Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CPLD XC2C256-6FTG256C is EOL #82

Open
MorganTL opened this issue May 23, 2024 · 14 comments
Open

CPLD XC2C256-6FTG256C is EOL #82

MorganTL opened this issue May 23, 2024 · 14 comments

Comments

@MorganTL
Copy link

No description provided.

@gkasprow
Copy link
Member

any suggestion what family we could use here?

@Spaqin
Copy link

Spaqin commented May 24, 2024

Mirny uses the same CPLD.

A suggestion would be to use Artix-7, like XC7A35TICSG324 or XC7A100TCSG324, depending if 35k logic cells would be fine or we need 100k.

@gkasprow
Copy link
Member

Artix is FPGA, which means it has much higher internal delays and is suitable for synchronous designs. CPLD was placed here as a simple asynchronous glue logic. Such a big FPGA would significantly increase the board cost because we also need extra power rails.

@gkasprow
Copy link
Member

Since AMD and Lattice do not make any CPLDs anymore, we can move to Cypres or Altera:
5M2210ZF256I5N
EPM570F256C4N
CY37256VP256-100BGC

@jordens Maybe the ICE40 family could be fine here?

@jordens
Copy link
Member

jordens commented May 24, 2024

That would be interesting to explore.

@kaolpr
Copy link
Member

kaolpr commented Jun 6, 2024

If there are no pending ideas on implementing some more elaborate logic we could go with iCE40 HX8K as in Fastino. This would let us drop LVDS transceivers too (same for Mirny).

@dnadlinger
Copy link
Member

dnadlinger commented Jun 6, 2024

The biggest (in relative terms) design we currently need is the status readback for SUServo mode: quartiq/urukul#11. For this, we ran right up against the size limits of the parts that were on older revisions, at least in a straightforward implementation, though there is some discussion on how to best implement this in a glitch-free way still unresolved (see linked PR).

@dnadlinger
Copy link
Member

(the amount of logic required is still very small; I suppose you could just run that PR through the iCE toolchain to check)

@jordens
Copy link
Member

jordens commented Aug 14, 2024

Is anybody working on this? I have no idea about stock situation at cti/ts. Given the revision/production/development/testing lead time this may be something that should have been started a while ago.

@gkasprow
Copy link
Member

Yes. I expect to have Mirny and Urukul designs done in 2 months. Two guys are working on these designs.

@gkasprow
Copy link
Member

CTI secured stocks for next year

@jordens
Copy link
Member

jordens commented Aug 14, 2024

Who is doing the gateware redesign? That should be done first to verify/decide the choice of chip (did you choose already?).

@gkasprow
Copy link
Member

we will go for same chip as in Fastino

@pkozakiewicz
Copy link

I have no idea about stock situation at cti/ts.

We are well stocked with CPLDs and finished devices so this situation does not threaten availability.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants