Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
ariadne.space
Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
1–10 of 28 posts
Re: Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
#2I think that the patent threat will crumble with more and more complex features being implemented on the Open Source cores, like BOOM and so on. I don't think that ideas that are taught commonly at university and are all over GitHub will be able to stay "owned".
The question than will be how close we can come to the proprietary systems and which use-cases are low-key enough that their cutting edge new innovations don't make a difference.
I think the microcontroller space will be wholly owned by RISC-V in the long run. For cheap, commoditized stuff, open is better than closed for everyone. For the high performance stuff, the manufacturer still needs to protect their investment, especially because the will need to invest more and more for ever smaller gains.
Do you think that makes sense or am I phantasizing? :D
Re: Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
#3I think that the patent threat will crumble with more and more complex features being implemented on the Open Source cores, like BOOM and so on. I don't think that ideas that are taught commonly at university and are all over GitHub will be able to stay "owned". The question than will be how close we can come to the proprietary systems and which use-cases are low-key enough that their cutting edge new innovations don…
I think for the high-performance stuff, history will repeat itself like with China's silk production. The "silkworms" (today's silicon IP) will eventually become open and everyone will know how China did it.
Re: Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
#4I think that the patent threat will crumble with more and more complex features being implemented on the Open Source cores, like BOOM and so on. I don't think that ideas that are taught commonly at university and are all over GitHub will be able to stay "owned". The question than will be how close we can come to the proprietary systems and which use-cases are low-key enough that their cutting edge new innovations don…
Someone eventually has to build the hardware and that's the really expensive part. Arm has the upper hand here as they deliver more than just an ISA, they can sell you a whole silicon and software stack including engineering expertise to help get your thing to market. Plus they control the ecosystem so you're not going to run into odd edge cases (e.g. Loongson which is sorta MIPS). Not saying that companies like SiFive are not competent but they are just one player in what will become a very big game.
Re: Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
#5"As should be obvious by now, there is no situation where these foundry processes and tools are open source."
This is already false. The famous OpenPDK by Skywater (sponsored by Google) is proving this article wrong from the beginning. (https://github.com/google/skywater-pdk)
Yes, thats a rather old technology node, but you can now synthesize your free RISC-V design with a free Toolchain (openROAD) onto this open PDK.
Amazing times!
Re: Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
#6I think that the patent threat will crumble with more and more complex features being implemented on the Open Source cores, like BOOM and so on. I don't think that ideas that are taught commonly at university and are all over GitHub will be able to stay "owned". The question than will be how close we can come to the proprietary systems and which use-cases are low-key enough that their cutting edge new innovations don…
For high performance, HW accelerators would gain traction as that would allow them to protect the IP and provide differentiation.
Re: Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
#7I think that the patent threat will crumble with more and more complex features being implemented on the Open Source cores, like BOOM and so on. I don't think that ideas that are taught commonly at university and are all over GitHub will be able to stay "owned". The question than will be how close we can come to the proprietary systems and which use-cases are low-key enough that their cutting edge new innovations don…
Someone eventually has to build the hardware and that's the really expensive part. Arm has the upper hand here as they deliver more than just an ISA, they can sell you a whole silicon and software stack including engineering expertise to help get your thing to market. Plus they control the ecosystem so you're not going to run into odd edge cases (e.g. Loongson which is sorta MIPS). Not saying that companies like SiFi…
Do you think that fabs like TMSC or global foundries will develop tools to support IP designers with this, to drive their own business?
There is stuff like that going on in PCB design, where manufacturers make free design software, or distributors making footprint libraries.
Re: Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
#8I think that the patent threat will crumble with more and more complex features being implemented on the Open Source cores, like BOOM and so on. I don't think that ideas that are taught commonly at university and are all over GitHub will be able to stay "owned". The question than will be how close we can come to the proprietary systems and which use-cases are low-key enough that their cutting edge new innovations don…
> "For cheap, commoditized stuff, open is better than closed for everyone."
Having an open core is only half the battle. Cheap, commoditized stuff is tuned and tweaked to within an inch of its life for the available foundries and specific processes on which it is being fabbed both to squeeze out maximum yield and to give the highest possible performance at minimum power. That's very expensive engineering for which investors are going to want to earn their money back on.
Re: Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
#9Can someone explain why the RISC-V ecosystem won’t eventually stabilise into a series of lower performance open source cores and higher performance closed source (and non licensable) cores.
In other words why should designers open source performance leading cores for competitors to copy?
Re: Open cores, ISAs, etc.: what is open about them?
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone eventually has to build the hardware and that's the really expensive part. Arm has the upper hand here as they deliver more than just an ISA, they can sell you a whole silicon and software stack including engineering expertise to help get your thing to market. Plus they control the ecosystem so you're not going to run into odd edge cases (e.g. Loongson which is sorta MIPS). Not saying that companies like SiFi…
Do you think that fabs like TMSC or global foundries will develop tools to support IP designers with this, to drive their own business? There is stuff like that going on in PCB design, where manufacturers make free design software, or distributors making footprint libraries.
> There is stuff like that going on in PCB design, where manufacturers make free design software, or distributors making footprint libraries.
Totally different things. Asking TMSC how to design a RISC-V chip is akin to asking Advanced Circuits or OSH Park how to design an Intel motherboard. They can make the board for you, but they dont design it.