Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Allwinner D1s/F133 RISC-V Processor Integrates 64MB DDR2

cnx-software.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 52 posts

Re: Allwinner D1s/F133 RISC-V Processor Integrates 64MB DDR2

#11

Post by simfree »

Jhsto wrote: post #9
monocasa wrote: post #4

The HDMI and DSP lines are crossed out. Does anyone know of they aren't supported on this chip vs the regular D1?

The second paragraph says: > Besides the built-in RAM, Allwinner D1s comes with many of the same features as D1 RISC-V SoC, but loses HDMI output and the HiFi 4 audio DSP, and Allwinner made some tweaks to the IOs with one less I2S audio interface, and general-purpose ADC.

Were the HDMI output and audio DSP licensed IP blocks from another company? On other Allwinner chips, the HDMI phy is from a different company than Allwinner.

Guess this is a super budget respin of this chip, where most licensed IP blocks have been removed.

Re: Allwinner D1s/F133 RISC-V Processor Integrates 64MB DDR2

#12

Post by monocasa »

simfree wrote: post #11
Jhsto wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The second paragraph says: > Besides the built-in RAM, Allwinner D1s comes with many of the same features as D1 RISC-V SoC, but loses HDMI output and the HiFi 4 audio DSP, and Allwinner made some tweaks to the IOs with one less I2S audio interface, and general-purpose ADC.

Were the HDMI output and audio DSP licensed IP blocks from another company? On other Allwinner chips, the HDMI phy is from a different company than Allwinner. Guess this is a super budget respin of this chip, where most licensed IP blocks have been removed.

Or even just that the chip was designed to fuse these blocks off for the low price options. It's not uncommon for those license agreements to allow disabled blocks without the licensing fees.

Re: Allwinner D1s/F133 RISC-V Processor Integrates 64MB DDR2

#14

Post by simosx »

naraic0o wrote: post #8
fartcannon wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Might be that they care about open computers.

Allwinner? Maybe, but I highly doubt it. They're one of the worst offenders when it comes to releasing sources.[0] [0] https://linux-sunxi.org/GPL_Violations

Allwinner wants to sell as many SoCs as possible. Being open and having good Linux support is good business. The serve the low-end sector, which means they may not spend a lot of money for Linux support. But Linux support is good for business.

About a decade ago, Allwinner was providing an "SDK" to vendors to customize the Linux kernel for their devices. This "SDK" was a tarball of the compiled Linux kernel. In it, there were object files for drivers by third-parties for devices in the SoC that Allwinner sourced from other companies. Allwinner had the source code but obviously could not release it. They did not think better, and included those object files because it helps device integrators (mainly Android) to get the job done.

How do you deal with this issue with this blatant GPL violation? Obviously, you do not alienate the company. They fcked up but it's not the end of the world. They cannot release the source code of parts they do not own. You build a relationship and get them through to the right path.

But what happened in reality? A colossal fck-up. An attempt to "blackmail" the company to release the full source code and enforce the GPL. Listen to this, an attempt to enforce the GPL to a company "located in China". Not even on vendors that sell products in Europe or the US.

This alienated any attempts to get Allwinner's upper management to work with Linux. Allwinner made an effort and released some stuff (https://github.com/allwinner-zh) including the bootloader source and documentation (2015). The damage was done.

In 2016, Linus and other kernel developers posted their position on enforcing the GPL (https://lwn.net/Articles/698452/). Very pragmatic and should have been followed with Allwinner.

Re: Allwinner D1s/F133 RISC-V Processor Integrates 64MB DDR2

#15

Post by ndesaulniers »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #13
ndesaulniers wrote: post #3

That's not much DRAM, but consider that the Funkey S ( https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/squonk/funkey-s-the-wor... ) uses the Allwinner V3s (32b ARMv7-a) with 64MB DDR2 DRAM.

Looks like it's stuck at July 2020.

The kickstarter may have ended, but they've entered general production and can be purchased today here: https://funkey-project.myshopify.com/products/funkey-s.

Re: Allwinner D1s/F133 RISC-V Processor Integrates 64MB DDR2

#16

Post by brucehoult »

ndesaulniers wrote: post #3

That's not much DRAM, but consider that the Funkey S ( https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/squonk/funkey-s-the-wor... ) uses the Allwinner V3s (32b ARMv7-a) with 64MB DDR2 DRAM.

If you want more DRAM there's the "https://www.hackster.io/news/sipeed-teases-linux-capable-64-...

Or of course the Nezha with 1 GB RAM and a full set of interfaces for ~$100.

I expect there will be plenty more boards with this basic SoC in future.

Re: Allwinner D1s/F133 RISC-V Processor Integrates 64MB DDR2

#17

Post by brucehoult »

monocasa wrote: post #12
simfree wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were the HDMI output and audio DSP licensed IP blocks from another company? On other Allwinner chips, the HDMI phy is from a different company than Allwinner. Guess this is a super budget respin of this chip, where most licensed IP blocks have been removed.

Or even just that the chip was designed to fuse these blocks off for the low price options. It's not uncommon for those license agreements to allow disabled blocks without the licensing fees.

It saves millions of dollars to not have to do a different mask set, so quite likely. The downside is wasted silicon area and thus per-unit cost, but you've got to make a lot before that bites.

Re: Allwinner D1s/F133 RISC-V Processor Integrates 64MB DDR2

#18

Post by NullPrefix »

simosx wrote: post #14
naraic0o wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allwinner? Maybe, but I highly doubt it. They're one of the worst offenders when it comes to releasing sources.[0] [0] https://linux-sunxi.org/GPL_Violations

Allwinner wants to sell as many SoCs as possible. Being open and having good Linux support is good business. The serve the low-end sector, which means they may not spend a lot of money for Linux support. But Linux support is good for business. About a decade ago, Allwinner was providing an "SDK" to vendors to customize the Linux kernel for their devices. This "SDK" was a tarball of the compiled Linux kernel. In it, t…

>Allwinner was providing an "SDK" to vendors to customize the Linux kernel for their devices

I tried contacting them to get the SDK for a tablet I had and they just asked me how many SOCs I am planning to buy.

Re: Allwinner D1s/F133 RISC-V Processor Integrates 64MB DDR2

#19

Post by PeterisP »

NullPrefix wrote: post #18
simosx wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Allwinner wants to sell as many SoCs as possible. Being open and having good Linux support is good business. The serve the low-end sector, which means they may not spend a lot of money for Linux support. But Linux support is good for business. About a decade ago, Allwinner was providing an "SDK" to vendors to customize the Linux kernel for their devices. This "SDK" was a tarball of the compiled Linux kernel. In it, t…

>Allwinner was providing an "SDK" to vendors to customize the Linux kernel for their devices I tried contacting them to get the SDK for a tablet I had and they just asked me how many SOCs I am planning to buy.

Well, that's pretty much what "providing SDK to vendors to customize their devices" means; if you're not planning to buy SOCs to make large quantities of custom devices, you're not a vendor for whom the manufacturer cares to provide an SDK.
Post reply on HN