discuss-gnuradio
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Mainlining FPGA modifications


From: Alexander Chemeris
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Mainlining FPGA modifications
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 22:01:13 +0400

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 21:19, Matt Ettus <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 04:09 PM, Alexander Chemeris wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 21:30, Alexander Chemeris
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 21:04, Marcus D. Leech <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure whether to post this to GnuRadio or to USRP-users, so I
>>>>> post it here.
>>>>>
>>>>> We've started a project to implement a custom SDR hardware (which we
>>>>> plan to open-source later) and we want to reuse as much of USRP FPGA
>>>>> code as possible. But it will require a good deal of customization as
>>>>> well.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, we're looking for an advice on how to structure our relations with
>>>>> the upstream (i.e. GnuRadio/USRP) the best way. I.e. where should we
>>>>> place our code and how to ensure our code will be accepted to the
>>>>> mainline, etc?
>>>>>
>>>> I can't answer the questions about where to best place the code in the 
>>>> tree,
>>>> but maintaining compatibility with the
>>>>  UHD wire protocol and API would really help make it easy to integrate into
>>>> Gnu Radio.  Matt can comment on
>>>>  UHD licensing for projects like this, I'm sure.
>>>
>>> To make it more clear - we intend to keep all VRT/UHD related FPGA
>>> code in place and just replace/change interaction with RF part. May be
>>> we'll have to slightly extend VRT/UHD code for our specific purposes,
>>> but it will be minor changes.
>>>
>>> In other words - all our changes will be to support a new platform
>>> seamlessly with existing UHD code.
>>
>> Could anyone comment on this topic after all?
>> Tom, Josh, Philip - I'm not sure who should I bug about this?
>
> We are always looking for contributions to the FPGA code and will
> consider including any interesting new functionality.

Is a new platform considered as an interesting functionality?
And the main question - is there any guideline on how to add a new
platform so that it will be possible to mainline it?

-- 
Regards,
Alexander Chemeris.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]