Slashdot Mirror
Single-Chip Linux Computer
goombah99 writes "Axis Computer has announced a single-chip Linux-based computer that integrates 2MB Flash, 8MB SDRAM and an Ethernet transceiver into a single chip with a 27mm x 27mm footprint. 'Just add power to the chip and you have a Linux computer with network connection.' It runs the Linux 2.4 kernel without any patches. The announcement says the chip is 'available' but the tech specs are labeled as preliminary, and the order form on the web site is broken, so it's hard to confirm if it is out yet or not. Some specifications in html and pdf are available at the company's web site."
but really, serial ports? parallel ports? i'm not too sure that the scsi is going to win them any points either, but what the hell. they might have well integrated a video controler, an audio controler, and a 9600 baud modem to boot!
Well, I think they target embedded applications and not laptops here. Most embedded applications don't need sound or video capabilities and most engineers love to have serial and parallel I/O, because of their simplicity.
In embedded world, you want minimalistic hardware. USB requires a microcontroller with USB stack just to talk to it. It is far easier to use serial port and probably 3 lines of code to talk to a serial port. Parallel port can be interfaced pretty much directly to keypad, small character LCD, relays etc. Can'tt say the same for USB without yet another microcontroller.
I am about to work on an FPGA single chip computer. Taking an open MIPS(ish) core and connecting it up to some peripherals.
The best thing about its is that it will be completely open.
Opencomputer will start as an FPGA but I am hoping to find a good excuse to manufacture it along with an asynchronous version and make my self a fully open PC.
Mouse powered Chips, Open source Processors and Lego
It runs the Linux 2.4 kernel without any patches.
Just to break out the tinfoil, how do we know? I think that if I were to make Linux work on a device my company produced, I'd claim it worked without any patches, and thus only point people to a vanilla source, and not have to release any of my changes for my competitors to see. I'm no fan of the GPL (and bash it regularly), but this seems like a viable tactic. Saying that you can't get the code to work on their chip doesn't seem like much in the way of indisputable evidence that they altered the code, either.
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
It is available.
The chip itself is $40. The eval board for the ETRAX 100LX is available for $299 as well as a version with bluetooth for $495.
Finally, the order page for both of these is at https://www.axis.com/shop/technology.htm.
--Tim
It only says its a 100 MIPS processor. (Million Instructions Per Sec)
The MIPS has 32 registers.
Mouse powered Chips, Open source Processors and Lego
from the specifications page
...
ETRAX 100LX has almost everything you need included
* 32 bit 100MIPS RISC CPU core
* 10/100 MBit Ethernet controller
* 4 asynchronous serial ports
* 2 synchronous serial ports
* 2 USB ports
* 2 Parallel ports
* 4 ATA (IDE) ports
* 2 Narrow SCSI ports (or 1 Wide)
* Support for SDRAM, Flash, EEPROM, SRAM,
Just add power and and ethernet connection.
Quite an impressive package. Though in practice you would need to add more memory. But think about it, in the space of about 1/2 cubic inch you could cram memory, the chip, plus say a Microdisk. Expand that to the size of an IPOD and you could put in a lot of stuff, incuding the power supply
I'm not exactly how fast 100MIPS when comparing a RISC to say and Intel CISC that takes many clock cycles to complete on instruction. I'm assuming its probably slower than a 2 Ghz Pentium, but fast for an hand held.
<b>What Gets interesting is this: it dissipates 0.35 watts (typical)!!!!! </b>Let me say that again. It dissipates 0.3 Watts for 100MIPS. compare that to a typical Pentium Computer in the hundreds of watts range for a Gigahertz. This means you could have 600+ in a single 1U chasis dissipating the same amount of heat.
Time to really start thinking about parrallel software and computer deisgn. For easily paprlizable problems 600 of these ina 1U would destroy an entire rack of Pentiums while disspating so little power this could be just slipped under your desk, not in cooled computer room. Oh did one of the chips burn out--who cares, there's only 599 more.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Nope, you're all wrong. It uses the CRIS architecture. See here for the architectural description.
I control the time!
The title is misleading. The device is a multi-chip-module, not a single chip computer. They have packaged a number of chips in a very small package, but it is not a single chip. A MCM will cost more to manufacture than a true single chip computer because it requires a ceramic substrate to be manufactured with very small trace widths connecting the chips that are placed on the substrate.
It's a Cris architecture, if, you expand a recent kernel or 3.2 gcc source you'll see a bunch of stuff for cris. I have one of their development boards which doesn't use the MCM but is a 100LX based system.
Andy
This is not to say that the designation means much any more... people have discovered how to make the most horrendous instruction sets (read: x86) go fast with only a million (!) extra transistors or so. This CPU doesn't have those, but what matters is that it's fast enough.
Still, it's amusing because half the complexity of the instruction set (and a substantial parcel of the chip) will never be exercised by any compiler. It's there as a sort of homage or shrine to machines from the days when programs were written in assembly language, and machines were marketed on how fancy the instruction set was, regardless of how it slowed the machine down.
The CDC machines were exceptional: Seymour Cray really understood. Also, in the '60s, some people at IBM built the 801, which evolved into the PowerPC. The rest of the industry didn't catch on until the Stanford RISC people made their big splash.
Right so. 2MB should be enough for anybody! ;-)
Red Hat should take notice, but still it's importatn that Red Hat is just as Linux as this tiny system is. And, there is a point in Linux being able to downsize into less than 2MB. Although Desktop Linux is not and does not allow for the same applications as embedded linux, there is a real virtue in sharing the codebase between these two. (Or desktop and webserver, cluster or grid server for that matter.) Although developers may not always agree on the direction the developments should take, together they provide for an open environment that is scaleble, and in escense is very lean. This is something Microsoft can never touch upon with Windows CE/PocketPC/whatever.
That's why I think this one-die embedded linux system is indeed a a-good-thing (tm).
Look at the complex addressing modes and variable-length instructions: hallmarks of a CISC. To quote chapter 2 of the documentation,