| wolfspraul | good morning everybody | 01:15 |
|---|---|---|
| wolfspraul | cladamw: hi! :-) | 01:15 |
| wolfspraul | I am reading over the m1 schematics and I am so impressed about their quality! | 01:15 |
| rjeffries | This project is new to me. seems very open, but I am not expert on licenses etc.: http://www.ethernut.de/ | 01:15 |
| cladamw | good morning | 01:15 |
| wolfspraul | that is really fun to read through and think about, one can feel it's not the typical sloppy junk with all sorts of loose ends and "don't cares" | 01:16 |
| wolfspraul | thank you (and Werner) so much for your excellent work on this | 01:16 |
| cladamw | the quality derived from werner's suggestions. :) | 01:16 |
| wolfspraul | I have a few small questions here and there, clueless as I am about circuits | 01:16 |
| wpwrak | and adam's relentless work on applying them with great care :) | 01:17 |
| wpwrak | cladamw: i'm actually a bit puzzled how you avoided making a lot more mistakes :) i mean trivial things that you just overlook. after a while, i simply don't see my own mistakes anymore. but try as i might, i found almost nothing in your work. | 01:19 |
| wpwrak | wolfspraul: and thanks :) | 01:19 |
| rjeffries | wolfspraul when do you plan to have thge new itereatuion of MM available for customers to oreder? | 01:19 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: ir.fpd: added front edge silkscreen (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/b88a133 | 01:19 |
| wolfspraul | ok I start a little | 01:20 |
| wolfspraul | on the pdf side, we already know we could be better in technical things like searchable text, links, page titles, what not | 01:20 |
| wolfspraul | some things I noticed on the power supply page | 01:21 |
| wolfspraul | U11 pin4 "Inhibit" ends in a little 'x' | 01:21 |
| wolfspraul | does that mean it's not connected/floating? | 01:21 |
| wolfspraul | I would think so but that may not be 100% clear | 01:21 |
| wpwrak | all those little "x" mean unconnected | 01:21 |
| wolfspraul | yeah | 01:22 |
| wolfspraul | ok | 01:22 |
| wolfspraul | most of my feedback is about 'understandability' | 01:22 |
| cladamw | wpwrak, hehe ... i eventually got used to your rules but still not convinced myself to good quality once I saw all explanations you mentioned. All reasonable ! | 01:22 |
| wpwrak | it's something you put there manually, so that kicad warn you if you forgot to assign some pins | 01:22 |
| wolfspraul | something I noticed in the 5V bottom-left part - D15 says "5.6Vdc" but C142 is just "100n" | 01:23 |
| wolfspraul | so the cap doesn't have a unit, but the voltage does | 01:23 |
| wpwrak | yes, we use the compact unit-or-multiplier-as-decimal-point notation for the most common values | 01:23 |
| wolfspraul | only occured to me because the two are right next to each other | 01:24 |
| wpwrak | we only switch to regular SI style for the more exotic parts | 01:24 |
| wolfspraul | but not for 5.6Vdc? :-) | 01:24 |
| wolfspraul | voltage is not exotic | 01:24 |
| wpwrak | R and C are a lot more common than zeners :) | 01:24 |
| wolfspraul | I agree to leave the Vdc there btw, but it makes me feel sad about the missins 'farad' :-) | 01:24 |
| wolfspraul | sure sure, just saying because I saw those two back to back | 01:24 |
| wpwrak | besides, zeners have multiple voltages. so the "dc" does convey information. | 01:24 |
| wolfspraul | it felt wrong | 01:24 |
| wolfspraul | next one - I noticed those blocks "POWERED" on nets | 01:25 |
| wpwrak | do you also feel bad about the missing Omega for resistors ? | 01:25 |
| wolfspraul | I'm wondering whether that is more helpful or more confusing | 01:25 |
| wolfspraul | no | 01:25 |
| wolfspraul | I understand the system | 01:25 |
| wolfspraul | but you have to admit seeing those "5.6Vdc" and "100n" next to each other feels unbalanced | 01:25 |
| wpwrak | so our instincts work in similar ways ;-) | 01:25 |
| wolfspraul | it feels like "one of them must be wrong" | 01:25 |
| wolfspraul | small detail | 01:26 |
| wolfspraul | just my impressions | 01:26 |
| wolfspraul | "POWERED" | 01:26 |
| wolfspraul | basically we want to clarify where the power lines are | 01:26 |
| wpwrak | my instinctive response to 100n is also that it's a little odd. but i have a hard time coming up with a rule that would require an F for caps but no Omega for resistors. | 01:26 |
| wolfspraul | a "strong and continuous" signal :-) | 01:26 |
| wpwrak | "POWERED" is to help kicad with error checking | 01:27 |
| wolfspraul | I find that "POWERED" confusing because I think there must be a wire/net "POWERED" somewhere | 01:27 |
