been half-heartedly trying to learn French the past few years but it's deceptively hard to either find a decent streaming service, or to find torrents with French audio + subtitles. Strangely it was quite easy when I had a stab at Swedish a few years ago; a number of their TV channels have a free streaming service that you can access…

Maybe you may have more luck using legal services such as Netflix. I'm quite sure they have subtitles for most of the languages they support; at least, I'm sure they have them for English, German and Italian. Torrents are often a poor choice with regards to captions, because either you manage to find a source that ripped them from an source in sync with video (such as the DVD), or you have to resort to fan dubs or th…

For some idiotic reason Netflix geofences their subtitles. Here in Sweden you're lucky if there are even the original English subtitles available for the thing you're trying to watch.

I've even managed to find a few shows where they didn't even bother to allow disabling the subtitles!

Re: New Raspberry Pi Model B+

#100
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny thing is you don't even need a HAT, there are passthrough extractors and they're cheap (30 bucks for a pack of 4): https://www.amazon.com/ANVISION-Splitter-Adapter-Compliant-R... Let's see how much the official PoE HAT is, but it better be cheap or I know what I'll be buying (more of)

This is definitely not PoE, just a hack on top of normal ethernet infrastructure. If you use one of these with a normal PoE switch you will fry whatever is connected on the other side, as it won't step down the voltage from 48V to 5V. Both sides need to be using this, but then real PoE is guaranteed to work even on 100m long cables, with this your 5V will end up being <4V with a 100m long cable and potentially useles…

And this will not work with gigabit ethernet.
Post reply on HN