| viric | mth: ok, thank you! | 07:25 |
|---|---|---|
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: fixed LP38511TJ-ADJ's GND to power input (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/f36ddbf | 12:46 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: changed JS28F256J3F105's BYTE as Input (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/261b470 | 13:01 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: changed MIC2550AYTS's VTRM to Power input (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/2c9b9b4 | 13:09 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: changed testpin to Passive (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/966affe | 13:14 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: changed MT46V32M16P's VREF to input. (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/9cd6b11 | 13:22 |
| LunaVorax | Hello everyone! | 14:24 |
| wolfspraul | hi :-) | 14:24 |
| wolfspraul | I'm almost calling it a day though... | 14:25 |
| rjeffries | reading backlog. someone asked if I pimp qi-hardware in Raspberry Pi channel. A: NO. I was not promoting Raspberry Pi here, merely mentioning the release of board schematics (a Good Thing, IMO). | 17:22 |
| rjeffries | Not sure I understand the latent hostimity to a $35 computer that will run Linux. While not perfectly open, they have released datasheet on the SoC and now we see schematics. As best I can tell, they are not forcing people to purchase the board. | 17:24 |
| rjeffries | Why not let 1,000 flowers bloom? Raspberry Pi may well fail, if so, then it failed. It is not a threat to Ben Nanonote, rather it has very different target market. | 17:25 |
| rjeffries | Ben NN has been an interesting (ongoing experiment). I am not sure Raspberry Pi can not achive a similar level of open-ness as Ben NN. Both have published SoC datasheets. | 17:27 |
| rjeffries | The life forces of qi hardware have already shifted to Milkymist, which has promise, although it will never be a $35 system. Will Milkylist someday be converted to an ASIC? It could happen. | 17:29 |
| rjeffries | s/hostimity/hostility/ | 17:30 |
| DocScrutinizer | what damn latent hostility? | 18:17 |
| DocScrutinizer | wpwrak: (precharge) hah, well you want some proper current limiters in a number of places | 18:22 |
| DocScrutinizer | wpwrak: and I don't think you could place "the capacitor to the right side of switch" here | 18:32 |
| DocScrutinizer | anyway we had sth similar with Vsys on GTA02, no? ;-D | 18:33 |
| DocScrutinizer | (current limiter) a LDO with /ENA input is probably the better alternative to a switch with current limiter | 18:38 |
| DocScrutinizer | this way you got a decent decoupling from system VDD by design | 18:39 |
| DocScrutinizer | and a LDO probably is even cheaper than a switch with current limiter | 18:39 |
| DocScrutinizer | of course this requires some power rail providing Uout + Udrop_LDO | 18:40 |
| DocScrutinizer | running a commerical device without any on-board power stabilization is ... a bit unusual. As are good stabilized 5V wallwart PSU | 18:42 |
| wpwrak | DocScrutinizer: in GTA02, we solved the Vsys problem just by placing a cap on the other side of the switch :) | 20:07 |
| wpwrak | an LDO may be a bit inefficient. but yes, it's a possiblity, too. | 20:09 |
| wpwrak | just the absence of inrush current limiting is generally a bad idea, as we keep seeing :) | 20:10 |
| DocScrutinizer | yup | 20:15 |
| DocScrutinizer | unless you have no separate power domains and a proper power-up sequence | 20:15 |
| DocScrutinizer | one of the main reasons for power-up sequences is to avoid such effects | 20:16 |
| DocScrutinizer | basically you can take a boader approach than "limiting inrush": always consider both ends of the rope | 20:18 |
| wpwrak | DocScrutinizer: power-up sequences don't help in this case - it's all hot-plugged | 20:57 |
| wpwrak | or at least can be hot-plugged. same worst case :) | 20:58 |
| DocScrutinizer | sure | 21:49 |
| --- Sun Apr 22 2012 | 00:00 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.9.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!