| kristianpaul | hi wolfspraul :) | 01:27 |
| wolfspraul | is it? | 01:27 |
| wolfspraul | until I understand it's more like a comment/note | 01:27 |
| wpwrak | you can have pins that are defined as "power input". you must connect them to a "power output" | 01:27 |
| wolfspraul | and even then it's quite fuzzy since "powered" is still about electrons and physics as everything else | 01:27 |
| wpwrak | that can be a pin marked as such, or some other pin with the POWERED on top | 01:27 |
| wolfspraul | again, just describing my confusion | 01:27 |
| wolfspraul | but eventually I got it | 01:28 |
| wpwrak | it's a confusing concept :) | 01:28 |
| wolfspraul | all sorts of lines are marked "POWERED" :-) | 01:28 |
| wolfspraul | not sure what to think of this | 01:28 |
| wpwrak | kicad makes it even more confusing by just having a mysterious diamond-shaped symbol | 01:28 |
| wolfspraul | some devices can be powered using just the energy coming over signal wires... | 01:28 |
| wpwrak | at least we got rid of that one :) | 01:28 |
| wolfspraul | you could argue this forever | 01:28 |
| wolfspraul | power is flowing all over | 01:28 |
| wpwrak | think of it as a declaration | 01:28 |
| wolfspraul | yeah but very strange one | 01:29 |
| wpwrak | sort of a comment for kicad | 01:29 |
| wolfspraul | don't know what the point should be | 01:29 |
| wolfspraul | you could easily take this concept apart I think | 01:29 |
| wolfspraul | thinking about something as simple as a PWM circuit | 01:29 |
| wolfspraul | so first it's not a "powered" line, and then it is? after the lowpass filter? | 01:29 |
| wpwrak | i consider it borderline useful, too. but that's what you have to do to get kicad to be happy with your design | 01:29 |
| wolfspraul | sure sure | 01:30 |
| wolfspraul | just my feedback | 01:30 |
| wolfspraul | here's another one... | 01:30 |
| wolfspraul | we have a lot of ICs, on the power page for example "TPS76301" | 01:30 |
| wolfspraul | a regulator? so I am wondering whether ICs should have 2 more fields in the schematics, just text: 1) type 2) maker | 01:30 |
| wpwrak | if you run an ERC on, say, atben, you'll find more weirdness. nasty things i didn't work around. such as "output" pins that connect to ground. (for RF hardening) of course, kicad complains. but it doesn't provide a means for modeling such oddball concepts. | 01:31 |
| wolfspraul | I think chip brands are important, and so might be a quick categorization like "regulator" or "ldo" or whatever | 01:31 |
| wpwrak | i wouldn't be opposed to specifying the maker. | 01:31 |
| wolfspraul | great | 01:31 |
| wolfspraul | how about category/type ? | 01:32 |
| wolfspraul | speeds up reading I think | 01:32 |
| wpwrak | (maker) because boom may be mislead, too. it does matching on vendor part numbers. | 01:32 |
| wpwrak | dunno. it's usually pretty clear what the things do. just a question of recognizing design patterns. | 01:33 |
| wolfspraul | oh | 01:33 |
| wolfspraul | we continued the thread in 2 channels :-) | 01:33 |
| wolfspraul | sorry about that | 01:33 |
| wolfspraul | #milkymist then | 01:33 |
| wolfspraul | or here? | 01:33 |
| wolfspraul | I'm confused now | 01:33 |
| wolfspraul | so for ICs - add maker & type | 01:34 |
| wolfspraul | ? | 01:34 |
| wolfspraul | if possible, I would vote for keeping that "POWERED" box out altogether | 01:34 |
| wolfspraul | in the PDF | 01:34 |
| wpwrak | if you drop the POWERED, ERC gets messy | 01:35 |
| wolfspraul | I don't want to drop a kicad concept | 01:35 |
| wolfspraul | I only talk about the PDF I am reading | 01:35 |
| wolfspraul | and I describe the things that cause me a little mental bump | 01:35 |
| wolfspraul | without any subsequent aha moment | 01:35 |
| wolfspraul | more like "urgh" moment | 01:35 |
| wolfspraul | I have some more | 01:36 |
| wpwrak | i think it's just another concept you have to get used to. i think the "POWERED" is already much better than the diamond. e.g., you guessed right that it's just some sort of comment. you'd have had a much harder time figuring out what the diamond means. | 01:36 |
| wolfspraul | in a PWM you first have a pulse, then a DC current | 01:36 |
| wolfspraul | right? | 01:36 |
| wpwrak | (diamond) consider this: http://projects.qi-hardware.com/schhist/atben/pdf_atben.pdf | 01:36 |
| wolfspraul | where does "POWERED" start? | 01:36 |
| wpwrak | the critters are in the lower right corner | 01:37 |
| wolfspraul | just with my tiny little knowledge of electronics I already kinda swallow hard on this 'powered' thing | 01:37 |
| wpwrak | you're over-analyzing :-) | 01:37 |
| wolfspraul | good thing we don't document intricate regulator circuits | 01:37 |
| wolfspraul | not over-analyzing | 01:37 |
| wolfspraul | I run into this, it wastes my brain energy | 01:38 |
| wolfspraul | until I mentally dump it into the trash bin | 01:38 |
| wolfspraul | because I see those "5V" marks clearly | 01:38 |
| wolfspraul | or "1V8" | 01:38 |
| wolfspraul | so what could that be? | 01:38 |
| wolfspraul | a DC current? | 01:38 |
| wolfspraul | then what is "POWERED"? | 01:38 |
| wolfspraul | nothing, just confusion | 01:38 |
| wpwrak | perhaps we should have left the diamonds. you may have found them easier to overlook :) | 01:39 |
| wpwrak | the bikeshed problem :) | 01:39 |
| wolfspraul | and again, I do want to learn. in a PWM, where does 'powered' start? | 01:39 |
| wolfspraul | first it's a pulse, right? | 01:39 |
| wolfspraul | then it becomes a DC current | 01:39 |
| wolfspraul | true? | 01:39 |
| wolfspraul | or did I misunderstand this | 01:39 |
| wolfspraul | seems very artificial to me where the "POWERED" starts | 01:39 |
| wpwrak | it starts on the net to which you connect to a "power in" pin and which doesn't already connect to a "power out" pin | 01:39 |
| wolfspraul | and your example of shunting to ground or whatever in atrf as well | 01:40 |
| wolfspraul | this "powered" concept feels wrong to me | 01:40 |
| wolfspraul | but the "1V8" are clear | 01:40 |
| wpwrak | think of it as a directive to guide ERC | 01:40 |
| wolfspraul | it's in the mental trash bin now | 01:41 |
| wolfspraul | I don't think about it anymore :-) | 01:41 |
| wolfspraul | I can't see it | 01:41 |
| wolfspraul | it disappeared! :-) | 01:41 |
| wolfspraul | another one | 01:41 |
| wpwrak | its presence does not affect what your circuit does. only what complains you get from ERC. | 01:41 |
| wolfspraul | we have a nice little table with hw revision on one of the fpga sheets | 01:41 |
| wolfspraul | I understand [kicad/erc] | 01:41 |
| wpwrak | maybe we should call it "FNORD" then :) | 01:41 |
| wolfspraul | but I talk about readability/understandability of the pdf | 01:41 |
| wolfspraul | and I think I may have a point there | 01:42 |
| wolfspraul | coming from that angle... | 01:42 |
| wpwrak | it's a quirky kicad concept | 01:42 |
| wolfspraul | so, that hw revision table | 01:42 |
| wolfspraul | I like those little tables | 01:42 |
| wolfspraul | on the power supply page, we have a bunch of voltages we are generating | 01:42 |
| wolfspraul | wouldn't it be nice to have a little table that lists who the different voltages are for? | 01:42 |
| wolfspraul | just high-level, but I think it could help | 01:42 |
| wolfspraul | in fact, on the top left side we have a 4V3 = 4.3V? who is that for? | 01:43 |
| wpwrak | sure. you commonly have power distribution diagrams. also things like current would be interesting. | 01:43 |
| wpwrak | doesn't even have to be part of the schematics | 01:43 |
| wolfspraul | yes, current too | 01:43 |
| wolfspraul | although we have a few little "4A" etc here and there | 01:44 |
| wolfspraul | my idea was just to start with a little table on the power supply page | 01:44 |
| wolfspraul | very simple | 01:44 |
| wolfspraul | who is the 4V3 for? | 01:44 |
| wpwrak | yes, that's the beads. since openmoko, i'm very picky about seeing them properly specified ;-) | 01:44 |
| wpwrak | i think it's for audio | 01:45 |
| wpwrak | yes, audio | 01:45 |
| wolfspraul | ah, ok | 01:45 |
| wolfspraul | well then, "little overview table" | 01:45 |
| wolfspraul | I have some more | 01:45 |
| wolfspraul | on the fpga decoupling page | 01:45 |
| wolfspraul | the larger caps are polarized, the smaller ones not? | 01:45 |
| wpwrak | this touches on a broader problem: it would be nice if global labels indicated there else the signal appears | 01:45 |
| wolfspraul | it there an obvious reason/explanation for that that any EE would know, or should we add a little comment? | 01:45 |
| wolfspraul | say for example C88 is polarized (4u7) but C98 (470n) is not | 01:46 |
| wolfspraul | maybe this is obvious for more knowledgeable folks | 01:46 |
| wpwrak | i'm not even sure if all of the caps drawn as polarized are really polarized. i'm almost certain they're not. | 01:46 |
| wolfspraul | well ok | 01:46 |
| wolfspraul | then I even may have a point | 01:46 |
| wolfspraul | some more | 01:46 |
| wolfspraul | on the U22C page (btw I don't know which page is bank 0/1/2/3) | 01:47 |
| wolfspraul | I really hate those DNP/0R resistors without explanation | 01:47 |
| wolfspraul | feels like some uncertainty/sloppiness/unfinishedness to me | 01:47 |
| wpwrak | that's bank 2 | 01:47 |
| wolfspraul | R158-R161 | 01:47 |
| wolfspraul | R158 is 0R DNP, R159 is 0R | 01:48 |
| wolfspraul | bah | 01:48 |
| wolfspraul | :-) | 01:48 |
| wpwrak | -> xilinx manual ;-) | 01:48 |
| wolfspraul | so it has to be like this? | 01:48 |
| wolfspraul | can R159 also be DNP? | 01:48 |
| wpwrak | M0/M1 set some sort of boot mode. but the details are probably complicated. | 01:48 |
| wolfspraul | can all those 4 be removed? | 01:48 |
| wolfspraul | ok but you admit that a block of 2*2 resistors, all 0R, two DNP two not is confusing! | 01:49 |
| wpwrak | it's really a "go to the current xilinx docs if you need an answer" type of question | 01:49 |
| wolfspraul | something like this I mentally want to rip out entirely and understand what is really going on | 01:49 |
| wpwrak | i mean, in the general sense | 01:49 |
| wolfspraul | or it's a leftover of unfinished/partial works | 01:49 |
| wolfspraul | I have some more :-) | 01:50 |
| wolfspraul | hope this is interesting for anyone... | 01:50 |
| wolfspraul | similar issue on the nor flash page | 01:50 |
| wolfspraul | R60/61, R184 | 01:50 |
| wpwrak | a 0R / DNP pair is usually clear: we want to be able to generate H or L. there's one choice that's the normal condition for our board. but someone may what to change it. therefore, we add a footprint that allows doing that | 01:50 |
| wolfspraul | 60 and 61 are 10k dnp | 01:50 |
| wolfspraul | 184 is 4k7 | 01:50 |
| wpwrak | think USB_BOOT on the ben | 01:50 |
| wolfspraul | so those are all pull-up resistors? | 01:51 |
| wolfspraul | why is one 4k7 and two are 10k? | 01:51 |
| wpwrak | where are they ? | 01:51 |
| wolfspraul | and the 10k - is the pullup needed or not? | 01:51 |
| wolfspraul | those are the ones we fiddled around with forever in the reset battles :-) | 01:51 |
| wolfspraul | nor flash page | 01:51 |
| wolfspraul | but I see those 3, and it looks confusing/unfinished | 01:52 |
| wolfspraul | if r60/r61 are dnp now, can we remove them? | 01:52 |
| wolfspraul | no pullup needed? | 01:52 |
| wpwrak | on which page are they ? | 01:52 |
| wolfspraul | I may misunderstand it of course | 01:52 |
| wolfspraul | u9 nor flash | 01:52 |
| wpwrak | thanks ! ah yes, they're indeed a bit odd | 01:53 |
| wolfspraul | some more | 01:53 |
| wolfspraul | C127 on that page, value is 1u, but not polarized | 01:53 |
| wolfspraul | the bigger ones before were polarized, the smaller ones not | 01:53 |
| wolfspraul | what is the cutoff/reason? | 01:53 |
| wpwrak | i think polarization is quite arbitrary | 01:54 |
| wolfspraul | just saw it. C128 is 100n C127 is 1u | 01:54 |
| wolfspraul | well | 01:54 |
| wpwrak | as i said, several caps drawn as polarized probably have components that aren't | 01:54 |
| wolfspraul | should we remove the + then? | 01:54 |
| wolfspraul | in some use cases the difference can be quite dramatic though I would think | 01:54 |
| wpwrak | i don't know what rules adam applies. in the end, i does't bother me too much, since they're nearly equivalent | 01:55 |
| wolfspraul | ok | 01:55 |
| wolfspraul | next one first | 01:55 |
| wpwrak | (nearly equivalent) in the cases we have here. you're right that there are situations where things are less obvious. | 01:55 |
| wolfspraul | on the usb a/b page, some more wonderful DNP resistors | 01:56 |
| wpwrak | DNP can mean a number of things :) | 01:56 |
| wolfspraul | and even better, a note saying "full speed: mount R168" "low speed: mount R169" | 01:56 |
| wolfspraul | now that is confusing | 01:56 |
| wolfspraul | do we really mean a difference between full and low? | 01:56 |
| wolfspraul | or between host and slave? | 01:56 |
| wolfspraul | why is that comment/dnp resistors missing on the usb c/d and e/f pages? | 01:57 |
| wpwrak | design variants, things where we want to leave a plan b open, and then stuff we simply leave to the user to equip | 01:57 |
| wpwrak | there's a lot of the latter in audio | 01:57 |
| wolfspraul | low and full? | 01:57 |
| wolfspraul | with resistor values? | 01:57 |
| wolfspraul | what do we mount on R4 then? | 01:57 |
| wolfspraul | both dnp? | 01:57 |
| wolfspraul | I don't get it | 01:57 |
| wolfspraul | it's just confusing | 01:57 |
| wolfspraul | so with both dnp, neither low nor full with work? | 01:57 |
| wolfspraul | something is not clear there | 01:57 |
| kristianpaul | dammit, never close kicad even you already saved... for some reason things get messy... | 01:57 |
| kristianpaul | at least eeschema.. | 01:58 |
| wolfspraul | those are 1k5 (dnp) resistors on the D+ and D- lines? huh? | 01:58 |
| wpwrak | wolfspraul: it's for configuring the port for a full or low-speed device | 01:58 |
| wpwrak | totally unsupported by gateware and firmware, of course :) | 01:58 |
| wolfspraul | I don't get it | 01:58 |
| kristianpaul | close by powering off computer* | 01:58 |
| wolfspraul | DNP means the circuit is open there? | 01:59 |
| wolfspraul | it connects to 3V3! | 01:59 |
| wpwrak | the pull up/down configuration depends on whether you have a host, low-speed device, and full-speed device | 01:59 |
| wolfspraul | I don't get it, sorry | 01:59 |
| wpwrak | we have only host ports, hence only the pull-downs but no pull-ups | 01:59 |
| wpwrak | that's how USB works :) | 01:59 |
| wpwrak | what this circuit does is give you the choice to configure it for any of these modes, should you choose to do so | 02:00 |
| wolfspraul | maybe we should write "full speed client" and "low speed client"? | 02:00 |
| wolfspraul | right now one could very easily think this somehow affects full and low speed in host mode | 02:00 |
| wolfspraul | but I think it doesn't | 02:00 |
| wpwrak | we could add a comment that it's for configurint the port as a device, yes | 02:00 |
| wolfspraul | it's just confusing, to me | 02:00 |
| wolfspraul | device, sorry | 02:01 |
| wolfspraul | host and device | 02:01 |
| wpwrak | no, host mode is unaffected | 02:01 |
| wolfspraul | but that's not obvious | 02:01 |
| wpwrak | it's a common source of confusion :) | 02:01 |
| wpwrak | such is life in usb land :) | 02:01 |
| wolfspraul | so then let's write "FULL SPEED DEVICE" and "LOW SPEED DEVICE" instead | 02:01 |
| wpwrak | when i first saw it, i thought someone had misunderstood the USB spec | 02:01 |
| wolfspraul | nah come on, that one word can help clarify things. it's not impossible to explain... | 02:01 |
| wpwrak | only then did i realize these were meant as configuration alternatives | 02:01 |
| wolfspraul | the lack of clarifying "device" confused me | 02:02 |
| wpwrak | kristianpaul: if you do that, do at least a few sync first :) | 02:02 |
| wolfspraul | that's it! | 02:02 |
| wolfspraul | 1. 'powered' designator | 02:03 |
| wolfspraul | 2. add maker and type to ics | 02:03 |
| wolfspraul | 3. small table to clarify power users and current | 02:03 |
| wolfspraul | 4. clarify decoupling caps polarization | 02:03 |
| wpwrak | i wouldn't touch "powered". it's a cost of living with kicad | 02:03 |
| wolfspraul | 5. R158-R161 could be documented better/cleaned up | 02:04 |
| wpwrak | but you can try to make a patch that lets eeschema omit things like POWERED and submit it ;-) | 02:04 |
| wolfspraul | 6. same for R60/R61 | 02:04 |
| wolfspraul | 7. usb device config resistors could be documented better | 02:05 |
| wolfspraul | that's it | 02:05 |
| wpwrak | though it may be tricky to get that right. there are other pieces of meta-data you don't want to suppress. and you'd also have to follow the wires, maybe convert junctions, too. etc. it's a bit of work. | 02:05 |
| wolfspraul | I feel most strongly about #2 and #3 in this | 02:05 |
| wolfspraul | god no, I won't touch that [powered] | 02:05 |
| wolfspraul | then I think #4, and #5/#6 should also be possible to improve slightly | 02:05 |
| wpwrak | (((-:C | 02:05 |
| wolfspraul | #7 is just adding one word | 02:05 |
| wolfspraul | #1 is just ranting | 02:05 |
| wolfspraul | but overall the schematics are a joy to read! | 02:06 |
| wolfspraul | cladamw: can you help with a power diagram/table? | 02:06 |
| wolfspraul | this concludes my feedback :-) | 02:06 |
| wpwrak | kewl. not too bad :) | 02:07 |
| wolfspraul | thanks | 02:08 |
| wolfspraul | if even I can read that stuff, it's already written for dummies | 02:08 |
| wpwrak | hehe :) | 02:08 |
| wolfspraul | the IC maker/type could help even more | 02:08 |
| wolfspraul | or, at least in the online PDF, some cool little links to wikipedia one can click on to find out about some background concepts | 02:09 |
| wolfspraul | but those are just bells and whistles, plus the PDF has some serious technical shortcomings like text search | 02:09 |
| wolfspraul | ability to follow wires by clicking on them | 02:10 |
| wolfspraul | etc. | 02:10 |
| wpwrak | some concepts are difficult to convey because they depend on a lot of background. just like that usb pull business. it's a very common source of confusion everywhere. but yes, we can make it a little bit more accessible on our side. | 02:10 |
| wpwrak | (pdf) all things that really need support from kicad itself | 02:10 |
| wolfspraul | as I said I feel most strongly about my #2 and #3 | 02:10 |
| wolfspraul | those are really valuble | 02:10 |
| wolfspraul | valuable | 02:10 |
| wolfspraul | the small cleanup is always nice too | 02:10 |
| wolfspraul | polarity, dnp resistors, etc | 02:10 |
| cladamw | wpwrak, wolfspraul do you mean like this ? http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Milkymist_One_Power_Tree | 02:10 |
| wpwrak | another thing that would be nice to clear up would be to have chip pin numbers on all the bypass caps :) we have that now for the RAM | 02:11 |
| wolfspraul | yes, although that also doesn't include the mystery 4V3 user :-) | 02:12 |
| wolfspraul | but yes, that's what I mean just integrated nicely as a little table or so in the "power supply" schematics page | 02:12 |
| wolfspraul | right now we have a set of regulators and circuits prepping this or that voltage | 02:12 |
| wpwrak | and it was a pretty good lesson - before these things weren't there, which led to a good amount of weirdness and miscommunication with layout. fortunately, harmless. this time. | 02:12 |
| wolfspraul | but little info on where this goes, current, overview | 02:12 |
| wolfspraul | definitely [chip pin numbers for bypass caps] | 02:13 |
| wpwrak | maybe the power tree needs updating. i see that it still has that ancient noisy codec | 02:14 |
| wolfspraul | maybe we can move it into the schematics? | 02:14 |
| wolfspraul | remove from wiki? | 02:14 |
| wpwrak | that should be possible, yes | 02:14 |
| cladamw | not to remove it now, i think that i can use KiCad editor to edit a new power tree. | 02:15 |
| cladamw | a power tree i can equip them with power net name, chip reference, circuit block and etc. | 02:16 |
| cladamw | regards to chip pin numbers with bypass caps, i'll also clean them up. | 02:17 |
| wpwrak | i would put the circuit block before the chip reference. less intimidating :) | 02:17 |
| cladamw | the chip pin name don't need to be accurately same as current m1rc3 if later m1r[4..n] producing. | 02:18 |
| cladamw | for examples two 100nF placed to pin 1 and pin 19, layout guy can place whatever 100nF to pin1 or pin19, | 02:19 |
| cladamw | we made unclear and unreadable in previous runs. | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | wpwrak: no it not | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | i still deleted same components | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | save | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | rsync | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | close kicad | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | no poweroff | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | re-open | 02:20 |
| wpwrak | (pin 1 vs. 19) well, it shouldn't cause much work for the layout guys either way :) | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | and got EESchema file text load error at line 788 | 02:20 |
| cladamw | (circuit block) wpwrak ? | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | hmm | 02:20 |
| kristianpaul | and now there are lots of missing components on the screen... | 02:21 |
| wolfspraul | cladamw: yes, good! | 02:22 |
| wolfspraul | of course, first make a new and clean version in kicad before removing the wiki one | 02:22 |
| wolfspraul | now that we have kicad, we have a better place for this info than the wiki | 02:22 |
| wpwrak | cladamw: i mean "Audio LM4550BVH" looks nicer than "LM4550BVH Audio". | 02:22 |
| wolfspraul | before we needed the wiki to have any place outside of the dark and closed AD files :-) | 02:22 |
| wpwrak | kristianpaul: did you use a weird character in some name ? | 02:23 |
| cladamw | wpwrak, okay. :) | 02:23 |
| kristianpaul | wpwrak: let me see, but this wasnt happening before the component cutoff.. | 02:23 |
| kristianpaul | nope | 02:25 |
| kristianpaul | just can see 3 components right now afaik, | 02:25 |
| kristianpaul | the rest wires and nodes.. | 02:25 |
| wpwrak | can you paste line 788 and its context ? | 02:27 |
| kristianpaul | is empty.. | 02:28 |
| kristianpaul | aparently | 02:28 |
| wpwrak | and what is around it ? | 02:29 |
| kristianpaul | http://paste.debian.net/171665/ | 02:30 |
| kristianpaul | is very curious, after check the diff with tig, i noticed new text when i just removed compoments why?.. | 02:33 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: tsop.fpd: added new TSOP module (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/dfcaa9d | 02:35 |
| kristianpaul | hum | 02:35 |
| kristianpaul | looks like a bug | 02:35 |
| kristianpaul | i just deleted one block now and the same error popup.. | 02:36 |
| wpwrak | kristianpaul: it gets better: pick a text comment. double-click to edit the text. delete it. then press OK. you'll get "Empty text !". and then kicad segfaults ;-) | 02:36 |
| wpwrak | (at least here) | 02:36 |
| kristianpaul | dont cheerme up that much ;) | 02:37 |
| wpwrak | perhaps you can recover it by putting some text in the empty line with a text editor | 02:37 |
| kristianpaul | i'll try found root cause | 02:37 |
| kristianpaul | by trial and error :) | 02:37 |
| cladamw | wpwrak, would you mind if I outline frame to your header or he10 module ? | 02:37 |
| cladamw | s/I/I add | 02:38 |
| kristianpaul | or try another versio perhaps? this is 2011-05-25 | 02:38 |
| cladamw | wpwrak, are you qi-bot ? hehe ... | 02:38 |
| wpwrak | (mind) not at all. i've just been lazy :) | 02:40 |
| kristianpaul | putting some text in the empty line seems works, but how many empty lines left :) | 02:42 |
| kristianpaul | perhaps i need sed help | 02:42 |
| cladamw | wpwrak, also since a dedicated pin number 1, 2, or n, (n-1) there would be good. :) | 02:43 |
| wpwrak | you mean to mark #1 ? the default kicad lib uses quare pins for #1, round for the rest | 02:44 |
| kristianpaul | argh, EESchema file undefined object at line | 02:44 |
| kristianpaul | better replace not remove empty spaces.. | 02:44 |
| cladamw | wpwrak, i'd like a feature for Fped. i.e. place number (txt) in outline, can it be now ? | 02:44 |
| wpwrak | no, it can't do text | 02:44 |
| cladamw | Can KiCad do #n, #n-1 ? | 02:45 |
| wpwrak | lemme see ... | 02:45 |
| cladamw | hmm .... i was thought your pin# can be shown inside solder paste in Fped, but can't add number text in outline in the future ? | 02:46 |
| wpwrak | yeah, the module editor has text | 02:46 |
| cladamw | hmm ... alright. | 02:47 |
| wpwrak | i only show the pin number as non-physical text (i.e., something pcbnew shows but that doesn't go to the gerber) | 02:47 |
| wpwrak | the problem with supporting text that goes to the gerber would be matching kicad's fonts and such. tricky. | 02:48 |
| cladamw | if yours(Fped) can do, that would be super ole. | 02:48 |
| kristianpaul | ha | 02:48 |
| wpwrak | i'll put it on my to do list for 2013 :) | 02:49 |
| kristianpaul | i just save it as another name (no mod) and same error | 02:49 |
| cladamw | wpwrak, tks a lots ! not bad. :-) | 02:49 |
| kristianpaul | hmm | 02:55 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Werner Almesberger: reset reachable_pkg in the instantiation process and restore on inst_revert (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/fped/59b90b3 | 02:59 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: tsop.fpd: added 28 and 32 pins option (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/d0f16e9 | 03:55 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: added to-252 link (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/b8f4df3 | 03:59 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Werner Almesberger: modules/qfp-gen.fpd: QFP modules generated from IPC-7351 formulas (WIP) (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/6a24272 | 04:33 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Werner Almesberger: Merge branch 'master' of projects.qi-hardware.com:kicad-libs (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/b977bc9 | 04:33 |
| wolfspraul | ah, another small schematics comment | 04:59 |
| wolfspraul | this one about atben - there is a crystal X1 16MHz 8pF 40ppm ESR=80R | 05:00 |
| wolfspraul | maybe we could relax those specs a little so nobody gets stuck finding *exactly* such a crystal | 05:01 |
| wolfspraul | is that possible? | 05:01 |
| wolfspraul | for example the ESR - probably anything above or below 80 should be ok, no? | 05:01 |
| wolfspraul | or the ppm, if it's 30 or 20, what would be the problem? | 05:01 |
| wolfspraul | if that info is missing then someone may not know what to do with a part they found with say ESR 100... | 05:02 |
| wpwrak | oh, that's a maximum value. like a resistor tolerance of 5% doens't mean we'd reject a 1% resistor | 05:02 |
| wolfspraul | ok but we can be more helpful | 05:02 |
| wpwrak | the capacitance must match C10 and C11, though | 05:02 |
| wolfspraul | the ESR is a minimum or maximum? | 05:02 |
| wolfspraul | 40ppm is the precision, right? if so, would <= 40 ppm be more helpful? | 05:03 |
| wolfspraul | I just want to convey good positive vibes to the reader, less worries :-) | 05:03 |
| wpwrak | maximum. but i wonder where it comes from ... | 05:04 |
| wpwrak | i think 40ppm is pretty unambiguous :) | 05:04 |
| wolfspraul | the point is to make those specs more reader/user *friendly* | 05:04 |
| wolfspraul | a higher precision crystal will work as well, so why not write "<= 40 ppm"? | 05:05 |
| wolfspraul | if the schematics should be an exercise in "think yourself", then I can also have a lot of ideas how to achieve that, of course :-) | 05:05 |
| wpwrak | ah, the ESR is from the transceiver data sheet. so far so good. but they actually relaxed the spec. now it's <= 100 Ohm | 05:05 |
| wolfspraul | a large part of the industry seems to believe in that model anyway | 05:06 |
| wolfspraul | how good that they say <= :-) | 05:06 |
| wpwrak | (higher precision) because it's obvious ? :) that's a bit like foo++; /* increment foo */ | 05:06 |
| wolfspraul | so I think we should do that too, obvious or not, if it helps people more quickly navigate around the specs and focus their time on where it matters to them | 05:06 |
| wolfspraul | you could say "all crystal ppm are meant <=", but then it's better to just write <= there imho | 05:07 |
| wpwrak | naw, if you fill the schematics with trivial junk, people will not notice the places where you actually have something to say | 05:07 |
| wolfspraul | two characters | 05:07 |
| wolfspraul | ESR is <= 100R now? | 05:07 |
| wpwrak | will be, once i finish dinner :) | 05:07 |
| wolfspraul | I agree about not repeating obvious/redundant information | 05:09 |
| wolfspraul | but then you want to invite people and accelerate their first steps | 05:09 |
| wolfspraul | ESR= is a good example of potential time waste | 05:09 |
| wpwrak | yes, the ESR is bad | 05:09 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Werner Almesberger: atben/atben.sch, atusb/atrf.sch: correct and clarify ESR of X1 (reported by Wolfgang Spraul) (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/ben-wpan/42f1a78 | 05:50 |
| Ayla | hi | 10:35 |
| Ayla | is there a way to tell GCC that a branch will probably be used more often than another one? | 10:36 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: to.fpd: added TO-252 package (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/9762038 | 10:50 |
| qi-bot | [commit] Adam Wang: Merge branch 'master' of projects.qi-hardware.com:kicad-libs (master) http://qi-hw.com/p/kicad-libs/983ee35 | 10:50 |
| Ayla | __builtin_expect() | 10:54 |
| wpwrak | Ayla: there is a builting for it. linux uses it a lot: http://kerneltrap.org/node/4705 | 12:33 |
| Ayla | yep, I knew it on linux | 12:33 |
| Ayla | but linux uses likely() / unlikely() | 12:33 |
| Ayla | (which are macros) | 12:34 |
| wpwrak | the article also describes what's underneath | 12:35 |
| mth | Ayla: this is what we use in openMSX: | 12:58 |
| mth | #if __GNUC__ > 2 | 12:58 |
| mth | #define likely(x) __builtin_expect((x),1) | 12:58 |
| mth | #define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect((x),0) | 12:58 |
| mth | #else | 12:58 |
| mth | #define likely(x) (x) | 12:58 |
| mth | #define unlikely(x) (x) | 12:58 |
| mth | #endif | 12:58 |
| Ayla | I used something like that | 12:58 |
| Ayla | but why __GNUC__ > 2? | 12:59 |
| mth | because GCC 2 doesn't have the feature and non-GCC compilers probably don't have it either (not with identical syntax, anyway) | 12:59 |
| mth | I hope no-one still uses GCC 2, but we've had this code for a long time | 13:00 |
| Ayla | ok | 13:00 |
| mth | I should check how it is expanded for clang | 13:01 |
| mth | because they do support many GCC extensions | 13:01 |
| Ayla | want my clang toolchain for mips? ;) | 13:01 |
| mth | I can check on OS X | 13:02 |
| mth | I do want clang for MIPS at some point, but let's not get distracted by that right now | 13:02 |
| Ayla | yes | 13:03 |
| Ayla | we have only 3 days left ;) | 13:03 |
| mth | we should make a list of issues and priorities | 13:05 |
| mth | maybe in the other channel would be more on-topic | 13:05 |
| wolfspraul | uwe_mobile__ uwe_ - congrats on your sigrok project btw! that's shaping up really nicely | 23:43 |
| wolfspraul | I recently bought a FX2-based CWAV AX clone, now trying out sigrok and the free firmware | 23:44 |
| wolfspraul | maybe I also give the Hantek dso-2090 a shot, but I understand support for that is still kinda wip | 23:44 |
| wolfspraul | but it's a great project, good luck! | 23:44 |
| wolfspraul | sigrok I mean :-) | 23:44 |
| --- Wed May 30 2012 | 00:00 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.9.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!